90.9 WBUR - Boston's NPR news station
Top Stories:
PLEDGE NOW
Week In The News: Egypt, Firefighters, Healthcare Delay

Egypt in crisis. Arizona’s firefighter tragedy. A big delay for healthcare reform. Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

Egyptians celebrate in front of the constitutional court after Egypt's chief justice Adly Mansour was sworn in as the nation's interim president Thursday, July 4, 2013. Arabic reads, " bye bye Morsi." (AP)

Egyptians celebrate in front of the constitutional court after Egypt’s chief justice Adly Mansour was sworn in as the nation’s interim president Thursday, July 4, 2013. Arabic reads, ” bye bye Morsi.” (AP)

What do you call the overthrow of an elected president by massive crowds and soldiers?  Coup?  Revolution?  This week, we called it Egypt.  Mohamed Morsi, out.  Muslim Brotherhood leaders in jail.  Egypt’s historic experiment with democracy, way up in the air.

In Arizona, an astonishing firefighter death toll.  Nineteen, and sorrow.  In Washington, the Obama administration retreats, delays on health care reform’s “employer mandate.”  Europe rages at US surveillance.  Snowden, Zimmerman still dangling.

This hour On Point:  our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

- Tom Ashbrook

Guests

David Sanger, chief Washington correspondent for the New York Times. Author of “Confront and Conceal: Obama’s Secret Wars and Surprising Use of American Power.” (@sangernyt)

Margaret Talev, White House correspondent for Bloomberg. (@margarettalev)

Jack Beatty, On Point news analyst.

From Tom’s Reading List

CNN: Egypt’s security forces move against Muslim Brotherhood -- “Egypt’s top prosecutor has issued an order preventing deposed President Mohamed Morsy and 35 others, including the top leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, from leaving the country while authorities investigate allegations they ‘incited to commit violent crimes and kill peaceful protesters,’ state media reported Thursday, citing the prosecutor’s office.”

USA Today: Businesses react to health care act delay – “Businesses reacted with relief to the Obama administration’s decision to give large and midsize employers until 2015 to provide health care coverage for their workers or face fines.”

Los Angeles Times: As Arizona fire rages, scientists warn of more unpredictable blazes – “The analytical work performed by fire scientists here at the National Interagency Fire Center also confirms what seems anecdotally evident: Wildfires are getting bigger — the average fire is now five times as large as it was in the 1980s — and these enormous conflagrations have a breathtaking facility to dance and grow. Unforeseen winds are swerving and turning on fire crews, and it’s no longer unusual for fires to double in size in a day.”

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
  • Wm_James_from_Missouri

    Some civilization enhancing news:

    ACAL Energy has developed a fuel cell that they claim will generate 135hp and last for the equivalent of 300,000 miles of driving.

    http://autos.yahoo.com/news/breakthrough-fuel-cell-technology-promises-futuristic-cars-affordable-180000979.html

    From “ConsumerReports“:
    “… ACAL says it has six automakers lined up to test its new fuel cell, pointing to the potential the industry sees this breakthrough. (Read our drive of a Mercedes-Benz fuel-cell car.) ….”
    http://www.acalenergy.co.uk/

    ————————————————————————–

    Boston Business Journal

    “Neurala to turn robots into ‘adaptive, learning beings’ starting this year” From :

    http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/startups/2013/06/neurala-robot-intelligence-software.html

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

      Your latter link: So we can park a new robot in front of the Alvin Ailey troupe, and it’ll learn dance moves on its own? Looks like Asimo is about to get served!

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      yup humans are becoming obsolete. what is there that a robot can’t do? I don’t know if its a good thing or not

  • Wm_James_from_Missouri

    Poor Snowden :( . It seems there is no honor among information thieves.

    http://news.yahoo.com/france-says-no-snowden-theyre-busted-spying-too-180756826.html

    • Steve__T

       links broken

  • Unterthurn

    Surprised how poorly informed Americans seem to be about the rest of the world being is so disappointed with the US regarding the NSA scandal. The extent to which the spying has occurred was never foreseen nor approved by United States’ allies. The destruction of relationships is on going as new reports hit the local media outlets by the hour everyday since the revolution.

    • HonestDebate1

      Even when they are informed, many don’t care.

    • jerwest

      Ticking off high-growth regions like Latin America and China is a bad idea.  Someone has to buy our trillions of debt besides the Fed!

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      since they don’t even care that they are being spied on why would they care that others are spied on?

  • Coastghost

    Today’s Google news headlines include mention that our Affordable Care Tax Act REQUIRES health insurers to “target obesity”. How could Obama and Pelosi have FAILED to realize that this policy will undermine NPR underwriting? Between the two of them, Cabot Creamery Cooperative and Ben & Jerry’s have been injecting fat, calories, and cholesterol into the American diet for years and decades: how many tons of American obesity can be ascribed to these two outfits alone? The entire Vermont dairy industry merits targeting, if the headlines are to be believed. How could Vermont dairy farmers have been so insensitive for so long to the health requirements demanded by our therapeutic state? (For that matter: how could NPR accept their evil corporate cholesterol peddling and their fat-tainted financial underwriting?) Ice cream seems a vastly underrated public health threat (someone in the five boroughs needs to alert Mayor Bloomberg, he seems to’ve missed this one): but then certain ACTA requirements, we understand, are being implemented only gradually, while others are on the verge of being implemented before being postponed indefinitely.

    • Wm_James_from_Missouri

      I eat about 1 gallon of Eddy’s chocolate ice cream and about ½ a chocolate cake a week, with some exceptions. My BMI is in good shape. Most of these “experts” don’t know what they are talking about !

      I haven’t been to a doctor in over 30 years !

      Drink coffee, lots of it. It solves a lot of problems.

      “Discovering Coffee’s Unique Health Benefits”

      http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2012/jan2012_Discovering-Coffees-Unique-Health-Benefits_01.htm

      • John Cedar

        Indeed…it is diet science and medical science that gives skeptics of climate science the most ammunition and credibility.

        It seems everyone I know who is diet conscious to such extremes, has either body fat, sleep, stomach, knee, back, or lady-parts problems.

        • jefe68

          Lady-parts problems?

        • Don_B1

          Diet and medical sciences are just beginning to come to grips with obesity and they are just realizing that sugar may be/is the big offender rather than fat.

          Most people who have for whatever reason gained too much weight has usually gone through many cycles of dieting and regaining weight because there has been no successful hypothesis that led to a good theory of obesity and its elimination. (Dr. Dean Ornish being the one that got consistent good results through highly controlled dieting.)

          In strong contrast, climate science IS, repeat IS, a highly verified both as an analytical and predictive theory of how the major parts of the Earth’s climate system is influenced by the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Just because there are details yet to be established does not, repeat not, mean that climate science is as useless as medical and diet science have been in the past. And more details of how the climate is being affected are being teased out of new data daily and it all supports the past accepted work of/by climate scientists.

          Every (false) claim against climate science that you make has been well debunked as shown at the website Skeptical Science:

          http://wwwskepticalscience.com

          Those that are more open-minded than I perceive, from your many comments here, you are, should profit from looking up claims against climate science and recognizing that action today to mitigate (reduce) CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels is imperative and economically wise, unless you want to pay the $3.5 TRILLION that will be required to recover from environmental damage by storms and drought if the delay lasts only to 2020. Delaying beyond that will be an exponentially bigger penalty.

          But there is good news: by paying as little as 1% or a bit more, but less than 2% of GDP to switch to sustainable energy sources and increase energy efficiency (which will benefit everyone even in the unlikely case that the climate scientists have missed something) rather than pay 10% or more of GDP in the future.

      • jefe68

        You are aware that diabetes is a silent disease, right? You could have it and not know it until it’s to late. This happened to my father.

    • anamaria23

      Lots  of people eat dairy sensably and do not become obese.  The greater culprit is carbs, especially non whole grains and sugary  sodas which effect insulin levels adversely. 

      • HonestDebate1

        I think it all comes down to calories in and calories burnt. Sugar should be avoided but I just enjoyed a Pepsi, I drink about 5 soda’s a year at most. I like water. Fruit has positive aspects but the sugar is just as evil… and fattening. I like carbs too but not in excess. We eat plenty of fresh vegetables, not much red meat and fish a couple times a week. Once a week we go vegetarian. Beans and rice are excellent for your health and form a complete protein. So does Peanut butter and wheat. I do have a weakness for red wine on steak night. It’s even better with venison.

        I just think moderation and common sense should rule. I lost 35 pounds several years ago (when my aging metabolism changed) and have kept it off. I took a year to do it but it wasn’t a diet. It was a change in lifestyle and my approach to food in general. 

        • Don_B1

          @anamaria23:disqus @HonestDebate1:disqus 

          HonestDebate (Gregg) is impervious to learning anything that doesn’t fit his libertarian ideology, but those who want to understand how high sugar intake changes the body’s metabolism, making balancing the input and burning of calories on a permanent, continuing basis more difficult than Gregg would have people believe could benefit from:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z5X0i92OZQ

          • HonestDebate1

            Just what is it you think I think?

    • HonestDebate1

      “Affordable Care Tax Act”

      Perfect.

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      ban the banana split! I think you might be on to something. in argentina the only fat people I saw were the ice cream salesmen

  • Coastghost

    One other darling headline from the past forty-eight hours which slipped past the eagle eyes of NPR producers and editors: the $630,000+ tab that Hillary Clinton’s State Department ran up to boost its “likes” on its Facebook page.

