The New York Times is reporting that Lobbying Imperils Overhaul of Student Loans, an unsurprising outcome for anyone following, well, anything for the past thousand years of American politics. Yet, this story--though still unfinished--offers sobering parallels for the debate that dominates much of our thinking in progressive circles: health care reform.
(My apologies to jamesarthur that his earlier confusion went on deaf ears.)
Yesterday, in the new-and-improved-press-briefing-disinformation room, the President of the United States of America expanded democracy beyond what even the most visionary of political thinkers have ever imagined. Enemies of this great nation have now been incorporated into our political processes, into our great and wondrous system of government for the people, by the people, etc. Terrorists--those bad guys who brought it on, and bombed us on 9/11, y'know, the same, exact bad guys we're fighting in Iraq--are now a part of our representative democracy. They are constituents to which our commander-in-chief-executive-officer is listening, voices that will help shape the future of our country for years to come. Or at least until September.
//Rewrite history and amend the dictionary after the jump.//
The richer you are, apparently, the better sex you have. That's according to a recent survey of more than 600 high-net-worth individuals. And rich women, it seems, enjoy sex the most.
We all knew we wanted to be rich; what we didn't know is that we wanted to be rich women.
The tawdry, tawdry details under the covers...
This is something all progressives must have an opinion about. How much money should the superrich among us ....okay fenced off from the rest of us....give to charity, to NGOs, to any of the agencies and groups who help to alleviate poverty and to save people dying of preventable causes? More than they do, right? But how much, exactly? And how do we decide?
Peter Singer is a philosopher who has been dealing with these issues for a number of years. He comes at the problem by first asking, What is the value of a human life? Tough to measure in numbers, so he then asks, Are some lives worth more than others? He says no; in the abstract all of us say no (except wingnuts ....sigh). But, if we're being honest with ourselves, he says, when we look at our wealth, our luxurious, pampered wealth, and we look at our patterns of giving -- charity + foreign aid -- we see that we don't value all lives the same. If we did, we'd give more. Much, much more.
[the good stuff follows]
Recommended by teachergonz
- I really have to wonder sometimes. Are they truly so filled with Hate that they would take it out on the American people time and time again? We've seen it with Gov Walker insane and unnecessary ...80 comments 211 Recs
- It should not surprise any folks that have been closely following our economy (at least those following it with any degree of objectivity) when they read Paul Krugman’s Wednesday blog post, “[...260 comments 350 Recs
- This is the annual sum the Federal government gives in tax write-offs and subsidies to the corporations each year, around 80% of which goes to top ...25 comments 33 Recs
- 276 comments 337 Recs
- The heavily Democratic House of Representatives in Massachusetts pulled a cowardly, treacherous act late last night,293 comments 442 Recs
- 96 comments 133 Recs
- 337 comments 272 Recs
- Voting along typical party lines, a panel in the AZ state senate has voted for a flat income tax plan that ...48 comments 56 Recs
- This afternoon, by a vote of 92-49, the Vermont House of Representatives passed single-payer heath care legislation. As ...258 comments 456 Recs
- If you were taught the same way I was, Capitalism was always explained with the fable of the lemonade stand. The false fable was so popular, they even had an educational video game designed around ...22 comments 55 Recs
- No current results.
- No current results.