MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
|
|
|
From the Readers
- barefooted 10 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
Creative corner
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
From the Dagbloggers
- Michael Wolraich 1 year 1 week ago
- Danny Cardwell 3 years 3 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 2 weeks ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 3 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 3 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 3 months ago
Hits of the Day
- Doctor Cleveland (50)
- Deadman (5)
- Doctor Cleveland (5)
- PeraclesPlease (4)
- artappraiser (4)
Why the Washington Post's Attack on Bernie Sanders is Bunk
By arc400 on Fri, 10/02/2015 - 7:02am |Robert Reich responds to David Fahrenthold's claim that Sanders’ plan for free public college would mean “colleges... run by government rules.”
URL:
http://robertreich.org/post/130312224165
- Add new comment
- 5023 reads
Comments
I always like Robert Reich's arguments and support of Sanders' solutions that he is running on. This college free tuition in public higher educations is easy to do and very workable.
What we are going to see with Sanders is a switch to new economical policies based on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). MMT brings Keynesian economics into the 21st century. We had a gold standard monetary system in the first half of the 20th century. We have been operating under a fiat monetary system since 1971. The gold standard models our government is operating on needs to be updated and adapted to fiat system that we have. This includes all the failed trickle down models that we know aren't working and the Chicago School of Economical models. The Republican politicians have been clinging to old gold standard ideas and some of them have even glorified that system. But the reality is we have a fiat system for the last 44 years, and it is time to fix our monetary policies to fit the reality. This scares the crap out of the establishment because they benefit from what is in place now and many of us are not anymore.
Fully funding education is a must if we are going to compete in the modern world economically. Other countries are doing just that and it is working just fine for them. It will work just fine for us too.
How do I know this? His official economical advisor is Stephanie Kelton. She is the Elizabeth Warren of Economics. She is one of the top experts on MMT and monetary policy. As much as I admire Clinton, it was this choice of advisors that sold me on Sanders.
by trkingmomoe on Sat, 10/03/2015 - 1:04am
http://howhegotthere.blogspot.cz/2009/08/chapter-1_20.html?m=1
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 10/03/2015 - 5:39pm
I remember what they did. Tweety was the worst. I quit watch McLaughlin when Jack Germond stop appearing. I stopped watching Tweety in 2007 because of his Hillary bashing.
After 2008 many have unplugged their cable.
They don't have the influence that they did then, now that there is social media and a large blogosphere. Even poor people can own a cell phone that is an android and keep up with news through social media. TV with rabbit ears can bring in the nightly news.
The village does not want him in the Whitehouse. He is not an insider and to liberal.
Politico did a hit piece on him about not being able to win without super pac money. They were interviewing paid campaign workers about what they thought in Iowa and New Hampshire. They down played his ground game and said which Republican had the best ground game. This was last week so all I could do was laugh at the author. They said he would hit a wall on Super Tuesday because it takes money and more money to get past that. Keep writing that kind of stupid stuff and I will unfriend them off my FB. I didn't bother to share that. The GOP staff workers need to worry about putting a plug in the drain they are circling.
by trkingmomoe on Sun, 10/04/2015 - 7:53am
NY Times announced a criminal investigation into Hillary in July, only to walk it back over the following week, but still the scuttlebutt remains she might be indicted even though there's almost 0 chance of that. Like but hey, William Safire for years assured us that Whitewater would bring her to jail - or he'd eat his shoe? Bernie is getting only a slight taste of these slime so far. If he looks serious he'll get more, but certainly not as much as a Clinton or Clinton colleague. The steady berating of Clinton counts as a long promo advertisement for Bernie at this point, likely to end the day after never.
The lack of PAC money certainly hurts Bernie along with not having endorsements vs. Hillary's large one (she just got the Teacher's Union yesterday, but the Firefighters are holding off), while Bernie's massive private donations appear to have drawn close but not equal to Hillary's (yet?). Not able to win? a lot of new dynamics in 2016 - ground game is 1 of them. Here you can look at the 2016 primary schedule - while Super Tuesday is important, 54% of delegates are chosen by March 15.