    Whoops, my bad! It was ONLY something more than $630,000, although admittedly and arguably this sum could’ve been better spent by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting–NPR itself could’ve elevated some lowly reporter to anchor status and paid scads of summer interns slightly higher nominal wages.

    • Wm_James_from_Missouri

      I am still waiting to hear how much the Obama entourage spent on his African trip. ( Was it really close to one hundred million dollars ? ) Just think, if politicians took all of this wasted money and put it into companies such as the one I listed above, “ACAL“, we might actually end global warming, and pollution and the need for Middle Eastern warring, and all of these ridiculous gas prices that have made so many poor people even poorer !
      By the way, I supported Mr. Obama. He has been a disappointment to those of us that had hoped for real change. He is just another politician. Personally, I don’t even think he is a Democrat !

      • disqus_fw2Bu1dEsd

        The reality is that presidential trips are expensive. It would be fair to be opposed to all of them, but the hypocrisy of only being outraged when certain presidents travel is unacceptable. George W. Bush appears to have had himself quite a little African spending spree, but apparently cost only matters when Barack Obama is the president who is doing the traveling.  

        • jefe68

          For some of the right wingers posting here President Obama is the worst thing to happen to this nation and he can’t even put on shoe without them finding some fault in the action.

          It’s interesting to note, that when the right goes on about how many days Obama takes for a vacation that George W. Bush, was on vacation more — 1,020 days — than any U.S. President since Herbert Hoover and possibly more than any other President in history.

          • Wm_James_from_Missouri

            I am among the new normal middle class. I have had some 6 to 8 weeks of paid ( good estimate) of vacation in the last 15 years. Take off your political glasses and take a good look at America. Then take a good look at those that are ruling us.

          • Don_B1

            @Wm_James_from_Missouri:disqus @jefe68:disqus @disqus_fw2Bu1dEsd:disqus 

            The cost of the Africa trip as reported by the LA Times is between $60 and $100 million due to the massive security needed post 9/11 and thus it was quite restrained compared to recent trips by Presidents George W. Bush or William Clinton. See:

            http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-obama-africa-20130703,0,6213340.story

          • Wm_James_from_Missouri

            Don, it doesn’t matter if George Bush spent a billion dollars on trips. Obama spending one hundred million dollars on this trip was not wise or necessary. He could have shown the world how to save large amounts of money by using video conferencing. Obama was supposed to be something different, better, right ?

          • Wm_James_from_Missouri

            Bush was a loser. Some of us had hoped Obama would be a winner !

        • Wm_James_from_Missouri

          Wrong! Spending money recklessly is wrong, period ! Allowing these types of activities pardons similar future activities by others, yes even those in a political party that you don’t like.

  • John Cedar

    Was the Obamacare delay enacted early enough to sway elections, as it was intended to do? Doubtful. I already laid off employees and cut hours of operations. Choices had to be made before July, so that they could be enacted by July, as that is the “look back” date for full time employees.

    • jefe68

      Boy from the way you sound I bet some of those folks are relived to be getting unemployment. 
      You sound like the boss from hell.

      • HonestDebate1

        John Cedar deserves a medal for even staying afloat in this business hostile environment. Obamacare is the biggest job killer out of DC in history. It will only get worse, that is why Obama is trying to delay the pain until after 2014.

        • jefe68

          OK chicken little.

          • HonestDebate1

            Chicken Little only thought the sky was falling, I’m pretty sure it already has.

    • HonestDebate1

      The Obama regime concerns itself only with the next step. He lied his ass off to get elected. He knew he wouldn’t close gitmo or accelerate Bush’s withdrawal in Iraq. He knew he needed to enforce a mandate for Obamacare as he excoriated Hillary for having one. And on and on but it worked. Then he bribed, kicked back and reconciled to get Obamacare passed by any means necessary. Then he intimidated the SCOTUS into approving it as a tax that he swore it was not. Then he sic’d the IRS on conservatives and scared them so bad they stopped writing checks. He lied about Benghazi so people would not realize the threat of radical Islam was still alive and well. The narrative was Bin Laden is dead and Al Qaeda is decimated. It worked and he was reelected. Now the next step is the House in 2014 so he is delaying the employer mandate by decree. I have no idea what authority he thinks he has to do that but he never cared about that sort of thing. 

      Meanwhile, the train keeps inching along. People adjust to the new normal. People adjust to being paid not to work. The brainwashing ensues.

      Don’t count on the calvary, 2014 could very well spell the end for America… but that assumes it’s not gone already.

      • hennorama

        Gregg Smith – more scurrilous drivel.

        Please apply your own oft-repeated “standard” that one must know they are not telling the truth in order to be lying, and prove all of the so-called “lies” you claim President Obama has told.

        I for one will not be holding my breath.

        • HonestDebate1

          Hennon, it’s impossible to lie without knowing you are lying. I don’t know whose standard you are referring to but it’s no one that is alive today.

          Merriam-Webster:
          1:to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive

          Free Dictionary:
          1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.

          Oxford:
          an intentionally false statement

          WordWeb:
          Tell an untruth; pretend with intent to deceive

          • Don_B1

            And your post above does not meet your “standard pf honesty” in any respect as it fails the definitions you give. Remember lack of knowledge of the law is not an excuse when you violate it. And you have had more than ample opportunity to know that you are the one with the most egregious lies; see

            http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/obama-scandals-used-to-be-a-thing.html

            and

            http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/05/frank-rich-gop-finds-a-new-watergate.html

            just for starters.

            If, a big IF, you had any credibility before that diatribe, you have left it in shreds and lost it in the weeds.

          • HonestDebate1

            I have lots of credibility from those who know me but zero credibility around here. That’s cool, I don’t care. I don’t see what your links have to do with what I wrote.

            I also don’t get the ignorance of the law analogy, that’s just weird.

            Maybe he’s just stupid and was not lying. You are entitled to your opinion.

          • Steve__T

             You don’t seem to get a lot of things, next time you call someone stupid look in a mirror.

          • HonestDebate1

            Yes, I certainly am stupid but I didn’t call anyone stupid. I explicitly said I did not think Obama was stupid. I think he was lying. It has to be one or the other.

            “If he didn’t know all of these things that everybody else did then he’s just stupid. I don’t think he’s stupid but feel free to if you want.”

          • Don_B1

            Barack Obama ran on letting the Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250,000, and not on those earning more.

            Note that when that pledge was made, and throughout all of 2008, no one knew how bad the financial crash was and how much economic damage had been done until January 2009 or later.

            But you are again being disingenuous so as to spread LIES.

          • HonestDebate1

            But he didn’t do it, he extended them. During the campaign he swore over and over it was the worst economy since the depression. At that time (it later was) it wasn’t even close to being true. It was something like #25. So now you’re saying he didn’t know it was as bad as he swore it was. Terrific.

          • hennorama

            “I have lots of credibility from those who know me but zero credibility around here.” – Gregg Smith

            Here’s just one example why:

            Gregg Smith – [[I don't post anything without verifying.]]
            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/06/28/week-scotus-obama-snowden#comment-951197788

            Gregg Smith – [[Here's Barrack Obama from 'Dreams From My Father':

            “It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names."

            “I found solace in nurturing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race”.]]

            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/06/28/week-scotus-obama-snowden#comment-950807573

            hennorama (to Smith) – [[WRONG. (again, but adding "again" just seems superfluous at this point.)

            As you have been in discussions with [jefe68] and [1Brett1], I’ll send this to them directly as well.

            From Politifact.com, The Truth-O-Meter Says, regarding your claim that in “Dreams From My Father,” Barack Obama wrote “I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.”:

            “Obama didn’t write that”

            “The quote is actually lifted from an article in the American Conservative. Author Steve Sailer wrote a detailed analysis of Dreams from My Father, describing the narrator as “a humor-impaired Holden Caulfield whose preppie angst is fueled by racial regret” but also praising it as “an impressive book” with an “elegant, carefully wrought prose style.”

            “The ‘grievance’ quote comes from the following passage:

            “In reality, Obama provides a disturbing test of the best-case scenario of whether America can indeed move beyond race. He inherited his father’s penetrating intelligence; was raised mostly by his loving liberal white grandparents in multiracial, laid-back Hawaii, where America’s normal race rules never applied; and received a superb private school education. And yet, at least through age 33 when he wrote Dreams from My Father , he found solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against his mother’s race.”

            See:
            http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/jun/10/chain-email/obama-didnt-write-that/

            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/06/28/week-scotus-obama-snowden#comment-951297871

            Poor, poor Gregg Smith. He’s obviously misunderstood.

          • HonestDebate1

            “It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.”

            “I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.”

      • jefe68

        Obama regime? Oh please, it’s not as if he took the White House using a coup. You’re comments are hilarious.

        • HonestDebate1

          Regime is not defined as a coup.

    • ThirdWayForward

      So you have more than 50 employees in your company?

      • John Cedar

        Obviously.
        No wait…I guess you could read it that I took action to get to less than 50

        • Steve__T

           BINGO give the man a cigar!

    • ThirdWayForward

      The employer mandates only apply to relatively large companies — more than 50 employees. It would be a huge shame if those employees were fired and other’s hours trimmed because of ignorance of the law.

      We don’t like the employer-mandates — an extension of Medicare to allow those under 65 to opt-in (paying higher premiums that would make that part of the program revenue neutral) would have been far, far better than this crummy patchwork that depends on the benevolence of employers such as yourself.

