PrinceHal's Comments (388)

“These eight names represent "a cross-section of prominent economists"?

Who ever heard of even one of these guys?”

“More to it? Be sure to let us know when you learn what that turns out to be..

What I fear most is that there is LESS here, and in the actual Obama agenda, than we can imagine. LESS than meets the eye has been a hallmark so far.

But I promised to keep my cynicism to myself because the lies and stratagems of THE OTHER SIDE are infinitely more dangerous and abominable. And yet again and again, like just now, I fall off the wagon.”

“OK, so pinning the blame on undeserving scapegoats is a million-year-old human predilection. Fine. Alas for this argument, however, it has absolutely no application to the current case. Choosing the insider team of Geithner and Summers to run Treasury and sticking with them really IS the problem. They are insiders -- financial-business, Wall Street, Goldman Sachs insiders -- who stand for the status quo that has just burned down the house.

They oppose anything that vaguely smells like reform. They are about as far from undeserving scapegoats as it's possible to get. And that goes double for the President who chose them and sticks with them through thick and thin. Can this possibly be the same Barack Obama I voted for and to whom I mailed tiny checks when he was running for high office? While, incidentallly, Goldman Sachs and others were mailing him much, MUCH bigger checks?

Beeblebrox, I hope you can find a case of real scapegoating where your argument actually edifies. May it come soon. This isn't it.”

“Does this go for polio too, Erdgeist?”

“Bravo, Dylan Ratigan! Yes indeed, Geithner must go, and Summers with him.

They represent the worst of the Barack Obama who showed up to govern after hiding out during last year's election campaign. Yes, the same Obama who sold out to that campaign's biggest donors while promulgating the lie that his biggest donors were ordinary Americans, paying Mr. Obama's way by the number, not the size, of our contributions.

And Bravo to Huffington Post for publishing Mr. Ratigan's essential call to reason. But why isn't this the lead story on Page 1? And why shouldn't it stay there until the President demonstrates that he knows he's being watched by those who voted for him, even though he let rich corporations (like No. 1 donor Goldman Sachs) pay the real freight for his campaign?”

“When is somebody going to mention what this article tells you, then floats right past: -- this alleged Public Option doesn't even kick in until 2019.

TWENTY-PHA­NTASTICAL-­NINETEEN! Ten years from now!

By that time, the Rethuglicans will have figured out how to get rid of it altogether. But say they haven't: Why do we -- those of us who last that long -- have to wait another TEN YEARS for what may partially resemble a tiny step on the road to relief? Three guesses, folks.”

“Who ARE these people we put in the White House?

Where did they come from? What do they want? Where are their heads?”

“Hey, George Bush aside, there's plenty to criticize about Barack Obama. But Michelle's job is telling the cute stuff. You're on a different kind of campaign when you start talking about Afghanistan (Obama should be "addressing a general's request for forces"), global warming (he shouldn't be "flying to Europe to pitch the Olympics"), health care ("doctors will take out tonsils and cut off feet"), bashing Fox News ("getting into a tit for tat with selected new media outlets") and negotiating foreign policy ("apologizing for our country").

On this serious stuff, better stick to the facts, minus your right-wing spin -- especially if you call yourself "Truthtalker." Otherwise you might sound like you work for one of those mysterious "selected new media outlets."”

“It's no big surprise that the networks are taking Fox's side. As anyone who watches their 6:30 newscasts is aware, they too believe that, for them, freedom of the press includes the right to distort, if not actually lie aboot, any story they report. The difference between them and Fox is only a matter of degree.

Thankfully, that matter of degree stil exists. But with actions like this one, in which they publicly put themselves in bed with a truth-mauling organization like Fox News, for how long?”

“You said it, Senator!

Hope you keep right on saying it.

But once is more than anybody else has mentioned this fact that we have endured for so long, but appear to be stuck with forever.”

“"Partly this is explained by the extraordinary clout of these companies." Or so it says right here.

That's a lot like saying "Jack and Jill went up the hill" is partly explained by the fact that there was a hill.”

“You write this to Cornel West: "But I keep asking myself this question. Will what the first Black President in this nation's history ever be able to do enough for the minority community to satisfy prominent intelectuals like yourself?"

Mr. Anthony, You should first ask yourself why so many, black and white, who voted for President Obama are now disillusioned by the difference between the presentation and the performance of the man they now have in the White House. Remember, we're not talking about the people who didn't vote for him -- nor any of those who would have hated and made trouble for him regardless.”

“You conservatives are a hoot, Mike. Like Pinocchio, all you folks need is a conscience.

Has Jiminy Cricket got a job these days, do you think?

You've already got a constitution, and your guys pay no attention to that either -- unless you think a Democrat is stepping outta line.

Hey, 20 percent of GDP sounds GREAT! Twenty is the same age I was the day I stopped being 19, and I've been a pushover for it ever since. But maybe that was just me.”

“So in your book, Liz Warren, one of the few wise ones in our government's employ, is "basically an entertainer who performs on TV shows" while playing to "the mob." And you, sir, you sound like you vastly prefer "intelligent operations" like those run by the big-bank mob of which Geithner and Summers are a part.