There was a graphic I had showing candidates' raised money vs. PAC money, and a number were at almost 100% PAC/super-backer (like Fiorina - just a shill to get, yep, Hillary - and the press doesn't mind ignoring her lies like the foetus on the table and the describer's insisting it was an abortion (I saw a doctor's analysis the other day where he pointed out procedures in the video that are no longer done in the US, so either way old video or outside the US - doesn't matter - the press won't challlenge).
More an issue, will a quite conservative country where 90+% supported the Iraq invasion and even the "liberal" Democrats have largely backed waterboarding and indefinite detention at GItmo going to support a to-be 75-year-old self-described socialist? I can get into issues, but largely Sanders' appeal relies on say the younger college crowd, disenfranchised progressive wing or Hillary-fatiguers - whether that's enough to overcome her long builtup standing, including likely a much bigger female constituency and likely more traction in the south? we'll see.
by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 10/04/2015 - 10:56am
He is doing better then I thought he would. Her numbers seem to be running the same way they did when running against Obama. It is a win win for him because he can go back to congress with all that support. Less then 2 weeks there will be the first debate. We will have a better idea how all this will play out after that.
by trkingmomoe on Sun, 10/04/2015 - 12:27pm
by PeraclesPlease on Sun, 10/04/2015 - 5:20pm
I am glad you are passionate about her. I like the link you posted too. I read every word of it. I just like his issues better and I am glad he is in this to win. We will have to see how this unfolds. Every election is different.
The first national presidential race I voted in was for McGovern. He screwed up picking Engalton as his VP. There was no way I would vote for Nixon. He also ran a bad campaign. I remember it as a Humphrey and McGovern soap opera. Vietnam was going on then to with lots of demonstrations. The Democratic Convention was a awful mess. No one wins with a campaign like that. This is a different electorate today with different issues. Sanders respects Clinton so I don't see it turning into a soap opera or mud slinging fest.
Sanders had a good weekend in Massachusetts. Boston rally according to a friend of mine in that area, had 20,000+ inside and 4,000+ outside. Officially it was 26,000 that attended.
by trkingmomoe on Mon, 10/05/2015 - 3:27am
by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 10/05/2015 - 5:25am
Look it up on Wiki. Humphrey ran in 72 and so did George Wallis as Democrats.
by trkingmomoe on Mon, 10/05/2015 - 7:37am
by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 10/05/2015 - 8:04am
It is my turn to give you a good link. I said up thread that Clinton's numbers are running about the same as they did in 2007. Here is WaPo from Oct 3, 2007.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/02/AR2007100202365.html
It is interesting to go back and look at her last campaign. It is also fun to find WaPo still up to the same types of memes. I hope they are not using the same crystal ball.
by trkingmomoe on Mon, 10/05/2015 - 7:31am
Well, eliminating Michigan & Florida changed the calculus a lot (as did Obama's team's much better attention to delegates rather than votes in caucuses). Florida later got half its vote counted, but that was long after the disqualification let the momentum and many superdelegates flow to Obama.
Hillary's poll numbers were fine going into February - her cash-on-hand wasn't. (I'm not sure in the end whether the cash was a bigger deal than the impression of sloppy lackadaisical cash management, being out of touch with her own campaign and supporting the "inevitable" meme).
She's locked up a huge lead of endorsements early, both political (congress, governors) & getting there with unions et al - those of course aren't votes, but 538 considers them 1 of 3 critical predictors in elections -- maybe that will change this year, but I can't see DNC types abandoning her easily for Bernie.
Obama was successful at being pretty much all things to all people. Bernie doesn't have that luxury, nor does he have the pull with minorities that gave Obama such a boost like in South Carolina.
In short, you can't be certain, especially with the media tilting the scale, but I'd rather be in her shoes than his.
by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 10/05/2015 - 8:42am