      • HonestDebate1

        Business is not about benevolence, it’s about making a profit. Profit begets benevolence.

        • jefe68

          So in your view people would never have had pensions for all the years they helped make large corporations such as GE very very profitable? 

          Even Henry Ford was open to sharing in the wealth on some level.

          • HonestDebate1

            Where do you get that? GE could not provide pensions if they didn’t make a profit. Henry Ford couldn’t “share wealth” until he made a profit. BTW, he shared wealth without a union. It’s good business to compensate employees fairly.

            Profit begets benevolence.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Ford “shared wealth without a union”. At his whim.

            And Henry Ford was nothing if not a man full of whims and grudges. Ask anyone who’s biographied his son Edsel.

            The Battle of The Overpass ensued, and people who worked at Ford didn’t have to worry about his whims for their being rewarded for their work.

            Funny, that.

          • Don_B1

            But the real important part of the issue is the amount of the profit.

            It worked for the benefit of the whole country from the 1950s to the 1970s when CEO salaries were about 50 times as much as those of the average worker in the company whereas currently CEOs make around 400 times that worker average.

            That is one of the reasons for the growing income inequality of people in this country.

            Economists have shown that a country’s economy does not grow as well when inequality is large, because then those with real large shares have litte incentive to invest in job-producing sectors when there  are “safer (short-term)” investments that are basically rent-seeking.

            That is the direction the Republican Party is taking this country.

          • HonestDebate1

            I just don’t think the average CEO makes 400 times what their employees make but I don’t care if they do.

          • Steve__T

             Of course not It has no direct effect on you that you can see. Your, your own CEO. Your hard working neighbors on the other hand that have to work for those other CEO’s do.

            I know some that say “hey I don’t care what he makes It could be a gazillion dollars, as long as I get mine”. Then ask them the last time they got a raise how much and do they have credit debt, and a crazed look comes over there eyes as reality sets in.

          • HonestDebate1

            It has nothing to do with getting mine. It’s just none of my business.No one is forced to work for anyone. 

          • Steve__T

            That is what I expect from you disingenuous BS. 

          • HonestDebate1

            What I wrote is true.

          • Steve__T

            Actually not that much but still way more than deserved  CEO’s make 273 times the pay of the average worker.

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/26/congrats-ceos-youre-making-273-times-the-pay-of-the-average-worker/

          • HonestDebate1

            Thanks for clearing that up.  Who knew ya’ll were talking about only the top 350 companies out of millions and millions. BTW, who determines what they “deserve”? You or the shareholders?

        • ThirdWayForward

          Does your business have more than 50 employees? If not, this discussion is completely moot.

          Employee benefits, like wages and salaries, are part of business expenses — the operating cost of the business. Profit comes after expenses are subtracted from revenues. 

          Yes, obviously a business needs to be viable in order to pay wages and benefits, but owners do have choices regarding how well they treat their employees. How profitable does your business need to be before you would consider providing your employees with health insurance support?Business should be in part about meeting the needs of its employees as well as turning a profit. This is best for everyone in the long run. When the focus is exclusively on short-term profit, everyone, owners, workers, and society suffers. Walmart does not provide health insurance or a living wage for many of its employees, and as a result, the rest of us through govt programs for the working poor have to subsidize their healthcare. Frank Capra in his 1946 film it’s a Wonderful Life contrasts the two business ethics and their broader consequences.

          • HonestDebate1

            No, but my comment is a general one. I’m just pointing out that benevolence is not a concern of business. Profit is. I don’t consider that bad because a lot of good can come from profit.

            I disagree with your premise (unless I’m misunderstanding you) that Obamacare depends on benevolence. Ultimately it will depend on the iron fist of the IRS to enforce it and tax the public to afford it. 

          • ThirdWayForward

            So your firm is smaller than 50 employees?

            And all the stuff about laying off employees because of obamacare was based on a hypothetical situation and not any reality related to the law?The whole employer-based health insurance system that most of us rely on is a patchwork and does depend on the benevolence of employers in terms of what kind of health benefits, if any, one receives. It’s a matter of the whim of the employer. I would much rather that employers have nothing to do with health care insurance — only about 40% of American workers currently get health insurance benefits. We need better, more comprehensive solutions.The penalties for employers are puny, they would get phased in and would only amount to $2000/employee/year if employers decided not to support health insurance.  There are no penalties for employees working less than 30 hours/week.This is far less than the cost of providing the benefit, so the cheapest thing for a stingy employer to do is to pay the penalty or to make everyone go part time (many employers do this already to suppress wages, to keep workers anxious about getting enough hours to get by).

            This is another reason why relying on employers to fix this system is inherently a BAD IDEA. Many will fight reform and subvert it wherever possible.

            It is only in comparison with our present, broken employer-given insurance-based system that Obamacare is a big step forward (such as eliminate pre-existing conditions as a basis for rejection).

          • HonestDebate1

            I disagree that Obamacare is a big step forward. I think it’s a big step backward. That is not, BTW, a defense of the way it was. Eliminating pre-existing conditions for rejection has big problems the way Obamacare is constructed. There is no reason for anyone to pay into the system until they are sick. That model is fraught with fiscal peril. So we have the mandate.

            I’d like to see employers out of the loop too but I again disagree the old system depended on the employer. The employee has always payed 100% of the cost. Anything the employer matches ultimately comes out of the pocket of the employee. It cost businesses  a certain amount to hire employees. If it all goes to the employee or if part goes to the employee and part goes to benefits it’s still the same cost to the employer. I say eliminate the middle man and put the money in the hands of the employee.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            a business must provide maximum return for its shareholders. they do not purchase health insurance because of largess but because they need those employees healthy to make the most money or they have a union that demands those benefits. I agree we should not subsidize walmart or other low wage payers by providing any benefits to their employees.

      • John Cedar

        More than 50 employees is not considered a large company, it is usually considered a medium sized business. However, in order to exaggerate the stated effect on the economy that small business has, medium sized businesses up to 500 employees are often lumped in with small businesses by liars who keep such statistics.

        Not sure what my benevolence has to do with the employer mandate. I would bet $10,000…er I mean $10, that I give more to charity than you do. Of course, charity like most everything finite, should be prioritized and allocated wisely. Employing people at a task that is not cost effective is not on my top ten list of worthy charities.

        Do you have any healthcare reform solutions that would depend on YOUR benevolence?

        • ThirdWayForward

          My point is that health care for employees should not depend on anyone’s benevolence, period. 

          I am NOT claiming that owners of intermediate-sized businesses having more than 50 employees are any more or any less benevolent than anyone else, only that access to health care for their employees should not be a matter of whether the owner thinks that they should have it.

          My criticism of the health care reform is that it relies too much on the benevolence of individual employers — this is not something we can count on. I would rather that we move away from a system based mainly on employer-sponsored health insurance.

          The fraction of American jobs that provide health insurance as a benefit has been declining in the last few decades, and more and more of the costs of healthcare are being loaded onto individuals. We cannot rely on businesses to do the right thing and provide for their employees’ health care (either because they can’t or they won’t). It is unfortunate that many business owners think that providing health insurance is “charity” rather than just good business practice that maintains employee health and loyalty.

          There are some provisions in the reform to give those who do not get employer-sponsored health insurance — we’ll see how those play out. 

          Ideally,  a non-profit national insurance cooperative would be formed that could effectively negotiate health care costs and compete with for-profit health insurance companies.

  • Ed75

    The best comment I’ve heard about Egypt is that the average Muslim won’t support the radical Muslims just because they are radicals. Still Christians are terribly persecuted across the Middle East, worse than in the early centuries of Christianity. One reason for the persecution in Africa is the number of conversions from Islam.

    Pope Francis published his first encyclical – it incorporates the encyclical on faith Pope Benedict emeritus was writing when he resigned. It’s called ‘Lumen Fidei’ (‘The Light of Faith’). His next encyclical will be on the poor (‘Blessed are the poor’). The pope goes to World Youth Day in Buenes Aires later this month.

  • HonestDebate1

    When the uprising against Mubarek began, Obama was pushing him out within days. We ended up with the Muslim Brotherhood. Obama and his apologist embraced it while those predicting Egypt’s inevitable lurch backward into Sharia were ridiculed as alarmist. As bad as Mubarek was, Morsi is far worse. Obama supported Morsi but the Egyptian people had a different view and prevailed. 

    The Arab Spring was an opportunity missed and will be remembered as the Arab’s fall. The terrorist are winning.

  • https://www.facebook.com/kyle.rose Kyle Rose

    How about addressing Eva Morales’ plane being grounded to illegally search for Edward Snowden? Incidents like this are when people see the true level of commitment of western governments toward liberty and human rights.

    • Wm_James_from_Missouri

      If our government with all of its’ high tech spying tools and well trained and very dangerous law enforcement officers don’t know how to find and, or, get to Snowden, how will they be able to handle well funded and well trained terrorist? Just goes to show you that the “war on terror” is a big phony. Besides, all Snowden has done up to this point, to my knowledge is tell the world what was already known by those of us who read !

    • Steve__T

      What a mess we make more enemy’s to cover our ass.
      While our pants are down around our ankles.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/04/bolivian-presidential-plane_n_3546460.html

  • ThirdWayForward

    I really don’t like this mainstream media meme about a coup subverting democracy. Morsi and the Muslim Bortherhood are not democrats with a small “d” — they were trying to consolidate their power by changing the Egyptian constitution. It neglects the antidemocratic nature of the forces overthrown by the coup. So their removal may a step TOWARDS democracy, or at least towards saving democracy.

