• About
  • Contact
  • Editorial
  • Policies
  • Archives
Angry Bear
Relevant and even prescient commentary on news, politics and the economy.
  • US/Global Economics
  • Taxes/regulation
  • Healthcare
  • Law
  • Politics
  • Climate Change
  • Social Security
  • Hot Topics
« Back

Open thread Sept. 25, 2012

Dan Crawford | September 25, 2012 8:48 pm

Tags: open thread Comments (9) | Digg Facebook Twitter |
9 Comments
  • Jack says:
    September 26, 2012 at 7:06 pm

    I have stumbled upon a “journalist” at Fortune magazine who can give David Brooks a run for his money in the race for most vapid booster of the upper classes. Nina Easton, Senior Editor at Large. And so too is a criminal “at large” until prosecuted for their crimes.
    The crime in question here, over at Fortune that is, is Ms. Easton’s current article, “Don’t blame the 1% for America’s pay gap,”
    http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/04/24/pay-gap-rich-poor/, which puts forth the novel concept that “everyone” is harping on the rich. For example,

    “You might think this was a group people would admire, even emulate, right? Not so. For this is the much-maligned 1%, whose media infamy via the Occupy Wall Street protests, followed by President Obama’s populist reelection message, is now firmly embedded in the American psyche.”

    So suddenly the combined efforts of OWS
    and Obama’s current election efforts are to blame for the negative image of the rich that the media has suddenly decided to present to the public.

  • coberly says:
    September 27, 2012 at 12:38 am

    But you see

    Ms Easton thinks we should emulate the very rich.

    There is a good chance that as a modern journalist she doesn’t know what the word means. But if she does I wonder if she has 12 step program by which we might do that..

    Of course it can only be envy that makes my cynical.

  • rjs says:
    September 27, 2012 at 8:03 am

    a question raised at crooked timber:

    Is It Moral to Vote for Obama? –
    Obama terrorizes innocent Pakistanis on an almost daily basis. The drone war he is waging in North Waziristan isn’t “precise” or “surgical” as he would have Americans believe. It kills hundreds of innocents, including children. And for thousands of more innocents who live in the targeted communities, the drone war makes their lives into a nightmare worthy of dystopian novels. … Obama established one of the most reckless precedents imaginable: that any president can secretly order and oversee the extrajudicial killing of American citizens. Obama’s kill list transgresses against the Constitution as egregiously as anything George W. Bush ever did. It is as radical an invocation of executive power as anything Dick Cheney championed. The fact that the Democrats rebelled against those men before enthusiastically supporting Obama is hackery every bit as blatant and shameful as anything any talk radio host has done.

  • coberly says:
    September 27, 2012 at 10:56 am

    rjs

    yes.

    and i’ll add, when the Pres says he is not going to “slash” Social Security while crossing his fingers behind his back and saying to himself “it depends on what the meaning of slash is is.” we are dealing with a liar. more refined than Cheney perhaps, but in the long run maybe just as dangerous.

    aren’t you glad you live in a democracy where you have a choice.

  • Jack says:
    September 27, 2012 at 3:01 pm

    And there’s the rub. Damned to do one thing or the other. Obama has a perverse view of the Constitution. For a guy that preaches morality and godliness he’s quick to kill well outside of the prosecutorial process. And then we have Mitt and Paul. Heaven help us all.

  • Anna Lee says:
    September 27, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    Jack, the whole thing is your (generic your) own dang fault. If you had let women in to run things occasionally, things might have gotten cleaned up a bit between mis-adventures.

  • coberly says:
    September 27, 2012 at 6:58 pm

    Anna

    your were thinking of Mad Albright? or Maggie Thatcher, or Sarah Palin, or Michelle Bachman, or

    …

    point is wimmins is equals to mens.

    btw, my “yes” to rjs was agreeing with him, not saying it was moral to vote for O.

  • Anna Lee says:
    September 27, 2012 at 8:51 pm

    coberly,
    Chuckle! That’s the point. The only thing I agreed with from politco’s this century came from Condi and she’s not even a liberal.

  • coberly says:
    September 27, 2012 at 10:28 pm

    we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud?

Featured Stories

Index of leading indicators says recession almost certain; so what of the coincident indicators?

NewDealdemocrat

Extending Capital to Nature, Reducing Nature to Capital

Peter Dorman

Trump and the debt ceiling

Eric Kramer

And the King of Coincident Indicators rolls over

NewDealdemocrat

Contributors

Dan Crawford
Robert Waldmann
Barkley Rosser
Eric Kramer
ProGrowth Liberal
Daniel Becker
Ken Houghton
Linda Beale
Mike Kimel
Steve Roth
Michael Smith
Bill Haskell
NewDealdemocrat
Ken Melvin
Sandwichman
Peter Dorman
Kenneth Thomas
Bruce Webb
Rebecca Wilder
Spencer England
Beverly Mann
Joel Eissenberg

Subscribe

Blogs of note

    • Naked Capitalism
    • Atrios (Eschaton)
    • Crooks and Liars
    • Wash. Monthly
    • CEPR
    • Econospeak
    • EPI
    • Hullabaloo
    • Talking Points
    • Calculated Risk
    • Infidel753
    • ACA Signups
    • The one-handed economist
Angry Bear
Copyright © 2023 Angry Bear Blog

Topics

  • US/Global Economics
  • Taxes/regulation
  • Healthcare
  • Law
  • Politics
  • Climate Change
  • Social Security
  • Hot Topics
  • US/Global Economics
  • Taxes/regulation
  • Healthcare
  • Law
  • Politics
  • Climate Change
  • Social Security
  • Hot Topics

Pages

  • About
  • Contact
  • Editorial
  • Policies
  • Archives