Maggie's Farm

Is the Democratic party now finally ojectively pro-terrorist?

I think I know the answer, but I can't believe it.

But there it is.

Let's all move to Habu's place!

Good for what? crash-dieting?

I'd agree with Hetman, except the markets and economy are so optimistic. not that it's all the same as the culture--it ain't--but that if the culture unravels, commerce will lead the way. Markets are all about confidence in the future. Countercurrents--which will eddy out, and which will mainstream?

True enough. Money moves at light speed nowadays--and for that reason, players don't price risk as high as they used to. But re the current bugaboo, the subprime foreclosure bear, remember that almost half (49%) of all homes are paid-off mortgage-free, and subprime/adjustables are only about 5% of mortgages, and statistically the worst-case on defaults will be no more than 10% of that 5%. News industry has to hype, of course--and the scaremongering Dems have been busy, too.

Just like losing the war suits their "isolated American market" union dream, a busted economy suits their other subconscious (maybe) dream, the pessimistic, government-dependent, population.

Kevin, you're right--globalism is moving production to the low-cost producers and that leaves a lot of blue-collar American industrial workers out of luck--though not enough to make much dent in the national unemployment numbers.

There are but two broad solutions--protectionism, which will save some jobs but raise the cost of living for all Americans--hurting the entire lower-income sector, not just the rust-belt manufacturing workers.

The other solution is the free-market. I know it seems heartless to be so cavalier about someone else's real pain, but it's really a question of national numbers--and national cost/benefits.

Do we want this low-unemployment, high-growth economy which helps everyone but priced-out industrial workers, or do we want to protect this sector at the cost of slower growth, higher costs-of-living, and the higher interest rates & inflation that will result when we start tariffing, distorting & regulating?

What is hard-hearted at first glance may not be hard-hearted at all--just realistic about fast-moving change in the world.

Change that is not all good, but should be judged in total, and not politicized via considering only the downsides while treating the upsides as just the natural state of being, hardly worthy of mention.

I remember as a youngster hearing the grownups discuss in hushed tones the moral decay that Peyton Place meant was happening in our land. I remember thinking "Yowza!"

Yep, Lewis, that's about the size of it. I like death and stupidity and hatred. But mostly I just want to offend you, and ruin your life. And yer momma's life, too.

We have been under attack since 1979 (in this phase), and it finally became intolerable on 911. Since then, we have made mistakes, but we had little choice but to fight back.

People like Lewis have hyper-keen vision & ultra-high standards for one side (us) and are utterly blind to and ignorant of the other side (those who attack us).

That's why people like Lewis are able to bluster in such high moral dudgeon. They can't--or won't--look at the reality of the situation.

Must be nice, to be able to grant oneself such god-like perspicacity, such self-awarded Solomonic wisdom, and then proclaim one's virtue and one's selected version of half-truths from such a lofty position.

Wonder if Madan Comrade Speaker was sending a signal, wearing that Hugo-Red color on the day of the vote.

Nahhh, I must be paranoid.

If I had to bet, yes--but not that she's ever say it. I believe the San Francisco Democrats got lost on the way to Econ 101 class. Hence, all a Chavez or a Fidel need do to earn their admiration is to say the right stuff. Talk "social justice" and on go the Che! T-shirts.

well, I shouldn't antagonize--my two cents ain't gonna help John much.