Jim

It is no secret, especially here in America, that we live in a post-Enlightenment age in which rationality, science, evidence, logical argument and debate have lost the battle in many sectors, and perhaps even in society generally, to superstition, faith, opinion and orthodoxy. While we continue to make giant technological advances, we may be the first generation to have turned back the epochal clock — to have gone backward intellectually from advanced modes of thinking into old modes of belief. But post-Enlightenment and post-idea, while related, are not exactly the same. Post-Enlightenment refers to a style of thinking that no longer deploys the techniques of rational thought. Post-idea refers to thinking that is no longer done, regardless of the style. Ergo: http://news.yahoo.com/perry-says-doesnt-believe-global-warming-143259373.html

Another stick in the eye. Thanks. It's Friday, c'mon, give me a break!

I'd have to agree with this assessment. No leadership what so ever. This guy is in constant react mode and on his heels. Rather than working on jobs issues, what did we spend energy on the last several months - the GOP-manufactured crisis de jour of holding the debt ceiling hostage. So far the only thing I've seen that this guy believes in is compromise on any outlandish proposal put forward by the Tea Baggers.

Crazy busy with work but getting to spend some time for field work in places like this with the pup.

Glen Beck is more concerned that there was such thing as a political camp for youth than what happened there:

Should have stepped it up and gone to rehab, yes, yes, yet. Sad.

Yes, and more. I'd say the Dems have been more than practical in compromising while the GOP is willing to risk the financial health of the country for political brinkmanship. Seriously - that figgin' Bush tax cut for the wealthy is worth fighting for?

...and, the present example is a great one. The driver is the Tea Party. Using a relatively straight-forward process of the debt-limit to foster an uncompromising postion of revenue cut only. Letting the Bush tax cuts expire is needed now. HTF are we supposed to pay for the programs the GOP pushed - undfunded war, unfunded Medicare drug program, etc. Suddenly they have found balanced budget religion?

I'm open to other descriptive adjectives that accurately reflect a preponderence for: Protecting the rich. Stuffing financial institution oversight in light of the recent reaming. Fleecing the public. Attaching programs that affect the most vuneralble while protecting the financial elites. Yelling for fredum but eagar to control women's health choices and gay life. Having one line only: reduce taxes.

I don't mind so much the "..campaign in poetry and govern in prose.." crap; but what I don't approve of is the narrowing of the range of the governing part of the spectrum. The dems' and Obmama just keep caving in to bash 'em, "it's our way or a train wreck" politics offered by the Looney Party.

I don't think that is the strategy. But I'd say by owning one heck of a lot of our bonds that they have some leverage.

Oh, we're soon to be the anvil. And not because our military prowess has been usurped. It will be by those countries that have invested in technology, education, infrastructure, and implemented their global economic vision. And not flushing their treasure into the global military dominance black hole. India and China are coming on.

This NYT article from last week was very interesting and a good metaphor for the Obama approach - which leans towards Wall Street.

Dore Gold? Seriously? Did you ever hear that f@#$%^ lie between his teeth on anything to do with the Palestinians as unoffical Israeli spokeman after he left the UN and as JCPA spinner. Granted, he may have some interesting take on things but man could that guy lie with a straight face. No thanks.

Always suspicious of someone with no upper teeth.

That's the bottom line w/Greece. The Euros are soon going to have to come to the conclusion that the pain is going to be shared and the German and Swiss banks are going to take a haircut on this one. The Germans are particularly pissed they are propping up Greece when, really, they are propping up German banks. The can has been kicked down the road only for a couple months. Once back from the August break I think a reality is going to settle in on the finance ministers.

Ouch! That's going to leave a mark.

I look at it this way Jim. We ("we") might like all these things to be the best-equipped, strongest military in the world, but you can't have everything you want. Our budget is bloated, our economy teetering, and we are overextended. So somebody has to make the tough calls to cut some of the above. Everyone who runs a household does this - so should the government. What programs specifically should be cut? Hell if I know but the cuts need to be made, and big cuts at that. Satisfied? If I were king (and you were queen!) I'd bet that we could come to reasonable decisions over a couple of pitchers. Unlike the current political situation. Plus, we could drown jb in the bathtub!

