BobJacobson's Comments (45)

“The Rangers were formed to hunt down and kill Mexicans who might be transgressing on the Republic of Texas' sovereign territory (thus the first illegal immigrants). It's ironically fitting that they should be called upon now to deal with Mexican drug cartels whom, unfortunately, they will find a lot tougher hombres than wandering ranchistos or Indios.

How did we get in yet another such pickle, another endless war -- this time, on and within our borders? Why isn't this a matter for federal attention as important as lavishing billions in aid on Iraq or ultimately thousands of lives in Afghanistan?

Perhaps because were we to engage, we would discover the vanity of relying on foreign aid bribes or military supremacy to sustain American hegemony, especially as we as a stressed out, drug-consuming society and the oppressive Mexican social elite are the causes in large part for the rise of the drugocracy in Mexico.”

“I'm a progressive Democrat. At first I was offended by Wilson's outburst. Now I wonder, wouldn't be grand for our legislators to be able to question our executive? And vice versa? Instead what we get are set pieces with no real explication of competing points of view. Sorry, it might be a great speech -- I thought it merely a good speech -- but I'm no clearer on what it will take to win this effort or what I or anyone can do to make it happen. it's like Obama's was trying to address three audiences -- the public, the Democrats in Congress, and the Republicans in Congress -- and not really connecting with the public. Sorry.”

“The House of Commons gets to the point more often and more quickly than the House. The Senate's still sleeping. Perhaps formal speeches aren't an occasion for scoffing, but there should be regular Q&A's whereby Congress and the President can roast each other. That would be more in keeping with the Founders'' intentions.”

“Most wealthy countries have universal healthcare that's government regulated if not outright provided. No lawyers are necessary to rectify malfeasance when the state assumes responsibility.”

“The speech was delivered with clarity and purpose, rather as a skilled CEO would do.

But it lacked passion. It didn't make me believe Obama wants an effective reform of healthcare in America as that he doesn't want anyone monkeying with his process. The implication is, if the process is enabled and sustained, a good bill will emerge.

But that hasn't happened yet. The process has been addled. The product's are confused.

I note that Obama stumbled twice when he had to confront the rudeness and boorishness of the Republican minority -- who really looked tiny as a group, playground bullies as individuals -- and that is a concern. He has to be resolute, confident, and passionate in addressing the opposition.

Until he's securely in charge of the situation -- which strong reforms, easily understood, would make much easier than the current hodge-podge -- he will remain vulnerable. I'm worried for climate change legistaion unless Obama can totally vanquish his opponents now, and that means finding fire in his belly.”

“In a company, the CEO defends his team. He falls on his sword for them if he has to, at least in public. Then he takes them aside and says, is this bad or is this good -- and he believes first and foremost in the team member, not outside accusers. Just like in the Constitution: you're innocent until you've been proven to have committed a crime. Jones committed no crime, yet the Beck maniac's call for justice gets taken seriously. Would YOU want to be working in the White House these days? Will there be a Night of the Long Knives to follow? I'm sick with what's taking place. The last one out turn off the the lights. This is panic.”

“Thanks, holier than thou.”

“I think he means building a green industry. Or getting people out of the ghettos. Or whatever does he mean? These clowns couldn't spot a genuine radical idea if Mao was staring them in the eyes.”

“Too bad most of us don't have as much to defend. Van was mature, but he also had feelings that he didn't let false etiquette obscure. He tells it as he sees it. I much prefer that to secret mendacity.”

“You get to do that once. After that, no one trusts you.”

“So?”

“An "Open Approach" to Information Policymaking, by Robert Jacobson (Ablex 1989), with relevance for policymaking on any highly contested issue (and which on the President's plate aren't?).

Australian Telecom Commission, TELECOM 2000 (ATC, 1976) for lessons in how its done.

Trust in the people, not the Congress, not the media, not lobbyists. Educate, ask, listen, and you shall receive.”

“Liberal/Conservative dichotomies clearly don't mean very much these days. Everyone calls themselves whatever works.

Dean's a fighter. That's without a doubt.”

“Bipartisanship works if you're dealing with a real party, not a collection of wealth-worshippers, political circus geeks, and churls. To be bipartisan with that mess, you have to lower yourself to their level. And then they bite your ears and nose off.

How about being value-driven instead of politics-driven? Politics follows values.

(Besides, with Baucus and Conrad as the playmakers, you don't even have to reach outside the party to find Republicans with whom to negotiate. They're right there!)”

“Right. All those bland Democratic Party members who thought they were being so reasonable by laughing at Dr. Dean in 2004 and then standing by while the party leaders booted him this year as DNC Chairman -- after his 50-state strategy won! -- should look in the mirror and be ashamed. A Party of Milquetoasts is never going to overcome the Party of Barbarians. Let's get some backbones going here, folks. Let's put aside the soccer games and the wine tastings and the sighing over friends' and families' jobs lost and get out on the streets, organizing, making some noise. It's no longer good enough to post outrage online and then expect some bought-for Democratic Senator to take your position. It's time to get angry, very angry. We need a leader. Dr. Dean. You have my support.”

“Squandering his populist appeal and appearing to abandon progressive ideals in pursuit of financial pragmatics, Obama could find himself with an odd, asymmetrical, trimodal base -- the very rich, the ever-hopeful, and fractions for whom his non-finance-related policies produce immediate results (e.g., national park protections for wilderness advocates).

Seeing the President having an audience with bankers to which few other Americans can aspire, let alone obtain, will make other Americans increasingly cynical and non-partisan, damning both big parties, joining smaller ones, or most likely, abandoning electoral politics entirely for political solutions much less manageable.

It's a huge risk for Obama to take, this fracturing and eroding of his once dominant base, for a few pats on the back from the bankers. The bank CEOs' collegial handshakes on leaving the meeting, captured in press photos, signals "Job well done." But the only job they've done well so far has been to avoid serious regulation, continue the bailouts, and retain their positions and bonuses. They sure haven't done anything for the rest of us. Do they deserve the President's time and attention? Really?”

“Nationalization is the only way to go; otherwise, we either watch the banks fail, taking down the whole financial edifice; or we taxpayers end up subsidizing bankers' and their shareholders' easy living.

The stock market lost another 5% (or more) today based on the uncertainty that Geithner has introduced to the already enormous regulatory problem left by the last Administration and caused by general greed among the banking industrialists. It has fallen by comparable amounts each time he's opened his mouth.

How did such an uninspired, uninspiring person get the nod for this ultra-important role? Is there a hook being prepared in the wings?”

“Good analysis.”

“This isn't a joke or a hoax? We're being asked to trade not eating animals for objectifying women?”

“What is an economist supposed to do? Mount a bayonet on his calculator?”

“As one member of Enron's plentifully staffed economic advisory board, Krugman spent four days in Houston. He resigned when he joined the NYT as a columnist and almost immediately became one of the first members of the press to attack Enron and its corruption. He was a constant critic of Phil Gramm. Krugman is an economic hero.”

“Geithner got the Treasury Secretary job and Paul Krugman did not?

I am without words for my feelings.”

“The Senate Republicans are masters of obstruction. They did a good job on Clinton when they ran that show and they did a good job on the House in the last session of Congress. Who's fooling whom?”

“Politically wrong. Historically wrong. Completely wrong. Do you and your friends banter this way, uninformed? No wonder you end up with such fallacious conclusions.”

“It doesn't matter what CNN or Fox or MSNBC say. What matters is how people vote and who's goals are met. In the real world outside the media bubble, people talk.”