    This has some (weak) parallels here at home. The Republicans in all the state legislatures where they hold absolute power, have been ramming legislation through  to limit the participation of major segments of the electorate. This voter suppression, along with the recent Supreme Court decision gutting the Voting Rights Act, is the most anti-democratic (and cynical) putsch we have seen in America.

    The Republcians are our Muslim Brotherhood and Taliban. They rail against Sharia Law but they are busy trying to install their own, religiously motivated strictures (all the anti-abortion laws). Evil, most evil, anti-enlightenment, anti-democracy.

    Will American democracy be like the frog in the steadily warming kettle?

    • Don_B1

      Biologists have actually run the experiment, placing frogs in a kettle of warming water. The only frogs that did not jump out as the water got hot were the ones whose brains had been removed.

      Unfortunately the American electorate contains a lot of voters whose brains, the ability and will to think through what is really going on and act on it, have been effectively removed by ideological claptrap promulgated by the Republican Party, particularly those of the Tea Party persuasion.

  • toc1234

    and on this happens while our Sect of State is sitting on a kayak off Nantucket. 

    • HonestDebate1

      He has a really really nice kayak.

  • manganbr

    Did Morsi do anything to suspend or interfere with the cycle of elections? How long would it have been until Egyptians could vote again?

  • ThirdWayForward

    We are seeing the problem of “illiberal democracy in TEXAS!!!!! in CAROLINA!!!!!! in FLORIDA!!!!

    WAKE UP!!!!

    The Republicans are our religious fascists here in the US.
    WE need to recognize that.

    What scares the beejesus out of us is that if some little cynical fascists like Wisconsin’s Scott Walker (or another Cheney for that matter) were to gain control at the Federal level, then all of this national security state apparatus could be used to consolidate power (by eliminating unions, dissident voices, confidential news sources). Think about what would be going on nationally if the present crop of conservative extremists got control of the presidency and both houses.

    • manganbr

      I would also compare the Muslim brotherhood to republicans, but to make quite an opposite point. All political parties wish to paint their opponents as fascist, oppressive, illegitimate (see Republican characterizations of Obama). So long as the Muslim Brotherhood didn’t burn the reichstag, as it were, I don’t see how the label fits. The opposition rhetoric about Morsi is totally consistent with the way disenfranchised minorities speak of their opponents after elections. 

      • ThirdWayForward

        The Republicans in Texas and many other states are trying to suppress voting by groups who they believe won’t support them.

        They are trying to smash those unions that oppose them.

        They are all stealth candidates — they always run on seemingly moderate platforms that mask their hidden agendas.

        If that isn’t undermining democracy, I don’t know what is. The radical conservatives of the Scott Walker stripe really don’t have any democratic scruples because if they did, they would not be trying to ram this kind of legislation through without any kind of public discussion, debate, and electoral input.

        It’s true that the Republicans are not calling for concentration camps or anything like that, but they have their scapegoats on the right in the form of undocumented immigrants (enough of them would love to have concentration camps for illegal aliens). There is more psychological continuity between our American conservative radicals, classical fascist movements, and religious authoritarianism than  those on the right care to admit.

    • HonestDebate1

      Nobody wants to eliminate unions in the private sector but unions in the public sector are an abomination. Wisconsin was saved from ruin.

      • ThirdWayForward

        The Republicans in Wisconsin were very selective in attacking the public unions that had higher Democratic Party membership. The attacks were VERY selective. The public unions were ready to negotiate (and have been taking cuts in pay and benefits), but Walker unilaterally tried to eliminate them anyway. he did not campaign on this — he too was a stealth candidate — very dishonest and antidemocratic. Walker and his minions created budget deficits by handing out tax cuts to corporations, and then they demand cuts in the compensation of teachers, nurses, and firefighters along with a dismantling of social safety nets in order to address the fiscal problems they created. This is crisis crony-capitalism.

        It’s so clear all of this was politically motivated, and it invites comparisons with every totalitarian regime that comes to power — they all attempt to eliminate any social institutions that stand in their way.

        Walker’s taped phone call clearly indicates that he would have been absolutely OK with hiring agent provocateurs to discredit the opposition protests. We don’t hear any criticism of these fascist tendencies from the right — they all condone this stuff.

        The Scott Walkers of the world are a much greater threat to liberty and the real freedoms of ordinary people than all the world’s terrorists combined. I think of him as a petty Eichmann-like figure — he would have been an eager little Nazi cheerleader had he been born in Germany a century ago. lord help us if these scoundrels ever manage to take decisive power at the national level. 

        I don’t see it in the near future (they always overreach and shoot themselves in the foot), but one can never underestimate the gullibility and ignorance of a sizable section of the American electorate.

        • HonestDebate1

          Yes, he was selective. As I recall (please correct me), he did not target private sector unions and he did not include law enforcement or first responder public sector unions.

          Every effort against Walker failed in the courts, in the legislature, and of course the recall as a reflection of the will of the people. Now Wisconsin is on the mend, things are looking up and public sector unions are backing him.

  • blueshift

    did morsi do something unconstitutional? oh my, yes! he decreed himself ‘above judicial review.’

  • Omaha Guy

    How can we argue against such a simple new constitution of Morsi?

    President Mohamed Morsi issued a new Constitutional Declaration on Sunday {sunday aug 2012}, consisting of the following four articles:

    1- The 17 June 2012 constitutional addendum is to be abrogated.
    2- Article 25, clause 2 of the 30 March 2011 Constitutional Declaration is to be replaced with the following text: “And he [the president] will undertake all his duties as stipulated by Article 56 of this declaration.” [Article 56 outlines the authorities of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces and grants the latter full executive and legislative powers, now held by Morsi.]
    3- If the Constituent Assembly [tasked with drafting a new constitution] is prevented from doing its duties, the president can draw up a new assembly representing the full spectrum of Egyptian society mandated with drafting a new national charter within three months of the assembly’s formation. The new draft constitution is to be put before a nationwide referendum within 30 days after it is written. Parliamentary elections are to be held within two months of the public’s approval of the draft constitution.
    4- This new Constitutional Declaration is to be published in Egypt’s official gazette and will be put into effect the following day.

    http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/50248.aspx

  • Coastghost

    “KGB”, up-to-date and current Mr Sanger????????????????

  • Steve__T

    What has to be understood is the history of our nation trying to stop and cover up their wrong doing. That gives a better perspective on Snowden, “How the Pentagon Papers Came to be Published” is an eye opener. It shows to what levels our gov will stoop to, to keep us in the dark about their wrong doing.

    http://www.democracynow.org/2013/7/4/how_the_pentagon_papers_came_to

  • Steve__T

    If Zemmerman never got out of his car, their would have been no reason to stand his ground, had he obeyed the police dispatchers instructions, their would be no trial. Does Trevon Martin have the same rights to stand his ground when approached by a stranger? 

    • jefe68

      And in that one act lies the rub. If just did what he was asked to do Trevon Martin would still be alive and Mr. Zimmerman would not be in a court room.

    • HonestDebate1

      It’s not against the law to get out of your car. A police dispatcher has no authority to tell you what to do. Trayvon had the same rights as anyone else. I just wonder why he didn’t call 911 if he felt threatened. I don’t think he felt threatened.

      • Steve__T

        I don’t care what you think. It has no basis in the facts.

        • HonestDebate1

          So it is illegal to get out of your car? A police dispatcher can order you around? And Trayvon didn’t have the same rights as everyone else? Alrighty then.

          • Steve__T

             Your dishonesty shines.

          • HonestDebate1

            I don’t think you are seeing what I wrote clearly. Wipe the hate out of your eyes.

          • Steve__T

            You: It’s not against the law to get out of your car. A police dispatcher has
            no authority to tell you what to do. Trayvon had the same rights as
            anyone else.  I just wonder why he didn’t call 911 if he felt threatened. I don’t think he felt threatened.

            Me: I don’t care what you think. It has no basis in the facts.

            You: So it is illegal to get out of your car? A police dispatcher can order you around? And Trayvon didn’t have the same rights as everyone else? Alrighty then.

            I see very clearly you like to twist words around. I don’t hate you, but I won’t hesitate to call you out when you are being dishonest.

          • HonestDebate1

            I don’t get it but as I said, I’m stupid. What about my first comment had no basis in fact as you alleged? Can you just answer that? My reply wasn’t twisting words, I wanted (and still do) to understand what I got factually wrong.  The facts I listed are undeniably correct.

            The last two sentences were not represented as facts, if that what you meant but that was clear and I gave reason for my opinion.

            Or were you just making a general comment on everything I think as having no basis in fact? That’s just hate.

            I’m so confused. Never mind.

          • Steve__T

             “I don’t get it but as I said, I’m stupid. What about my first comment had no basis in fact as you alleged?”

            I don’t think he felt threatened.

          • HonestDebate1

            That’s just a shaky opinion based on the FACT he did not call 911. You don’t have to agree but I have a basis and that’s before the testimony.

          • jefe68

            In the context to that particular situation, yes, he should have stayed in his car.

          • HonestDebate1

            Yes he should have.

      • 1Brett1

        If he felt afraid/threatened he could have stayed in his vehicle and backed it out a half-block to see the street sign of the street where he was (notwithstanding it is quite implausible he didn’t know the name of the street he was on).  

