What does it matter who appoints the right wing fascist to the Money Court? Its not like the current POTUS is worried about the constitution anyway. You think he’s going to point a liberal to the court? Even if that was true, you’re basically arguing you like your authoritarian psychopaths with a thin veneer of civility.

Obama only listens to the legislative branch when they say something he wants to hear. Execution via Drone pretty much sums up what policy he supports. He’s only weak and ineffective when he’s getting paid to be that way.

LOL, I do like you little green people. You’re wasting your time here though. The people here know the US has one of the lowest *effective* tax rates in the industrialized world, that companies are sitting on huge piles of money, the oil tankers parked off shores, the rampant lawlessness of the elites, and about the rob from the poor give to the rich strategy the financial oligarchy has instituted here. We even heard ‘tell o these people who go around spreading half truths and blatant lies trying to propagandize the uneducated.
I’m thinking maybe I’ll change my handle to Ole Glory, or Thomas Pain or some such. Then when I say the best effective upper tax rate, in terms of GDP is 70%, you won’t have to burden yourself with looking up papers and doing that due diligence trolls are known for. You can just believe like normal.

They are not the same. We’d be much better off with a Republican President. That’s beyond sad, but accurate.

For my vote to count (as partisan Dems like to remind me is important) I’d have to vote Republican. Also sad, but accurate. I’ll vote Green or some third party who don’t have a chance. If I have to drive to the poll booth I should at least vote for someone I could stand and I refuse to give our two party system the benefit of not voting.

For most of us the vast majorities of ignorant voters in our states makes the entire process statistically meaningless anyway. So if its already meaningless, there’s no need to vote for Obama for what ever your rationalization reason de jure is. Vote for the one you think best to lead and if they lose don’t sweat it. Your vote wasn’t going to count anyway.

Yes, lets make the medical industry to big to fail and give them federal bailouts in case of any wrong doing.

Think of all the extra competition when Goldman Sachs and the rest of the financial market decides to get into the medical profession. Its heads I win tails you lose! What’s not to love?

Blaming versus saying he has some control or impact of an issue is obviously not the same thing.

* Obama tried to calm down Netanyahu’s call for strikes on Iran during Bebe’s White House visit earlier this year.

We weren’t debating what would best get Obama reelected. The question was could the president use his position to mitigate bellicose statements from other quarters and thereby reduce tensions, and oil prices. The answer from you seems to be yes, but the optics might be difficult for him to manipulate. I guess you have decided that Americans care more about Israel than they do about the price of oil and hence the economy (and that’s giving a lot more credit to that particular ridiculous line of reasoning that is merited). Your position is easily disputed by polling.

* The president has repeatedly made funds available to states to invest in mass transit proposals.
>

So he isn’t powerless to make funds available. I’m glad you agree. He slipped one by those big bad Republicans I guess. How is it he is powerless then, again?

* Forcing the CFTC to investigate energy markets has been tried and failed numerous times since speculation ran up the price of oil, and consequently the price of gasoline, in the summer of 2008. … A president, any president, can do very little to regulate markets when hamstrung by congress, even though the regulators are ostensibly under control of the Executive branch.

You can’t say that congress itself was thwarted by a President and then claim that the President is ham strung by the same body. That doesn’t make any sense at all. Presidential prerogative has gone up, not down, over time.

No, it really hasn’t. Not since war time.

As long as Wall Street wants high gas prices, so will the Democrats (and Republicans). What they say to contrary is for the benefit of the sheep only.

It has less to due with national borders and more to do with the 0.1% vs everyone else. The Greek elites go along with these policies because they want to be in that 0.1% not because its the Germans calling the shots. Same as here. Money hasn’t cared about nationalism in a very very long time.

You listed 3 ways we could reduce the price of oil.

Why do you feel there’s nothing the most powerful man on the planet can do? Could you also list why you think Obama is powerless to implement or otherwise encourage any of those.

I’m pretty sure they just hate us for our Freedom. They obviously didn’t get the message that theirs is the “good war”(tm).

