PoliticsMainstream Politics and Economics

Previous 10 Next 10 
To: TimF who wrote (14786)4/6/2012 12:26:47 AM
From: Little Joe
1 Recommendation   of 75309
That is the myth that they teach in law school. Under Supreme Court decisions since the new deal, that is just untrue. They pay lip service to the concept of federalism and separation of powers but the truth is under modern constitutional law it means litte. If we are lucky the court will strke down Obamacare and begin to reverse the trend.


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: koan who wrote (14789)4/6/2012 1:25:12 AM
From: TopCat
2 Recommendations   of 75309
"What I was talking about with central planning was the whole idea of a constitutional democracy."

If you want to come up with your own definitions Chuck, you're welcome to it. Just don't expect the rest of us to go along with it.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: koan4/6/2012 1:30:41 AM
   of 75309
Time factor is extreme. Grasslands are 100 times more nutrious than jungles.

<<The Great Leap Backwards In a middle-of-the road IPCC scenario, A1B (rapid growth with a mix of energy sources), we could, by 2100, see CO2 levels similar to those in the late Eocene: around 700 ppm, comparable to the atmospheric conditions before the formation of the Antarctic ice sheet. In an optimistic case such as B1, which we now appear ever more unlikely to achieve without immediate emissions reductions, CO2 concentrations would rise to over 500 ppm, still exceeding anything observed in the past 30 million years. A plausible but pessimistic scenario, A1FI, would see 2100 CO2 concentrations rise to 1000 ppm, comparable to atmospheric conditions in the Early Eocene, which was the hottest time in the past 65 million years, apart perhaps from the short-lived (geologically short, that is) spike in temperatures at the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.

Perhaps the most astonishing aspect of the change that we are currently inflicting on the atmosphere is how fast it is happening. It took 40 million years to go from 750 ppm to the pre-industrial level of 280 ppm of CO2. To leap back to the Eocene atmosphere may take us just 200 years, some 200,000 times as fast. That’s roughly the same difference in speed between a snail and a jumbo jet. Of course, the climate will not fully respond to this sudden shock immediately; there is inertia in the system, fortunately. It will take many hundreds of years for the oceans to heat up and many thousands for the ice caps to melt completely.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: TopCat who wrote (14793)4/6/2012 1:37:49 AM
From: koan
   of 75309
I don't expect anything from anyone. I am just posting my ideas. Nothing more at all.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: koan who wrote (14791)4/6/2012 1:53:45 AM
From: Sdgla
1 Recommendation   of 75309
I didn't think you would be capable of providing any data to support your bullsh$$t statements and you didn't disappoint.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)

To: Sdgla who wrote (14796)4/6/2012 1:54:54 AM
From: koan
   of 75309
<<I didn't think you would be capable of providing any data to support your bullsh$$t statements and you didn't disappoint.

You wouldn't accept it if I did.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: koan who wrote (14797)4/6/2012 2:13:03 AM
From: Sdgla
2 Recommendations   of 75309
You use excuses like that in high school ? Where's that superior liberal dem mental acuity drawn from years in the classroom ?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: Sdgla who wrote (14796)4/6/2012 2:41:22 AM
From: Farmboy
3 Recommendations   of 75309
<<I didn't think you would be capable of providing any data to support your bullsh$$t statements and you didn't disappoint.>>

koan is so arrogant and narcissistic he thinks his word is the only 'backup' or 'support' he needs for that liberal progressive crap he posts.

Remember, no matter the subject, koan knows more than anyone else here ... and we are expected to recognize that and accept anything he says. After all he is the only one here who lists their 'occupation' as:

Existentialist, past State director of the offices of Emergency Medical Services, Alcoholism and Drug Abuse and coordinating the Valdez oil spill for H&SS and the Governor's office. Wrote all three State plans.

Can't you just smell the fumes of arrogance coming off that pile of crap? After all, no one else has done anything as important as koan has done. We should feel honored to have such a distinguished poster here, wasting their time to explain things to us we will never understand.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

From: Paul Smith4/6/2012 5:59:13 AM
2 Recommendations   of 75309
Hot Air Blog: Mitt Romney’s marvelous speech

Having written about the subtext of Pres. Obama’s Tuesday speech to news editors, it is worth looking at the speech likely GOP nominee Mitt Romney gave in the same venue on Wednesday. As reported at National Journal:

Nancy Pelosi famous [sic] said that we would have to pass Obamacare to find out what was in it,” Romney said. “President Obama has turned that advice into a campaign strategy: He wants us to re-elect him to find out what he will actually do.

“With all the challenges the nation faces, this is not the time for President Obama’s hide-and-seek campaign,” he added.

Romney argued he presents a stark contrast, boldly laying out his own agenda to solve the country’s litany of problems. That was no more true than when he focused on entitlement spending, an issue Obama has attacked Romney on for adopting the budget proposal put forward by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisc. The plan, the most prominent feature of which includes plans to convert Medicare into a premium-support model, polls poorly with the public, and is clearly an issue the president will highlight ad naseum through November.

But rather than distance himself from Ryan, he resolutely defended the House budget chairman, even praising him by name for having “the courage to offer serious solutions to the problems we face.” And he went on then offensive, accusing Obama of damaging Medicare first. Romney adopted the Democrats’ own attack against Republicans, saying that the president “has taken a series of steps that end Medicare as we know it.”

