Yes, agree the Scandinavian model seems like more of an ideal: providing sustainable growth, while granting the greatest political freedoms to the people. The same kind of thing a certain group in Philadelphia once set out to guarantee for this country...

But when are we going to get the NASCAR crowd up to speed? I don't know how we will ever get things straight when there exists such a vast pool of ignorant voters to exploit. Better communications technology has just made it easier for the neo-conservative hacks to get their message to the masses; I doubt we see many Red-staters here on Salon.

I think we're doomed to our more Cowboy-style economy for the foreseeable future.

Well, deregulation has been being pushed since the 70's. It seems to fly in the face of decades of tough lessons learned, both socially, and financially, due to the excesses of the robber barons, and the market crash of the Great Depression, respectively.

I don't know how the proponents of deregulation (I know Greenspan is one of them) could be so naive.

It seems the position that conservative intellectuals take (I mean true conservatives, not the neo-cons) lends itself to being immediately bullied into complete laissez-faire capitalism. While they might not intend this result, the argument for competition & survival of the fittest seems to be like waving a bloody steak at a pack of ravenous wolves.

I think we clearly need the pendulum to swing back toward more gov't oversight. I just wonder if this sort of prudent belt-tightening is still possible in light of the "for-us-or-against-us" political climate these scumbags introduced in 2000.

I think the interview got a little muddled in details, e.g. the steroids issue, and lost sight of the point: Like MTV, ESPN has dumbed-down their coverage to make it mass-media palatable. This is fine for the NASCAR crowd, and people with a pre-teen understanding of how the world works... but for the rest of us, sites like Deadspin provide the sort of insight we appreciate.

It's not about saying "Ha, look at the dumb people on ESPN." It's more about showing people that ESPN is not all that's out there. For as serious as ESPN makes themselves out to be, they are NOT authorities on this. They just have the resources to dominate coverage. Their power position puts them in league with big business, with the accompanying goal of simply ensuring steady profits for their shareholders.

As the establishment here, ESPN's goal is not to provide superior content, or to accurately describe the issues; ESPN's goal is to make money, and to that end they have to provide content - ANY content - to fill up their 24-Hour programming schedule and pander to the leagues, the players and the advertisers they rely on to generate their MASSIVE revenues. When you watch ESPN you are getting the story "they" want you to hear; not any objective analysis of the situation.

Sometimes it takes "theonion," or a Steven Colbert, or in this case Deadspin to point this out to us... Focusing on the fact that Deadspin covered the "Ron Mexico" case misses the point entirely. These days the establishment is bigger and stronger than it has ever been. Satire is the only venue where it can be challenged.

The whole argument for increasing reliance on contractors is that they can do the job more cheaply than the government, but thinking about it logically shows how absurd this concept is. We're supposed to believe for-profit, politically well-connected operators, getting sweet no bid deals from the government are going to do an honest job?

Anyone who buys into that should know that I've got a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in.

And the other argument, that we needed to rely on mercernaries because we didn't have the troops needed to invade Iraq at the time... WHY the hell did we need to invade in March 2003? It's clear they did not have WMDs aimed at us. No immediate threat.

Whoever is at the heart of the Republican Party think tank (I think it must be a pudgy sub-human looking brain-blob like Karl Rove) gets a lot of his philosophy on manipulating the people straight from Locke. Persecution sparks fever in the religious mind, and now that sort of messianic zeal is applied to politics.

Unfortunately, Locke's conclusion is that the gov't shouldn't persecute any people, and should give them the freedom to worship as they please in order to preserve a working, ordered society. I guess they don't really care about that anymore.

What's sick is that listening to the Republican candidates really spew this stuff. It's so stupid to hear it, yet they know their constituents; they know it's what they want. they know they are a bunch of fearful, unthinking, retards, desperate for someone to tell them what to think. Someone to take away the pain and give them something base and easy to believe in. Hate and fear are the two easiest emotions to get a handle on.

I hate to give to much credit to a political party, but it's really true that you don't hear this sort of crap from the Democrats.

... they really don't let up with this terrorist crap, do they?

Do the hilljacks in the Red States even buy into this crap anymore? Surrender to terrorists? Come on.