prole

The destructive fallout we're already seeing from fossil fuels in the currently politicized regulatory environment does not suggest to me that we need to move toward an inherently more dangerous form of energy production. When baby shows he can use the potty like a big boy then we take off the diapers. Make sense?

Given the recent revelations about natural gas, it's obvious that Americans lack the institutional capacities to deal with widespread nuclear. No fucking way.

Been there, done that...

72 pages of critically endangerd species.

I report, you deny.

I do realize that it's a bit unfair to bring "balls" into it, you being so sensitive about your own 'roid shriveled groats and all...

You psychopaths could at least have the balls to admit you just don't give a fuck rather than pretending there's no problem.

You'd have probably said the same thing in Germany circa 1936.

Meanfuckingwhile...

Burn down an SUV, get ten to twenty. Burn the economy down, get...rich.

The Federal bailout will come with strings attached, this time.

You might have missed the point in the article where the defendant suggests the reason the Feds are pursuing the case so vigorously is because it was a political act.

Oh sorry, this is about the spread of the Ghadaffi/Sheen/Billcoe Syndrome?

POTUS, SCOTUS, FLOTUS, DOMA, DADT... Fucking annoying.

Thanks Obama!

And if the strategy of pitting private workers against public seems to be stumbling a bit, how about young workers vs. old? The proposal from David "Grannyburgers" Brooks...

"Jump, jump, jump, jump!"

The unexamined, conventional wisdom 401(k) mythology is nearly as powerful as the "private sector is always better" hokum.

Public sector services, the people they serve, and the jobs, benefits, pensions they provide: Too big to fail. Just not as politically powerful as banksters, despite what you may have heard.

And Jim, raising taxes is not only feasible, it's inevitable. The only question is, how much pain are working and middle class Americans willing to inflict on themselves before they start to confront the reality staring them in the face?

The only solution is to stimulate economic growth. (It's why this wasn't a problem two, three, ten, twenty years ago) The austerity proposals offered by both political parties by all accounts will depress it further.

"New York is at a crossroads, and we must seize this opportunity, make hard choices..." "This is hard work and these are tough decisions..."

The echo chamber at full roar here. It's amazing that the "tough talk", "tough choices", "talking to the American people like adults" narrative now spans the entire "range" of mainstream opinion despite the fact there's nary a shred of truth to be found in their founding assumptions nor any evidence their proposals will address (let alone solve) the crises. The lack of historical memory, the inability to call to mind events only a few months old is breathtaking. What's appealing about Christie as a politician is his ability to boil things down into simple black and white issues for a third grade audience in an entertaining way and that he does so within a media landscape and political establishment that isn't particularly interested in challenging any of his assumptions. You "hate to agree with him" because you're being fed the same bullshit from his Democrat Party "opposition".

Your author inadvertently stumbles across the key in this passage: They will hurt the economy, but structural adjustment through austerity is nothing new. The neoliberal motto has always been no pain no gain. The notion that they simply don't know what they're doing is a dangerous one.