From this speech, folks on the left see Romney taking Obama’s bait — and that is not an entirely unfair assessment, merely an incomplete one. National Journal reports the Ryan plan polls badly based on its own poll, with an incomplete, misleading question. Nevertheless, given Democrats’ past success with Mediscare campaigns, it is not surprising some are licking their chops today.

However, the left is also missing the subtext of Romney’s speech, which reflects hard-headed realism. It reflects realism about our grave and growing debt problem (even if the Ryan plan is insufficient, it is necessary). It also reflects realism about the general election campaign to come. The Democrats intend to demagogue the Ryan plan and hang it around the neck of the GOP nominee, regardless of the identity of the nominee or his position on the Ryan plan. Romney knows this.

The establishment media, which has already allied itself with gross fiscal irresponsibility, will gleefully assist Team Obama in this campaign. Indeed, Obama’s demagoguery got a standing ovation from a packed house of news editors, while a much smaller crowd of journos gave Mitt Romney the polite golf clap. Romney knows this, too.

In 1996 (surely one of Obama’s models for a Democrat seeking reelection), GOP nominee Bob Dole ran away from the efforts of Newt Gingrich and the GOP Congress to bring the budget under control (even as Newt was driving Bill Clinton to sign welfare reform into law). This year, things could be different. Paul Ryan is probably a more stable ally now than Newt was then (or now). Moreover, even Obama’s budget director has warned that our debt is “serious and ultimately unsustainable.”

On the other hand, it may be — especially if the economy were to perk up between now and November — that Democratic demagoguery on entitlements can succeed again. But Romney’s speech suggests he recognizes he cannot afford to avoid the good fight, because Democrats and the media will surely fight the bad one.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Sdgla who wrote (14798)4/6/2012 9:44:25 AM
From: koan
   of 75309

Chomsky: How the Young Are Indoctrinated to Obey
Forty years ago there was deep concern that the population was breaking free of apathy and obedience. Since then, many measures have been taken to restore discipline.

April 4, 2012 |

Join our mailing list:
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

[iframe style="BORDER-BOTTOM: rgb(255,255,255) 0px solid; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(255,255,255) 0px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px auto; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: rgb(255,255,255) 0px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: rgb(255,255,255) 0px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px" height=250 src="" width=300 scrolling=no][/iframe]

Public education is under attack around the world, and in response, student protests have recently been held in Britain, Canada, Chile, Taiwan and elsewhere.

California is also a battleground. The Los Angeles Times reports on another chapter in the campaign to destroy what had been the greatest public higher education system in the world: "California State University officials announced plans to freeze enrollment next spring at most campuses and to wait-list all applicants the following fall pending the outcome of a proposed tax initiative on the November ballot."

Similar defunding is under way nationwide. "In most states," The New York Times reports, "it is now tuition payments, not state appropriations, that cover most of the budget," so that "the era of affordable four-year public universities, heavily subsidized by the state, may be over."

Community colleges increasingly face similar prospects – and the shortfalls extend to grades K-12.

"There has been a shift from the belief that we as a nation benefit from higher education, to a belief that it's the people receiving the education who primarily benefit and so they should foot the bill," concludes Ronald G. Ehrenberg, a trustee of the State University system of New York and director of the Cornell Higher Education Research Institute.

A more accurate description, I think, is "Failure by Design," the title of a recent study by the Economic Policy Institute, which has long been a major source of reliable information and analysis on the state of the economy.

The EPI study reviews the consequences of the transformation of the economy a generation ago from domestic production to financialization and offshoring. By design; there have always been alternatives.

One primary justification for the design is what Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz called the "religion" that "markets lead to efficient outcomes," which was recently dealt yet another crushing blow by the collapse of the housing bubble that was ignored on doctrinal grounds, triggering the current financial crisis.

Claims are also made about the alleged benefits of the radical expansion of financial institutions since the 1970s. A more convincing description was provided by Martin Wolf, senior economic correspondent for The Financial Times: "An out-of-control financial sector is eating out the modern market economy from inside, just as the larva of the spider wasp eats out the host in which it has been laid."

The EPI study observes that the "Failure of Design" is class-based. For the designers, it has been a stunning success, as revealed by the astonishing concentration of wealth in the top 1 percent, in fact the top 0.1 percent, while the majority has been reduced to virtual stagnation or decline.

In short, when they have the opportunity, "the Masters of Mankind" pursue their "vile maxim" all for ourselves and nothing for other people," as Adam Smith explained long ago.

Mass public education is one of the great achievements of American society. It has had many dimensions. One purpose was to prepare independent farmers for life as wage laborers who would tolerate what they regarded as virtual slavery.

The coercive element did not pass without notice. Ralph Waldo Emerson observed that political leaders call for popular education because they fear that "This country is filling up with thousands and millions of voters, and you must educate them to keep them from our throats." But educated the right way: Limit their perspectives and understanding, discourage free and independent thought, and train them for obedience.

The "vile maxim" and its implementation have regularly called forth resistance, which in turn evokes the same fears among the elite. Forty years ago there was deep concern that the population was breaking free of apathy and obedience.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2018 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.