The solution is to restrict their broadcasts to CNN where Obama can explain to them why they are savages that need to be educated. He can explain that to them in town halls via drones prolly best. Afghans are too poor to have Korans, just like 99% of Amercians are to poor to have constitutional rights, or jobs, but hope, hope’s ok. I think if we lower taxes on the upper 1% in Afghanistan then maybe the trickle down would allow them to afford some Hope. I think Hope is first then Korans… We already spend trillions to keep afghan children from “moving in tactical formations”, they can’t expect us to pay for everything.

I’m not sure whats worse, that book burnings elicit a response greater than the death of hundreds of innocents or that it gets more press/consideration here. I mean we apologize for burning Korans. I’m surprised no one from the military thought to first accuse the Korans of carrying weapons and harboring extremists views. Maybe the Korans were just in the wrong place at the wrong time like those wedding parties or young shepherds.
A progressive could say maybe Hillary should have tried a little diplomacy with the Korans before we sent the military in to burn them. But, its nothing to get too excited about. I mean, there are plenty of other Korans around, they breed like rabbits. Its not an excuse to vote against Obama or criticize him. Its an election year. Obama’s poll numbers are up so the Korans can’t be that big a deal.

I guess you missed the Irony..

Nice to see the Banks are loaning money again. At least they will get their money back for this one if they haven’t already. To think I worried about a economic downward spiral when it turns out Obama really does have a jobs program that actually doing well.
Well done democrats, nice to see you get something “progressive” done.

Perception is malleable. We had a front page article here talking about how great the economy is improving. Whether its complete bull, doesn’t matter. People will go to great lengths to believe what they want to.

The gallop poll has more to do with the power of propaganda than actual reality. If I hadn’t approached Dayden’s article with a skeptical eye I could have the same impression. Stocks are doing well, corporate profits are way up. Unemployment is down (as long as you measure it “right”).

According to the white house PR machine everything is just skippy. This article seems like just more propaganda meant to be self reinforcing.

I should also add that automation greatly reduces the impact of manufacturing salaries while teachers aren’t nearly easy to replace. Maybe its semantics, I just hate to see people blame workers when the benefits are going to the 1%.

Actually where I live the better salaries are outside of the munitions/defense sector. You wouldn’t think so but its true if only an anecdote.

I doubt there is as big a difference as you think in “salaries”. What you are missing completely is profit. Its not a requirement to make a profit off of teachers salary, books given to students, etc. Bomb making is a much harder business to get into which means there is a premium expected.

I guess what I’m saying is that when you spend money on bombs a good portion of that is going to shareholders, CEOs, and other management while spending on education is more likely to go to workers e.g. teachers, janitors, etc.

The guys working in the munitions factories aren’t getting rich necessarily. The ones I know do alright, but not on the scale of 3 or 4 times teacher salaries.

Hoover used the same tactic, worked great for him…

It baffled me that something like food stamp spending could be a net gain until I understood that its the spending of money that makes the whole world work, not the hoarding. Whether its in dollars or chickens doesn’t really matter.

I read about this years ago http://presimetrics.com/

I really recommend the book Presimetrics. I gave to to my libertarian father. Its very interesting at the same time being easy to understand and supported with data.

Well I was mostly kidding about 90%, but it would be a fair trade. If the 1% don’t want their income taxes raised, raise the capital gains. I’m fine with that. Realistically, 65% top marginal rate and 40 to 50% capital gains is probably optimum for society as a whole. I see no reason capital gains shouldn’t be taxed on margins just like income.

I think you are wrong about pensions though. Pensions don’t pay capitol gains afaik, my 401k definitely doesn’t. It is the ponzi type system of the market that has blown bubble after bubble and has robbed pensioners along with everyone else. See Matt Taibbi for the wonders that wall street officers public pensions for example.

lol, ya, their 401k would lose value. Thank goodness we have low cap gains so I can keep my 401k rockin.

Seriously, thanks for the laugh. The reason companies aren’t investing in infrastructure and personnel is that there is no incentive to. Companies can issue their own bonds to raise money. For retirement benefits the Stock Market doesn’t hold a candle to SS (in fact, thats the reason SS is being targeted, Wall Street desperately needs suckers that money. It is a pyramid scheme that provides a legal way for the rich to steal from the poor.