        But, as you say, let’s say for the sake of argument he didn’t feel threatened; your opinion here kind of blows the whole self-defense reason. He either felt threatened and behaved in a manner counter to what one would do if threatened, or he didn’t feel threatened and killed Martin for another reason other than self-defense. 

        • HonestDebate1

          I mean Trayvon didn’t appear to feel threatened.

          • 1Brett1

            Sorry, and thanks for the clarification. What makes you think Martin didn’t feel threatened? 

          • HonestDebate1

            He was on the phone with Rachel Jeantel and not 911 but I’m just speculating. I obviously don’t know what he was thinking.

          • 1Brett1

            Well, that is true and generally would indicate he wasn’t feeling threatened. Zimmerman, also, by getting out of his car and going in the direction of where Martin disappeared to, didn’t seem to be threatened, either. I will say that teenagers tend not to call police if an adult harasses them for being out at night. 

            I don’t think either felt threatened up until there was a scuffle. During the scuffle, however, each probably felt a little threatened, as aggression (whether it came from Martin, Zimmerman, or both, and no matter who initiated it) can indicate there was a feeling of being threatened. 

            Does Martin talking on the phone with Ms. Jeantel indicate he was pursuing Zimmerman and about to initiate violence against Zimmerman? Probably not. I know I  wouldn’t be casually talking on the phone while jumping out of darkness, demanding to know if someone had a problem, then telling him he does while punching him hard enough to knock him off of his feet.

            Whatever happened, while we’ll never know for sure, didn’t seem to quite happen the way Zimmerman says.  

            If someone (in this case, for the sake of argument, let’s say Martin) initiates a physical confrontation, does that give the other person the right to pull out a gun and shoot him?

          • jefe68

            So, if Martin was on the phone about the time he was shot than how is it he was able to confront Zimmerman at the same time? 

            I’m not sure about the time frame for the phone conversation, but I do remember Jeantel saying that she heard the scuffle. 

               

    • OnPointComments

      According to the written statement that George Zimmerman gave to the Sanford Police Department, when the dispatcher instructed him to not follow the suspect, Zimmerman was complying with the dispatcher’s instructions by returning to his vehicle when Martin approached him.
       
      Excerpt from the written statement of George Zimmerman to the police:
       http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/06/22/us/21george-zimmerman-transcript.html?_r=0 
       
      “The dispatcher once again asked me for my exact location.  I could not remember the name of the street so I got out of my car to look for a street sign.  The dispatcher asked me for a description and direction the suspect went.  I told the dispatcher I did not know but I was out of my vehicle looking for a street sign & the direction the suspect went.  The dispatcher told me not to follow the suspect & that an officer was in route.  As I headed back to my vehicle the suspect emerged from the darkness and said ‘You got a problem’ I said ‘No’ The suspect said ‘you do now’  As I backed and tried to find my phone to dial 911 the suspect punched me in the face.”

      • Steve__T

        In his first taped police interview after the killing, parts of which were played for the jury in a Seminole County criminal courtroom, Zimmerman said Martin circled his car before their fatal confrontation. But he did not say it while he was on the phone with a police dispatcher he called to report what he identified as a suspicious youth walking at a leisurely pace through the rain at his Retreat at Twin Lakes Community. Zimmerman, 29, also told police he got out of his car because he could not tell police the name of the street where he had last seen Martin before he lost eye-contact with him, even though the Retreat at Twin lakes housing complex has only three streets. Zimmerman also told Sanford Police investigator Doris Singleton, who testified in court on Monday, that Martin jumped out of the bushes before punching him to the ground and slamming his head into the concrete walkway repeatedly. But a Google map of the area where the attack is said to have occurred does
        not appear to show any bushes near the spot, and Zimmerman was unable to tell Singleton if Martin jumped out from in front of him or from behind him.

        So is he lying?

        • OnPointComments

          When Zimmerman was on the phone with the police dispatcher, he told the dispatcher that Martin was coming to check him out.
          Excerpt from the transcript of the phone call between George Zimmerman and the police dispatcher:
           http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html 
           
          Zimmerman: Now he’s just staring at me.
          Dispatcher: OK—you said it’s 1111 Retreat View? Or 111? 
          Zimmerman: That’s the clubhouse…
          Dispatcher: That’s the clubhouse, do you know what the—he’s near the clubhouse right now?
          Zimmerman: Yeah, now he’s coming towards me.
          Dispatcher: OK.
          Zimmerman: He’s got his hand in his waistband. And he’s a black male.
          Dispatcher: How old would you say he looks?
          Zimmerman: He’s got button on his shirt, late teens.
          Dispatcher: Late teens ok.
          Zimmerman: Somethings wrong with him. Yup, he’s coming to check me out, he’s got something in his hands, I don’t know what his deal is.

          • Steve__T

            Do you see the ambiguity’s of his statements? He knows exactly where he is and the address, their are only three streets in the complex,  he is the watch captain, why did he have to get out to check the street name? What happened to the bushes Treyvon jumped him from? 

      • jefe68

        The problem is that Zimmerman gave multipul statements and none of them are the same.
        Also, if Martin was on the phone at the time of his being shot, that does not add up either with Zimmerman’s claim that Martin was circling his car. Then the story changed to Martin jumping out of bushes but apparently there are no bushes on that part of the street where this incident took place. Then there is statement where he said Martin was still talking and yet he shot him in the heart which according to the coroner would have killed him instantly. Something is not adding up in the statements Zimmerman has given.  

         

        • OnPointComments

          I’m not an expert on this by any means, but I believe I’ve heard that there were two encounters between Zimmerman and Martin:  the first while Zimmerman was on the phone with the dispatcher, the phone call ends, and the second encounter in which there was a fight and the shooting.
           
          There’s conflicting testimony about whether the gunshot resulted in instant death.  The medical examiner on the stand today said Martin could have lived for 1 to 10 minutes.

          • 1Brett1

            Yes, possibly 1 to 10 minutes. That doesn’t mean he was conscious; it just means there was still brain activity. The medical examiner on the stand today said that Martin would have lost consciousness and would not have been able to move after being shot. This conflicts greatly with Zimmerman’s sworn statements that after shooting Martin he got out from under him and turned Martin over on Martin’s stomach, splaying his arms out to restrain him. After the shooting, when the first responders arrived, Martin was on his stomach but his arms were underneath his body. That is a huge discrepancy. 

            In the sequence of events with respect to Martin circling Zimmerman’s vehicle. Later, after this encounter, so to speak, Martin went down the sidewalk and into an area beside and behind townhouses/condos and also that led to the main road of the enclave. When Zimmerman got out of his car it was in the very same direction that Martin disappeared into (the sidewalk that led back out to the main road that encircled the enclave, but it also led to the aforementioned side and backyards). 

            There are a number of implausible statements by Zimmerman regarding this part of the incident. 

            1) Zimmerman later that night told police he was not pursuing Martin (yet it was in the same exact direction Martin went). 

            2) Zimmerman said he got out of his vehicle to get a street name and address number only and that this was his reason for getting out of his vehicle. There are only three streets in the entire community, the main one that encircles the entire community and two side streets (Zimmerman was on one of the two side streets) The street Zimmerman was on was the same street where he had called the non-emergency number about six months prior complaining about a large pothole. Zimmerman also had lived in the community for several years. Zimmerman also was the head neighborhood watch guy. Zimmerman also had a dog which he walked around the community several times a day. It doesn’t quite seem plausible that he didn’t know the name of the street he was on considering all of these other factors I mention.

            3) Zimmerman had told police the night he killed Martin that when Martin circled his vehicle he was scared. Getting out of his vehicle and going in the same direction as Martin does not seem to jibe with someone being afraid. 

            4) Zimmerman could have merely stayed in his vehicle and backed it up a half block to get the name of the street at it’s entrance (the street is a cul de sac/dead end). Aside from his being scared, this would have also been easier and a much shorter distance and time to get the information he said he was seeking. 

            Other discrepancies/inconsistencies/implausibilities include the fact that he told police that Martin jumped out of the bushes; there were no bushes. He also said Martin’s punch to his face knocked him off his feet (seems implausible as Zimmerman looks to have a fairly low center of gravity. He said Martin then got on top of him and was on top of him the whole time punching him in the face and head (and intermittently, repeatedly shoving his head into the sidewalk). One witness who saw the early part of the scuffle said it appeared Zimmerman was on top; another witness (who saw the end of the scuffle) said it appeared Martin was at that point on top. The back of Martin’s hoodie and underneath sweat shirt were wet (possible verifying Martin was at least at one point on the bottom. It is also important to note that Martin (who is right handed) had no marks, cuts or bruises on his right hand. Martin also had none of Zimmerman’s DNA under his fingernails.

            Zimmerman also told Sean Hannity he didn’t know about self-defense or ‘stand-your-ground’ laws, yet he had just completed a local community college course on both and had received an A. 

            I don’t think there is enough evidence to convict Zimmerman of 2nd degree murder; however, I think Zimmerman is lying about a number of components to his story, and that he concocted elements of the story to make it look like he was  jumped by Martin, overpowered and merely acted in self-defense. 

        • 1Brett1

          He said Martin reared back (still on top of Zimmerman) after Zimmerman shot him and said, “you got me!” Zimmerman said he couldn’t remember whether Martin moved off of him himself or if Zimmerman pushed him off but restrained Martin after shooting him…all of this sounds so much like a made up story.

