As one of the first posters, let me assure you that I did understand the article. I don't disagree with Lind's description of economic trends, except that we're ALL in a post-industrial economy/society now, as many claim. Manufacturing started to go away from all apects of American life in the 60's and 70' and we began the transformation into a service-economy. We have more people than can effectively consume all the goods we can make, and anyway, automation can do it cheaper. Reagan made this trend a river by encouraging outsourcing and foreign ownership of our remaining industrial assets. It's now a steady change into another kind of economy - but whatever it is, it's rather inexorable.

The service economy model has given rise to the amazing transformation of smaller cities and towns into hotbeds of (service) economic activity. Cities that were dying in the 60's and 70's for lack of good manufacturing jobs have now become hip, flourishing PLACES to be. Places where a college education either gets you a job, or at least can't hurt.

Obama is a part of this trend but has actually very little to do with its sources or its outcome. So if Lind is making a history lesson - bravo.

But what I find "counterproductive to positive change" is Lind's, and so many others', insistence that every aspect of society's changes be a filter through which we can criticize the president. Any president - the text would be the same with Hillary or anyone else. Read his past articles - Obama is proposing too much changed too fast, he's not changing enough, he's locked in the past, he's a tool of the future. It's enough to make you dizzy.

And at the core of it is Lind's, and others', absolute, total whihtholding of support for WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. His blanket insistence on new (or renovated) paradigms always comes at the expense of programs, problems, possibilities on the table. It's think tank stuff, and it merely raises the noise ratio in an already tremendously scrambled signal.

Look at the letters here - you'd think Obama was a consummate failure for all of his 4 years, instead of 6 months into his term and actively dealing with almost every problem we've asked him to. Not always as fast or as ferociously as we'd like, but doing his job - the one we hired him for. When writers support Obama, someone drags it down to "cult" level. Good lord!! One poster hit it on the head - how on earth could the New Deal ever get through this 24/7 cycle of frivolous news and unlimited sniping. The cost of instant and constant access to news and personal commentary is high indeed.

May I also point out, vis a vis New Deal industry and economy, exactly what Mr. Lind does for a living? Products, anyone? The blogosphere and punditworld are a completely integral part of the post-New Deal (or whatever) economy. Its where we're at.

my Republican contractor friend sealed the deal on his new cash-for-clunker upgrade. He's calling it his Obama-mobile, and he's loving it. His business is in the toilet, but for the moment he's a very happy camper.