Let's just say you are a political advisor, and the POTUS says to you : We've got a huge problem in these United States: our biggest industry, one that that occupies about 1/6th of our economy is completely fucked. (That's how he talks in private) Everybody has a vested interest, and none of those people want any change. Just to make matters even more interesting, these groups have lots of money and are going to engage in dirty tricks, no holds- barred lobbying, extreme politicking and huge advertising budgets. All these vested interests are going to do their best to make me and our allies look like socialists, communists, wild-eyed liberals and taxers/spenders unlike any group that has ever occupied the White House before.

Furthermore he adds, just to make matters a little more interesting, our economy is in the toilet, our deficits are already huge, and our country is the beneficiary of about 45 years of non-stop politicking by conservatives to try and convince the American people anything the U. S. Government does is bad, and that private enterprise is always better. Of course recent history pretty much lays that claim to waste. The titans at GM, Ford, Chrysler, AIG, CitiBank, BofA, Freddie and Fanny etc. etc. have conclusively proved that big business is every bit as greedy, stupid and shortsided as any group this plantet has ever known.

Also, the POTUS adds, we have a rather weak press, which doesn't do much accurate reporting about opponents of reform, and a vicious right wing media that will lie with audacity, and perpetrate lies - just to make a point, even if the point they are making is completely false and misleading.

The POTUS says " I am an honorable person, and the best way to fix the problem is to engage support from both sides; that way the American people will know our government is truly interested in doing what's right. That's the mandate the advisor receives.

The POTUS , as he leaves the room, mentions that we've never, ever had any national consesus - not ever - about how to solve this problem. Broad solutions always get derailed by the vested interests who claim, with total and utter sincerity, that our system is the best in the world. The prez says that this claim is not true; what is true is that our system is ranked 37th in the world, just ahead of Costa Rica's. He does agree, however, that we have the most expensive system in the world.

So while you are criticizing President Obama, about the system described (and you know what it is) just what slick, easy,slam dunk, no-brainer solution are YOU offering that is going to reform what Newt Gingrich says (and he's right on this one) is the most complex system on the planet. He even said this system makes our defense system look like child's play. Reforming this system is the most daunting and complex political reform the world has ever known. Why would anyone think it would be easy? This is the biggest game in the big leagues. Welcome to hardball!

Let's not lose sight of the goal; write, send money, call all your friends. Let's do what got Obama elected; engage in relentless organizing and grass roots work. It worked before and it can work again.

I live in the Bay Area, so coverage here has been quite extensive. The event has generated a good deal of discussion about evil, mental illness, sociopathic or criminal behavior. No one agrees as to the exact cause of their behavior, or how we should classify the Garridos' mental state.

As if that would make any difference.

I operate under the basic assumption that we are judged by our behavior, not our intentions. Understanding a person's intentions - especially in bizarre circumstances such as this, is a pretty tall order. Based on the posts so far, there is a good deal of disagreement as to the definition of the mental state of the couple. There does seem to be unanimity on the conclusion: these two people have engaged in behavior that is utterly and completely unacceptable.

Kant's definition of morality works well: If everyone did what I did, what would the outcome be? This is a very simple and elegant way to judge anyone's behavior. If the answer reveals an unfavorable outcome, then corrective action needs to be taken.

We can easily judge the Garridos' behavior; in my opinion they should be either be imprisoned for the rest of ther lives, or if that is too expensive, then they should be placed under house arrest for the same period of time. In either case, they should be permanently removed from society.

Ther have been several comments about preventing the Garridos' behavior. I think the ability to do that is quite limited. If the CIA and the other 14 spy agencies couldn't prevent 9/11, it seems clear to me that as a society we will never prevent events like this from occurring. One of the prices we pay as humans is that people will do bad things - and we are just stuck with that.

Being stuck with that reality also means that we should not engage in behavior which matches the cruelty of those who committed the crime. A humane society can do no less.