you might want to revisit this sentence:

". . .the toxic mixture of alcohol and indifference and alcoholism."

I think we can infer the alcohol from the alcoholism, no?

Interesting how often we've been hearing that lately. I guess economic health is now entirely equated with Wall St. wealth rather than with how the vast majority of Americans are doing. Interesting how rarely anyone mentions this.

It can afford to be unconcerned about the collapse of manufacturing jobs, casually reassuring us that more education is the answer to all economic woes.

The progressive cause is dead as long as this neoliberal lie endures. We're going to continue to have an economy designed to benefit Goldman Sachs at the expense of the masses.

This sentence

"Sterry had clients who seemed to be reenacting a past sexual trauma."

is not in singular/plural agreement. It should read either

"Sterry had clients who seemed to be reenacting past sexual traumas."

or

"Sterry had a client who seemed to be reenacting a past sexual trauma."

Really? Did it just open?

As I understand it, it is set before they perfect the skinjobs, right? Oh wait nevermind

Retroactive laws, that is, and they are not permitted in civilized countries.

Hamilton writes:

"some degree of significant oil price appreciation during 2007-08 was an inevitable consequence of booming demand and stagnant production"

Well, sure, we knew that "some degree" was that. The question is what degree? He doesn't seem to have an answer, so what's the point?

MLB is not the reason American blacks are playing less baseball, as Fleck seems to suggest. The Puerto Ricans and Dominicans in American big cities are still baseball crazy and play a ton of ball--I see it all the time. Blacks are also better represented in football than ever before, which requires far more equipment that baseball does--how does he explain that?

For whatever reason, there has been a cultural shift away from baseball in the black community, but there is no point trying to blame it on the man.

The banks have to be regulated if they're going to be insured by the government. That is the point. There was a time when they weren't insured or regulated, and as we all know it didn't work out very well.

Goldman Sachs sure pulled the strings as the MSM pretended not to notice.

Which, as other commentators have outlined, is that this is a truly incredible advancement. Others have made this case so I need not repeat it.

However, it should also be noted that wikipedia is something that tens of thousands of people donated to the world as a gift to humanity, without compensation. It flies in the face of our present economic paradigm, which so often assumes a very narrow level of self-interest on the part of individuals.

is Krugman has consistently been proven right, and Wall St. has been proven wrong. Must we overlook this fact in the rush to equivocate?

Bringing in Summers and Geithner was a big mistake, as the last few months have shown. Geitner could care less that his former cronies are still taken care of.

Yes, Obama's proposals are "radical" if Bush II's policies are considered normal. But when we consider that his government was one of the most right-wing ever to helm a major democracy, they aren't so radical.

We live in a globalized world now. It's unfortunate that political commentators don't consider the the entirety of the modern, industrialized democratic world when they locate our leaders on the ideological spectrum. If they did, Obama would be center-right and Bush would be off the charts.

It is just short for "Recorded music," after all.

You should never have resigned from the DLC if that's what you really are - a centrist New Dem. But I hope at least your bipartisan delusions are over with.

It must be a comedy, right?

Pretty unbelievable how the Dems never play hardball themselves but are always surprised when Republicans do.

And to think we were just reading constantly about how 60 didn't particularly matter.

What else could we have expected with Summers and Geitner in charge. It's the same old oligarchical bullshit. Let's get Reich and Stiglitz in charge.

Grappling is boring. They ought to find a way to get rid of ground combat altogether. Fighting standing up - that's the good stuff.

we would have Robert Reich back in the Washington, rather than Larry Summers & Co.

There is some truth to that, but Reagan's popularity in his own time is another thing that has been retroactively exaggerated. According to the Gallop polls, his 52 percent average approval rating for his presidency places him sixth out of the past ten presidents (not including Obama), behind Kennedy (70 percent), Eisenhower (66 percent), George H.W. Bush (61 percent), Clinton (55 percent), and Johnson (55 percent). His popularity frequently dipped below 50 percent during his first term, plummeted to 46 percent during the Iran-Contra scandal, and never exceeded 68 percent. (By contrast, Clinton's maximum approval rating hit 71 percent.)