Given that family housing for the military was -20% for fiscal 2011 and a measly +5% increase for personnel in 2011, here's a program summary: Program 2011 Budget request[10] Change, 2010 to 2011 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter $11.4 billion +2.1% Ballistic Missile Defense (Aegis, THAAD, PAC-3) $9.9 billion +7.3% Virginia class submarine $5.4 billion +28.0% Brigade Combat Team Modernization $3.2 billion +21.8% DDG 51 Aegis-class Destroyer $3.0 billion +19.6% Carrier Replacement Program $2.7 billion +95.8% F/A-18E/F Hornet $2.0 billion +17.4% Predator and Reaper Unmanned Aerial System $1.9 billion +57.8% Littoral combat ship $1.8 billion +12.5% RQ-4 Global Hawk $1.5 billion +6.7% Space-Based Infrared System $1.5 billion +54.4% I'd say, yea, let scrap the space-based infrared system to start.

I've been shot twice, jumped out of countless airplanes, been crushed under inhumane pack loads and generally abused and am, as an active duty military member, already in excess of 30% disability (if I were to get out today). If I had no retirement/ disability to make up for my service induced inability to earn, what is the possibility that I could provide for my family into my retirement; especially if I am unable to work in my field past 40? Some might not deserve their pensions, but I, for one, think I deserve mine. If the federal government fucks with my retirement and disability benefits, I will have no choice but to leave the service and many other experienced leaders will too. They have already had us do more with less for so long, it is only a matter of time until the rumors that our paychecks will be casualties will come to fruition as well. This is a symptom of the larger problem: Output exceeds input. The system can only last for so long and the military is dealing with the same ominous destruction that the economy is facing. The military and the economy are both casualties to the political bickering of congress. This shortsightedness will cost us decades of rebuilding and we may never fully recover. And I agree. Soldiers are in a separate category, asked to do what most would not consider at the whim of soft-handed politicians. The pentagon budget needs to be cut on some of the worthless programs pushed by bring-home-the-bacon pols. Do we really need to be spending twice as much for our military as the combined rest of the world? Pensions for the troops, medical benefits, family support, and post-conflict GI benefits should be solidified and increased. It is quite different than a public desk job.

And there lies the rub, eh? Who the f*** is going to implement the innovations? It's a matter of proportionality and it has just been tilted in one direction lately.

I don't want to put one more $.01 into SS. It is supposedly a "safety net" for retirement, and I'll take care of that myself, thanks very much. But I would ask why the tax brackets stop at $300K or whatever the top bracket currently is. You could have several bracket above that for say $500K, $1million, etc. I'd love for liberal Hollywood types and ball players to pay 50, 60, or 70% marginal rates. :-) Sorry if my sarcasm meter is not precise enough - but even I would have some issues with a 70% marginal rate and it's effect on innovation and investment. Regarding SS - we likely have a different philosophy. I have no pension and I don't think taxpayers should be paying for such for public employees. However, I strongly believe that a society is judged on how it treats its less fortunate. Yea - there is some small proportion that takes advantage of the system on the lower rungs of society. In comparision that pales to the upper income robber barons - seriously - see the film "An Inside Job" While I feel confident that I can take care of my own retitement I have no problem with my current obligation and a little more to SS to help out. Yea, I understand you opposition to taxes that don't benefit you directly - but quite frankly the issues involve what we want as a society as a whole. I don't like the present trend. OK to flush billions on the pentagon, but the cumbs for social programs are a threat. Get real.

I guess it depends on how you define huge: I'd say the long-term effect on the country sucked - HTF do you manage such a tax give-away when getting us into two wars? Income - output, it ain't rocket science.

---I'd disagree, the tax cuts for the middle class were relatively modest per family but in aggreate are significantly adding to the deficit Indirectly - social security benefits are needed most at the bottom end of the bracket - those disabled and those with low retierment buffer. In budget talks (current example is appropriate) SS always seems to lead the discussion out of proportion to say more usless programs - pick almost any military one. Thus ensuring its stability by taxing the upper income brackets - seriously - why is income that is taxed capped at $106,800? WTF? In general, I would agree that it would not move the productivity/wage curve. But I didn't say it would. But I think it would move us closer to a more equitible society - or at least a more fair one. Yea - and that is a bias of mine. c'mon - just being straight with you.

Fair question. Part of it - I don't know - how do you encourage responsible corporate governance? I'm open to suggestions. The tax part - eliminate all the Bush tax cuts (including middle class ones), bump up the long-term investment/dividend tax, remove the cap on the upper limit for Social Security tax.