December 29, 2007 11:00 AM
Mike's Blog Round Up
Corrente: Progressive policies will always be vehemently opposed by the Conservative Movement and the winger billionaires because progressive policies are not in their economic interests.
The Agonist: It seems like the only way we can get people to fight alongside of us in this "War on Terror" is to pay them.
Dahlia Lithwick: The Bush administration's dumbest legal arguments of the year
apostropher: Hey assh*le, you're using my word!
Pam's House Blend: Is Bhutto's murder related to illegal immigration? Huck, thinks so...
OFF THE BEATEN PATH: Morning Martini, Akkam's Razor, Calculated Risk, black agenda report, Real Clear Politics
Thank you for being so sweet. :)
For Mr. Huckabee,
A basic rule of reality is that you can't get something for nothing. Sooner or later the financial sector will have to come to grips with this rule, meaning that that debt is not wealth and the revolving reallocation of debt in the form of credit does not amount to wealth creation. The US will arrive at a magic moment when the full force of this reality reasserts itself, and it is likely to make itself manifest in the collapse of the entity most closely associated the idea of wealth: the dollar. Assets vested in the dollar's legitimacy will follow its fate. The implication is that an awful lot of the presumed wealth held by Americans could vanish into thin air. Do any of the candidates for president recognize how this works, or have any idea how much disorder this phase change will send thundering through our sociopolitical infrastructure?
Thanks for the link, bluegal. What I'd really like to know today, however, is what Obama thinks about Broder's "government of national unity. Fits right in with the Bloomberg breakfast, and especially tacking right on Social Security. The Villagers eat that stuff up with a spoon, and from the Village perspective, campaign 2008 is all about keeping the Village "their place."
Better call the server guys and tell them it's time to wakeup and fix some glitches.
From the Agonist:
"We have replaced diplomacy and mutual benefit with bribery and intimidation."
Every Government does this same sort of thing all the time. Paying off or bribing "allies" has been around since the Roman times and before. Intimidation and other pressures applied by one Government against another, has equally been around just as long. There is a whole list of dirty, underhanded moves that Government's use against another Government or its people and the United States is and has never been an exception to that rule. The U.S. has always propped up middle eastern dictators, usually of the Sunni variety, by using these methods. This has always been a rallying cry for groups like Al Qaeda but you never will hear the U.S. Government admit that.
A good, recent example can be seen in Russia recently providing the nuclear fuel for the Iranian nuclear power plant. Now, they may have provided the fuel but there is speculation that they did not provide key components to that plant in order to make it fully operational. The Iranians know this as well but they are milking it for all its worth. In the end, none of this is new. Its disgusting and vile, but it is not new.
L.A. Confidential @2
Agreed. To further prove your point, just look at this latest headline from the Scotsman. I do not think any Presidential candidate really understands the economic situation. If they do, they sure are not saying it. I sure do though as I import goods directly from Europe. Every foreign newspaper I read has headlines just like this one:
US woes grow as Sudan warns banks to stay away from weakening dollar
"Sudan's central bank is expected to humiliate the once mighty dollar on Tuesday by insisting that it will deal only in the euro and local currency, and will advise local commercial banks to follow its example. Bank governor Sabir Mohamed al–Hassan is concerned that the benefits of Sudan's recent economic boom will be wasted if the currency is tied to the weak US dollar."
http://business.scotsman.com/economics/US-woes-grow-as-Sudan.3627858.jp
We have a 'Government by Bribery', there should be no surprise that we're paying people to 'take our side'. It may be a bit of a surprise to find that we're bribing our enemies.
But just as we will sell weapons to whoever will pay for them, it should be no real surprise that our Treasury is open to all.
'All', that is, who can benefit Bush and his cronies.
Last night I was invited to a Premier of "The Bucket List", if you want to see a good movie, with great actors and a powerful message ... go see this one.
Hey, apostropher, 'assh*le' is my word.
Peggy Noonan and the press complaining about John Edwards $400 haircut again.
As if all of the candidates aren't spending millions of dollars on makeup, makeup artists, and other metro-sexual related ointments. I bet Mitt Romney spends more than that on his super-underpants. Geesh...the only one in the press that doesn't use makeup is Helen Thomas...because it wouldn't help.
Quelle surprise!, that rich folks will vote in the best interests of their wallets.
Especially in the US-corporate-capitalist society, where the thickness of your wallet is often coincident with the thickness of your head, and money counts more than intelligence or knowledge, and wit, health, and education take a distant second place to greed.
I think this bit from Bit of News hits it right on the head in describing the Bush Administration. I wonder if we will see Bush do the Nixon/C&L logo and then state: "I am not a crook!" The charts on this article are worth a look and they aren't pretty:
"The last administration to preside over two recessions was the Nixon Administration. Coincidently, the Nixon Administration also had election scandals and record-low approval ratings.
Most notably the Nixon Administration oversaw the end of a disastrous war and an inflationary environment directly caused by it.
History is repeating."
http://www.bitsofnews.com/content/view/6595/
I'm thinking more attention should be paid to Corrente's blog on the conservative movement vs Progressive policies. Can't you highlight this even more?
It's quite revelatory of the dismal state of US education, when many people and all media continually use the phrase 'Huckabee thinks....'
That's a blatant oxymoron, and should be banned.
Using 'Bush administration' and 'Legal' in the same sentence is a travesty.
Joe O
Edwards has been talking about the disparity between the wealthy, the corporations and the working people. I think he has been watching this situation develope for sometime and I think he is the person we need to lead us out of what is shaping up to be the next Great Depression.
The neocons sneer that he can't really care about regular people because he is rich. They call him a hypocrite, but they are only projecting their own attributes onto him. They forget that FDR was filthy rich but got the country out of the depression and on the path for success for decades. They hate FDR and they hate Edwards
Wealth acquired during a lifetime is not the same as inherited wealth. John Edwards is the embodiment of the American Dream. His working class dad could put him through law school. Bill Clinton was similar; low circumstances, high achievement. Somehow these men have become "elitists" in the eyes of the news yakkers. I'll never understand how anyone can look at these guys and see what the conservatives say about them. Personally, I find ALL the democratic candidates too conservative, or unrealistic (Kucinich is right on many things, but in a way he is the left counterbalance of Ron Paul. I'd STILL vote for him should he win the nomination, though).
Long-time reader, first-time commenter - thanks for the link!
Huck will do anything to get "street cred" with the nativist wrong wingers
Democracy? Without A War? How Odd!
Comments are closed on this entry