Which would certainly explain your differences with Ms. Warren .”

“"Not negotiating in good faith"? He really said that?

They must be in tears! How could anybody say such a thing about such fine people?

You mean old Harry Reid, you! You really know how to hit 'em when they 're down.

Only -- gee, I forgot -- they aren't down. They're up.

It's us -- me and you, Harry -- who are down. Go back to sleep, OK?”

“"But Axelrod says `It shouldn't define the whole health care debate.' "

Or so it says here.

Well, uh, too late, Dave. It has already defined the effing debate.

Say, you don't have access to one of those time-machine thingies that gets you into a meeting back then by any chance, do you? Because without one of them there things, you've got quite a job ahead of you. And one helluva mess behind you, too.

Frankly, I see more of the same in your future. And as a particularly offensive result, in mine and damn near everybody else's as well.”

“Brian-- As one of your liberal brethren who considers himself neither neccessarily big-L nor little-L, I find myself wondering at how well you're digesting Mr. Obama's handling of the health-reform issue, which has been weak, deficient, and could barely earn him a D if anybody on either side were giving out grades. And you, of all people, know they ARE giving grades, few of which are that high.

Seems you blame his floundering on the necessity to compromise. Hell, compromise is his long suit, so long that he compromises first and asks questions later. It's going to be tough to beat back the entrenched interests? When did we find out about that -- yesterday? Why not just call it impossible on Day One, as Obama did, and then keep behaving in public, but only in public, as if you were the leading advocate of meaningful health-care reform?

Forget liberal for a minute and just imagine people who want universal health care and people who don't. Either way, you'd have to be a dunce not to see that it's well-nigh-­impossible to get THAT, and looked impossible from git-go. The point is not that he didn't suddenly make it possible. Alas, I don't see him steering the ship even vaguely in the direction of possibility, If anything, the opposite is true. But maybe you're watching a different show. Your turn now to say I'm full of it. --Your pal Hal.”

“Judging by your reply to Brian's reply, you're the one who's got everything down pat and anybody who doesn't just sit there and let johnashman tell 'em how the world works qualifies for a dunce-cap..

Here's a couple of your best shots, for example, and they're your basic Jim DeMint brand of baloney. But you're right proud of 'em, I can tell.

1. "Nice swipe on the Oral Roberts thing, but it's stupid enough to disqualify you from blogging on most sites."

2. "Liberals seem to continue living in the theoretical world of college and never learn how the world really works."

But alas,I don't think anybody will ever talk you out of either idea, any more than they're gonna talk you out of your definition of socialism -- a real doozie, I'm sure. Where you get these ideas, and why you believe 'em, would be interesting to hear, but probably really bad for my acid reflux.”

“WHAT?”

“HIGHEST RATIO? What's all this about "highest ratio"?

Did defending the U.S. ever involve such a thing as massive use of "private" troops, much less having them "outnumber" regular armed forces, before Bush-Cheney started making small troubles into gigantic ones in Iraq?”

“I'd like to know how Sheila Bair feels about this.

Is this her idea or somebody else's? And if somebody else's, whose?”

“I forgot to mention that besides amplifying the readership of Brian Ross, your messages do a damn good job of peacefully clarifying important points, as well as straightening people out -- that is, if they're straighten-able. On which score, I'd say it's encouraging that you don't get a lot of back-talk. But I was bummed not to get one of your replies after my own recent message, below. Do only the obstreperous make your reply list? Whatever, keep it up. I think it's working..”

“Brian Ross, you sure have found a way to get people's attention! About 10 times a day, HuffPo sends me an email saying somebody I liked has made a comment I should read. Virtually every time, that somebody turned out to be you. Well, finally, I bit and linked straight to this piece, where I recognize that every comment you make will turn into another email in my in-box (or already has). But then I also found you had written a damn good piece that I can get behind three hundred and sixty-eight percent, so it all came out all right for me, and if other people do the same, for you too. I've forgotten why I first clicked one of your "I'm a fan of Brian Ross" buttons, but it turns out to have been one of my better, smarter and more useful online moves.”

“So, Swankie, let's say the situation were reversed -- 89 percent of Repubs were black and the other 11 percent were either white or Hispanic. You wouldn't bring it up? Or you'd bring it up and say what? Just curious.”

“I'm sure you're a wonderful physician, Dr.Ornish, but you're WAY ahead of yourself here. We need the insurance NOW. You may change the behavior of doctors and patients later -- MUCH LATER! -- and of course, only IF YOU CAN! BUT --- first things first!

I know this isn't Twitter, but may I "re-Tweet" the meat of Hansharriet's message of about an hour ago (11:37 p.m.)?

"The people don't have the money to buy off Congress, but we have the power to remove an unresponsive corrupt Congress. If Obama does not want to stand by his campaign rhetoric and transform it into action and leadership, we will find another leader who will."

Any way that can happen, I'm for it! Hansharriet , whoever he or she may be, says this: "There is only ONE solution: A massive March on Washington and March on the Capitol and the White House."

ANYBODY GOT ANY BETTER IDEAS? I hope so, actually. But if not, when do we leave?”