      • 1Brett1

        This also conflicts with Zimmerman’s account in his buddy’s book published about the tragedy. In the book Zimmerman supposedly said the dispatcher asked him to go see where Martin went so police could know where to go. The quote above sounds as though Zimmerman took it upon himself to get out of his car and search for signs and the direction Martin went. 

        This quote you have also seems like a conflict (albeit a trivial one). Zimmerman told police (in their walk around the crime scene early the next day after the killing) that Martin said “you got a problem now” then punched him. The written statement was from an interview at around midnight just the night before. 

    • 1Brett1

      Yes, Martin did have the same rights; he just didn’t have a gun like Zimmerman did. 

      And, about Zimmerman’s use if his gun and his behavior that night, they go against what a person who has a concealed weapon should do, as well as a person who is head of a neighborhood watch: he followed Martin and he used his weapon while “on duty” so to speak as a neighborhood watch guy. In both roles (as a concealed weapon carrier and as a neighborhood watch guy), he should have reported Martin to police then retreated. 

      I find his behavior that night consistent with his earlier statement to the dispatcher that “these guys always get away…” My belief is that it was as if he thought Martin was up to no good and he didn’t want to leave it up to police to resolve. Zimmerman felt (imo) he had power because he was head of neighborhood watch, felt he had good rapport with police and had a concealed weapon. I feel he wanted to play cop/hero and he felt he had a way of doing so.   

      • OnPointComments

        George Zimmerman had the right to trail Martin to see what he was doing.  Based on my own personal experience of having my home burglarized three times, Zimmerman was exactly right that “these guys always get away;” in my cases, no one was ever caught and nothing was recovered, just as my police officers predicted.  My belief is that Zimmerman thought Martin was up to no good, and Zimmerman was going to keep an eye on him to make sure the police could get the guy this time.  IMO, Martin decided that he was going to teach this “creepy ass cracker” a lesson for following him, so he attacked Zimmerman; Zimmerman feared for his life and shot in self defense.
         
        This is slightly off-topic, but IMO the prosecution hasn’t helped their case with the absurd sarcastic questions they have asked witnesses, such as “Does a body grow after death” and “Did you wish your son hadn’t been killed,” and the frequent sarcastic tone regularly used.  The testimony from the medical examiner today was a train wreck; his next continuing education class should be how to testify in court.
         
        Regardless, I hope we can all agree that the trial has been fair so far, and that the verdict should be accepted without any of the mayhem that some commentators have suggested will occur if the verdict doesn’t go the way they want.

        • HonestDebate1

          I agree with you but the problem is those same commentators are the ones who ginned up the entire racism angle in the first place. I sure hope it doesn’t happen. Hopefully we’ve learned something from the LA riots after the Rodney King related acquittals when 22 people were murdered. 

          http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/29/for-22-murder-victims-la-riots-leave-legacy-justice-eluded/

        • jefe68

          You use your own experience of having your home burglarized three times as a justification of Zimmerman’s actions.
          Your personal experience means nothing. 
          And if anything it leads none to believe that you would be a vigilantly looking for blood.
          It’s dully noted that you are putting words and thoughts into a dead boys mouth. Shame on you you. And you know what, you are one sorry small minded excuse for a human being.Did you not see and hear the police testify to the fact, the fact that there was very little crime in this community. 

          • OnPointComments

            In the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
             

            Excerpt from a Reuters news story:
            http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425 
             

            A NEIGHBORHOOD IN FEAR
            By the summer of 2011, Twin Lakes was experiencing a rash of burglaries and break-ins.  At least eight burglaries were reported within Twin Lakes in the 14 months prior to the Trayvon Martin shooting, according to the Sanford Police Department. Yet in a series of interviews, Twin Lakes residents said dozens of reports of attempted break-ins and would-be burglars casing homes had created an atmosphere of growing fear in the neighborhood.
             
            But it was the August incursion into the home of Olivia Bertalan that really troubled the neighborhood…On August 3, Bertalan was at home with her infant son while her husband, Michael, was at work. She watched from a downstairs window, she said, as two black men repeatedly rang her doorbell and then entered through a sliding door at the back of the house. She ran upstairs, locked herself inside the boy’s bedroom, and called a police dispatcher, whispering frantically.  “What am I supposed to do? I hear them coming up the stairs!”  Police arrived just as the burglars – who had been trying to disconnect the couple’s television – fled out a back door.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            is there something wrong with watching someone in your neighborhood you don’t recognize? whenever I see strangers in my neighborhood I like to see what they are up to. my neighbors do the same thing and I am glad they do. a burglary can happen anywhere there have never been any in your neighborhood jefe?

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      are you on the jury? I don’t know what happened. I will wait for a jury to decide. Zimmerman is not using a” stand your ground” defense as of now.  

      • Steve__T

         You know I’m not on the jury that’s a dumb question coming from you, no I don’t know what happened either, I have doubts about statements and what has been said. And I also await for the jury to decide. To me it doesn’t matter what defense he uses, as long as he tells the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          you seemed to be upset about the stand your ground angle which has not been used as a defense in this case.

          • Steve__T

             You seem to be reading too much into my statement, or not reading it entirely. As I stated I don’t care what defense he uses as long as he tells the truth.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            I was responding to this statement of yours:
            ” If Zimmerman never got out of his car, their would have been no reason to stand his ground, had he obeyed the police dispatchers instructions, their would be no trial. Does Treyvon Martin have the same rights to stand his ground when approached by a stranger?”
            that’s what you said right? seemed to be about stand your ground to me because both sentences mentioned stand your ground.

            If he testifies, which he probably will not because he has a good lawyer, of course he will tell the truth.  lying in court is a crime as he has already found out the hard way so I am sure he would tell the truth if he were to testify which he probably wont

          • Steve__T

             Understood

    • Steve__T

       Just to clear the air: If I were in Mr Zimmermans position having been involved in this I don’t think I personally would remember every little detail. Being accused of murder has got to be scary as hell. I pray for both the family’s of this tragic event. In whatever the Jury decides, I pray for peace.

    • John Cedar

       “We don’t need you to do that”, is not an instruction.

      • Steve__T

         I would hate to be your supervisor. Or someone responsible for you, or your actions.

        • HonestDebate1

          A dispatcher is none of that. 

          • Steve__T

             You are totally clueless. I know you don’t agree with any of my post but.. never mind like you said your stupid.

          • HonestDebate1

            I agree with you from time to time but a dispatcher is not a supervisor and Mr. Cedar is correct.  

            BTW, it should be “you’re stupid” smarty pants.

          • Steve__T

            Thank you. Yes you are

          • HonestDebate1

            Much better.

        • John Cedar

          No worries…I would prompt you to clarify any “instructions” if you were so ambiguous.

      • Steve__T

         OK request.

        • John Cedar

          {chuckle} It is not a request either.

  • pm05

    Re: Egypt. It sounds as though their constitution did not include impeachment. And, this was the solution to this. The problem is with the imprisoning of the Muslim Brotherhood. But, correction to a flawed constitution

  • http://www.facebook.com/dhrosier Dreighton Rosier

    Loaded dice – NO way the crap shoot is fair

    The Muslim Brotherhood spent decades preparing a strong political organization using the religious organization structure to enforce the pursuit of their objectives.

    When elections were held so abruptly the MB was prepared to steamroll their slate over the much larger majority of the population.

    The fractures in that larger majority are the stuff of which democracies are made, but they must have a free society in which they can debate and resolve.

    Single track minorities do win what appear to be democratic elections and if not held accountable to the principles of democracy can establish a totalitarian state based on any principles they wish.

    IF that were allowed to happen even the appearances of democratic process would evaporate and the result would look a lot like Nazi Germany no matter what the principles might be.

  • Debbie Hanneman

    The wildlands fires in the western U.S. are one of the very compelling reasons for us to work on solutions to global warming (I speak both as an informed earth scientist and the mother of a son on a US Forest Service helicopter rappel crew that is in the US southwest fighting wildland fires).

    I have been working with a citizen’s group, Concerned Citizens Montana, that has been trying to swing public policy to the concept of utilizing buried high voltage direct current transmission for new high voltage lines. We believe that this would be a major step to energy efficiency and the massive problem of large event storms and wildland fires that negatively impact energy delivery. If anyone has a suggestion on someone to talk with that could help in this endeavor, please let me know.

    • HonestDebate1

      It’s certainly a reason to allow brush to be cleared and some selective logging. Here in NC we made it until 2 weeks ago before we had to use the air conditioner. It’s been very cool. Typically we turn it on in April or May. We’ve have so much rain this year, I wish I could give some to Arizona. That seems to always be the case. Several years back we had a drought but Texas was flooding.

      • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

        with George Bush up in ME all the time I hope someone is cutting all the brush in crawford

        • HonestDebate1

          He cleared it out before he left.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            say what you will about his presidency but his brush clearing was second to none. I bet oboma could not clear brush to save his life, unless it was the kind you smoke

          • HonestDebate1

            I know, and how dare he spend his vacation days at home working in the yard instead of taking extravagant trips with huge entourages where money is no object, especially considering how much better the economy was doing back then.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            I have to admit that I was pretty annoyed with bush’s frequent golfing but oboma just took it to another level with golf so I guess its all relative. if golfing is such an important part of the presidency perhaps we should elect phil mikelson or tiger woods

          • HonestDebate1

            Bush quit golfing in 2003 because we were at war and he felt is disrespected the fallen. 

