The principal danger in a Romney presidency is in the reckless and contradictory Republican plan for deficit reduction, most of which is pure ideological nonsense.
Will the Democrats speak for the people? Will they fill Clint Eastwood's empty chair with human beings of passion and dedication? Or will they pursue a false "centrism," cheating the country of the debate it so desperately needs?
Economics in our time is a philosophy dressed up in equations. That does not imply that economics is worthless, only that is should not be trusted to deliver precision or provable certainty.
Due to Republican obstruction, the stimulus that passed was not even the Obama stimulus vision. It was larded up with corporate tax cuts and other unpopular Republicans ideas that Republicans now gleefully peg to Obama.
The first thing to understand about academic celebrities is that the role they play in public life is very different from what they do professionally.
Why would inflation, a fiscal and monetary circumstance which human beings by instinct regard as an ill omen, be seen in such positive hues by economists as renowned as Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman?
Do Americans realize that under a Ryan economic regime, tens of millions of our poor neighbors would be dropped categorically and coldly to the curb, with no support whatsoever from the very system that our forefathers and mothers set up to ensure that America would prosper?
Why do those at the very bottom rungs of society often oppose, again in the most violent terms, government health care? Because, if one accepts such aid, then one finally has to admit that one is indeed at the very bottom. And that is far too painful to do. Irrational? Perhaps.
President Obama can make the moral case for America's homeowners in a clear, strong voice. So far he hasn't done that -- partly because some key members of his team buy into the unfair notion that underwater homeowners, unlike Wall Street bankers, don't deserve to be helped.
I did some checking and yes, the federal government under Barack Obama's watch has spent a whole bunch of money. That much I'll concede. What I won't concede is that it has spent too much.
Whew, Mitt Romney needs a haircut, or something. To show up in London and tell the Britons they don't have their act together (not properly prepared) for the Olympics is, well, astonishing.
It's easy for Congress to show it cares about American security, the American economy and American manufacturing. All it takes is a vote to secure and upgrade a dam. And, you know, the rest of the nation's infrastructure.
A new narrative is needed that is more firmly anchored to reality and that allows reasonable people to use their own intelligence to decide how to act. The way to begin crafting a new narrative is by asking how the word "regulation" is used in biology.
The question before us is plain: Why should I pick up the phone and give Barack Obama money this year?
The continual gatherings of heads of state, such as the one just concluded in Rome of Germany, France, Greece and Italy, reassure us that the euro will be saved. But the means to do so seem to be as elusive as ever.