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            not really. I bet he was more low key about it after the “now watch this drive” faux pas

          • HonestDebate1

            Yea, really.

  • HonestDebate1

    We added 195K jobs in June but don’t break out the Dom Perignon. 322K went to the involuntary part-time category wiping out the gain. This is a result of Obamacare. The U3 rate remained unchanged but the U6 rate went way up. I just don’;t see a rebound with Obamacare on the books. No wonder he delayed it’s implementation but it’s just kicking the can. 

  • Larry Nolan

    This hour is not showing up in my iPad’s podcasts downloads. Did get hour two though. What’s up?

  • Coastghost

    “Kerry Yachts While Egypt Rots”: but was it not mere days ago that NPR was regaling us with tales of his heroic but not-yet-fruitful shuttle diplomacy between the Israelis and the Palestinians (as if to explain his relative silence on the Snowden matter)?
    Maybe by next Friday Mr Kerry will’ve slapped down c. $630,000 of his own money to nudge upwards the Facebook “likes” for his yacht.

    • disqus_fw2Bu1dEsd

      “Condi Rice shops for shoes during Katrina”. 

      • HonestDebate1

        And exactly what are the Secretary of State’s duties during hurricanes as juxtaposed with military coups in the Middle East?

        • Mike_Card

          Kerry was supposed to be there?  Like Hillary was supposed to be in Benghazi?  WTF?

          • HonestDebate1

            Hey Mike, Long time no see.

            No, no one was supposed to be anywhere. They lied, that’s all. 

          • disqus_fw2Bu1dEsd

            They are trying to tell you something: take a vacation, perhaps on a yacht after having bought some FABULOUS shoes— 

          • HonestDebate1

            I just got a pair of killer Orvis wading boots. I don’t need no stinkin’ yacht, I’m heading to the trout stream.

          • Mike_Card

            Thanks, Gregg.  I’ve been on a new path and just don’t get here that often.  Looks like you’re keeping the patch riled up!

          • HonestDebate1

            Yea, I do what I can. I hope your new path take you someplace nice. 

          • Mike_Card

            Hi, Gregg.  I can’t find my comment, so I hope it wasn’t snarky; if it was, not TOO snarky.  I miss being able to hang with all you screen names!

          • jefe68

            Yeah, like Superman or Captain Kirk being beamed down to a hot spot to save the day.

          • HonestDebate1

            The State Department one day:

            “Any report or tweet that he was on a boat is completely inaccurate.”

            The next:

            “As regime change was unfolding in Egypt, Secretary of State John Kerry spent time on his boat Wednesday afternoon in Nantucket Sound…”

          • jefe68

            I don’t f’n care.

          • HonestDebate1

            I just think our government should not lie to us and smear those who are telling the truth. You don’t have to agree.

    • HonestDebate1

      Kerry’s State department is carrying on Hillary’s Benghazi lying ways. 

      “Let’s go through the timeline on this, just so we have a solid understanding of how easily the State Department issues false statements to cover for its leadership and happily allows the smearing of others who report the truth, even on something as seemingly trivial and easily defused as the report that Sec. of State John Kerry was on his yacht Wednesday as Egypt’s revolution unfolded.”

      http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/05/state-department-yeah-despite-our-denial-kerry-was-on-his-yacht-during-egypt-upheaval/

      I’ll give them this much, unlike Benghazi, this time the coverup was worse that the offense. Why do they feel compelled to lie?

    • OnPointComments

      You have to give it to the State Department for having the audacity to baldface lie in the face of photographic evidence.
       
      State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki issued a statement Wednesday saying “any report or tweet that he [Kerry] was on a boat is completely inaccurate.  Since his plane touched down in Washington at 4 am, Secretary Kerry was working all day and on the phone dealing with the crisis in Egypt.” 
       
      CBS News had a photo of Kerry on his yacht and sent it to the State Department, asking whether they still stand by their denial that Kerry was on a yacht.  The response: “Yes.”
       
      The State Department finally acknowledged to CBS News that Kerry was indeed on his yacht.
       
      It’s amusing that so many who were all atwitter over the Romney’s money don’t give a squat about the Kerry’s money.

      • OnPointComments

        It reminded me of OJ’s book title “If I Did It.”
         I absolutely was not on my yacht during the Egyptian crisis. 
          And if I was on my yacht, I was thinking about the Egyptian crisis.

      • pete18

         Lots of money is only bad if Republican’s have it.

  • OnPointComments

    A tangent to the Zimmerman trial.  IMO, the risk of a politically-pressured witchhunt is the greatest threat to justice in this case.
     
    “ZIMMERMAN PROSECUTOR ANGELA COREY CRIMINALLY INDICTED BY CITIZENS’ GRAND JURY FOR ALLEGEDLY FALSIFYING ARREST WARRANT AND COMPLAINT”
     
    Excerpt:
    Following Corey’s criminal complaint charging Zimmerman, legal experts such as Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz condemned her for falsely signing an arrest affidavit under oath, which intentionally omitted exculpatory evidence consisting of the photographs showing the injuries Zimmerman sustained, and rushing to charge him with second degree murder under political pressure. Dershowitz called her actions unethical and themselves crimes.
     
    http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/02/5539380/zimmerman-prosecutor-angela-corey.html#storylink=cpy

    • John Cedar

      If I didn’t know in my heart of hearts that libruls find people such as Zimmerman or Duke lacrosse players to be expendable, I would be almost sure that this prosecutor is purposely just going through the motions to placate those who are outraged, with no intention of getting a conviction but rather intending to show people the case is weak.

      • OnPointComments

        I haven’t been impressed with the prosecution’s case or with the prosecutors.  I’ve heard some TV commentators say that the judge is being abundantly cautious, granting more prosecution motions than defense, to forestall any claims that the State didn’t have a chance to convict Zimmerman.  I wonder if the judge’s caution will be enough to stop riots and protests if Zimmerman is acquitted.

  • OnPointComments

    An excellent article about the state’s burden to prove Zimmerman’s guilt beyond a reaonsable doubt.
     
    “Zimmerman’s prosecution: Vigilante justice?”
     http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2013/07/05/zimmermans-prosecution-vigilante-justice/?tid=pm_pop 
     
    Excerpt:
    ●  What matters is if the state has the case — one so certain that there are no reasonable facts that could provide an alternate explanation.
    ●  Second degree murder requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the killer had “depraved indifference to human life.”  It is virtually inconceivable that a situation involving self-defense on the killer’s part will fit a ‘depraved mind’ charge.”
    ●  It isn’t good enough to say Zimmerman was foolish to follow Martin.  One has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman…had such a general indifference to life as to exhibit an attitude… akin to ”opening the door of the lions’ cage in the zoo.”

    • jefe68

      And yet Trayvon Martin did not have a weapon on him and if Zimmerman did not engage in his vigilante acts none of this would be happening now would it.

      At the very least it’s manslaughter.

      • WorriedfortheCountry

        No, it is not necessarily manslaughter.  Under FL law, Zimmerman can defend himself if he believes there is an imminent threat to his life.  Therefore, the jury will have to find him not guilty of man slaughter IF they buy his story that he was fearful of losing consciousness due to the beating and his airway being obstructed.

        Under this scenario it doesn’t even matter if Zimmerman threw the first punch to be justified self-defense.  Your characterization of ‘vigilante acts’ is also irrelevant.  btw — it isn’t vigilante acts’ IF you bring the police in as Zimmerman was attempting up until the end.

        No matter what the verdict it is a tragedy that the young man died.

        • jefe68

          To bad the evidence and his stories don’t add up to his version of the incident.

          What is it with you people? Zimmerman was the aggressor here. He engaged Martin it was not the other way around. Do you have any idea what your saying here?
          That anyone, and I mean anyone can approach you and start a fight and then shoot you and claim they felt threatened.
           

          • HonestDebate1

            On what basis do you claim Zimmerman approached Martin and started a fight?

          • 1Brett1

            Well, what about another question…can you shoot anyone who starts a fight with you? Even if he sucker punches you? The answer is no, unless there are certain conditions you’ve endured. Zimmerman’s only defense is that he felt threatened enough to sustain either bodily harm (not scratches or scrapes) or death from Martin. So, the question is, was his feeling of being threatened to such an extent reasonable/rational? Was his fear for his own safety a reasonable thing to feel given the situation he was in? I’ll not question whether Zimmerman felt he was in danger or not; I’ll assume he thought he was, but was that reasonable on his part?

            For there to be a 2nd degree murder conviction, the state would need to prove that either he didn’t feel threatened and simply shot Martin out of malice or that he wasn’t at all threatened in any reasonable extent no matter what his feelings were of the situation in which he found himself…I don’t think they can prove this. I understand they can convict him of the lesser charge of manslaughter, but I am not enough up on the law to say with certainty if this is true. 

          • John Cedar

            Are you sure you cannot legally shoot anyone who starts a fight with you in Florida? I think you can. And that is the big problem with the “stand your ground” law there.

            In fact, that sounds like a bad description for the law, since Zimmerman was not standing his ground, he was in pursuit, yet the law still apparently applies to his situation.

            I have never seen anyone killed in a fight but have seen enough fights that involve grave bodily injury, that  I think it is reasonable for a non aggressor to use lethal force in response to a physical attack, even in states that do not have a “stand your ground law”.

          • Steve__T

             I agree with the sentiments of your post. But I can see that could open a can of worms. Imagine a guy doesn’t like another, this guy is in a public place, guy walks up leans toward him and says something really nasty quietly to the other guy,(No body heard what was said) the guy gets mad and hits him, and that’s what the protagonist (non aggressor) wanted and expected, pulls out a gun a  shoots him dead saying he attacked me I was standing my ground.

            I don’t think I’m going back to Florida any time soon.

          • HonestDebate1

            A punch is the nose is not justification for murder. I don’t think that’s the way it works.

          • Steve__T

            In any other place where a person “has a right to be,” that person has
            “no duty to retreat” if attacked and may “meet force with force,
            including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary
            to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or
            another to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

          • Steve__T

             I did not say anything about justification I used a scenario. How this can be abused. see the law written out below.

          • HonestDebate1

            Yes, under the law. A punch in the nose is not a threat of death.

          • 1Brett1

            Well, you do throw around a couple of terms and concepts that may change the equation, e.g., “grave bodily injury,” and “physical attack.”

            As far as a “physical attack,” there are many definitions of a physical attack.   Just a  punch in the face is not cause to pull out a gun and shoot someone, whether in a state with stand-your-ground laws or not. If the physical attack is to such an   extent that anyone would reasonably consider the result to be harm enough to cause grave injury, then, I would think, yes, one could pull out a gun in a stand-your-ground state and shoot the attacker.

            Also, while it appears Zimmerman did follow Martin, the evidence that he actually had that intent in mind (to pursue) is circumstantial at best. The stand-your-ground defense would be from the moment of confrontation between the two, I would think, and not from the moment of Zimmerman’s so-called “pursuit.”

            I guess I see both participants as having some accountability; although, I feel Zimmerman had more ability to retreat, i.e., he was older/mature, had already done what he had set out to do: to report a possible suspect, and was bound by two important roles that should have dictated his conduct: 1) he was carrying a concealed weapon, and 2) he was acting in a “head-neighborhood-watch-person-on-duty” capacity. Martin was acting as many stupid-assed, blindly confident, ignorantly arrogant kids do (in my opinion). 

            Zimmerman should have had better control over himself and over assessing the situation. If anything good can come from this tragedy, it might just be that Zimmerman will never be able to fulfill his dream to become a cop; we have enough cops out there who are ill-suited for the job they have undertaken.

          • jefe68

            On the basis that Zimmerman is the one who got out of his car and went to confront Martin. You or I do not know what happened afterwards, but a fight did happen and it was heard on the cell phone by Martin’s friend. Martin was  not even talking to Zimmerman before, we know that due to cell phone records and Rachel Jeantel’s testimony. 

            By what basis do claim that Zimmerman did not start the fight? Which version of the event do you want to go with?

            You see, what I see here is you right wingers want is for Martin to be the villain  which is easy as he’s dead and can’t testify, for Zimmerman to be the good guy with the gun. It’s not looking like that to me.

            His statements are all over the map and so full holes you drive a chevy pickup through them. 

          • HonestDebate1

            I made no claim. I just want the truth, I’m not taking sides. Why would I want Martin to be the villain?

          • jefe68

            Did you not say he was the agressor? 

            I think Zmmerman is going to get off because I don’t think there is enough evidence for 2nd degree murder. He should have been on trial for 2nd degree manslaughter.

            By the way did you hear or see that Michael Savage thinks Zimmerman is guilty. Talk about muck raking.

          • HonestDebate1

            No, I didn’t say Martin was the aggressor. I don’t know. But you did say Zimmerman was the aggressor. Aside from your agreeing with him, what’s Savage got to do with anything?

          • jefe68

            His points are interesting. What you don’tlike Savageallof a sudden?

          • HonestDebate1

            I have never been a fan of Savage.

          • WorriedfortheCountry

            Actually Zimmerman’s statements are very consistent and have been mostly corroborated  by the evidence introduced at trial.

            We also have an eye witness that SAW Martin on top of Zimmerman pummeling him “MMA style”.  There is no eye witness that either supports or refutes Zimmerman’s claim that Martin started the fight or Zimmerman’s claim that he was simply looking for a street address to give to the police when attacked.  However, both are plausible.

            I agree that this is a difficult case and there is desire for society to seek justice to account for a young man’s senseless death.

            Zimmerman was in regular contact with the police and was attempting to bring the police to his location.  If he was a vigilante looking for ‘justice’ he wouldn’t bring the police in until AFTER.

          • 1Brett1

            “Actually Zimmerman’s statements are very consistent and have been mostly corroborated  by the evidence introduced at trial.”

            That’s actually not true. It’s just that the state has not done a very strong job of pointing out those inconsistencies/discrepencies, while the defense has done a great job of explaining those inconsisencies/discrepencies away, e.g., people often give changing/conflicting testimony when asked to recount their stories over and over.  

          • jefe68

            You think that his statements have been consistant? 

            What about the fact that there are no bushes near enough to the sidewalk, or that Trayvon Martin’s arms were under his body and not splayed out as Zimmerman said. There are quite few more inconsistencies that are there for those with eyes to see.

            The man was a vigilante, he was armed and looking for trouble, and he found it. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      yup as soon   as they charged him with that and not manslaughter or a lesser charge you knew that he will not be convicted

      • HonestDebate1

        I think if it wasn’t for the incredibly irresponsible media imposed judgements based on the color or skin and nothing else, the charge would have been more realistic and justice would have been better served.

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          actually without the media I don’t think he would have been charged with anything. its a farce. if the police thought they could have made a case they would have arrested him and he would have been charged right away. the  fact eh was let go says it all. if the police can arrest you they will

          • HonestDebate1

            Excellent point.

        • JONBOSTON

          I agree. Frankly the trial judge should have granted the defense motion for acquital. The prosecution has not met their burden of proof and their witnesses have helped Zimmerman establish reasonable doubt about his guilt.

          • HonestDebate1

            The word “racist” should be used with extreme care but these days it’s tossed around willy nilly. That reduces it and makes it meaningless.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

    Ya can’t make this stuff up:

    The WSJ Editorial page, demonstrating once again why they’re a crap source for thinking*.

    (*If you’re not rich enough to buy the cars, suits, watches and Gulfstream jetshares advertised in the WSJ.)

    Egyptians would be lucky if their new ruling generals turn out to be in
    the mold of Chile’s Augusto Pinochet, who took power amid chaos but
    hired free-market reformers and midwifed a transition to democracy. </blockquote)

    • hennorama

      Paraphrasing ‘The Onion’ post-9/11 – Holy Shucking Fit!

      Pinochet? Seriously? What the flock are those Murdoch sheep talking about?

      They seriously think Egypt will be “lucky” to get someone like Pinochet – a so-called “benevolent dictator,” who was willing to “disappear” anyone who opposed him?

      What a load of malarkey.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

        I’d like to agree that they’re revisioning Pinochet. But by this point, such reptition about benevolent forceful power-grabbers (of the proper sort) makes me wonder if the WSJ types really care about the idea of representational government for all, and the well-being of the hoi polloi.

        This kind of stuff was much easier to get away with when the WSJ was only something one read if one got within physical presence of a paper copy. It’s written for a certain sort of reader, and that’s not you or I. Curse you, intertubes!

        • hennorama

          TF – TY for your response, and especially for “intertubes” – that cracked me up.

          A few months ago, there was some Milton Friedman worship “in here,” so I brought up the so-called “Chilean Miracle” under Pinochet, and wrote, in part:

          “Somehow, conservatives have come to view Chile as a huge success story. In 1982, Milton Friedman praised dictator General Pinochet because he “has supported a fully free-market economy as a matter of principle. Chile is an economic miracle.” Apparently it did not matter to Friedman that the economic changes in Chile were essentially implemented at gunpoint.

          “The statistics also do not bear out his claim of Chile as “an economic miracle.”

          “Between 1972 and 1987, the GNP per capita fell 6.4 percent, adjusted for inflation. Per capita GDP was over $3,600 in 1973. As late as 1993, it had risen from its lows under Pinochet to only $3,170. Only five Latin American countries did worse in per capita GDP during the era of Pinochet and Friedman’s Chicago Boys. Chile is far more accurately characterized as a tragic failure of Friedman’s ideas, and the Chilean people are still paying the price today.”

          And of course, the WSJ conveniently failed to mention that General Pinochet launched a military coup during which an elected President, Salvador Allende, was killed/murdered/assassinated.

          They also fail to mention that the coup happened with CIA assistance, at the behest of US business interests affected by Allende’s nationalization of copper mines, banks and other foreign-owned businesses. (The circumstances surrounding this coup are discussed in detail in the interesting book “The Shock Doctrine” by Naomi Klein, and elsewhere.)

          You can read my entire post, which contains several links to source material, here:
          http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/01/25/week-in-the-news-229#comment-780020601

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

            Jeez, Uncle Milty has been “all in” on Pinochet for thirty years?

            Friedman sounds like a man who can’t imagine what it was like to be on the wrong side. Or maybe he’d has never seen “Evita” (which is about Argentina, not actually a documentary, but does describe the row between “descamisados” and military strongmen in the developing world pretty well, for my money).

          • hennorama

            TF – Economista Tío Miltonico Friedmanico is still dead, desde el 16 de noviembre 2006.

            He’s “all in” San Francisco Bay, where his ashes were scattered.

            (Whether he was clothed in a shirt at the time of his cremation is unknown.)

            One must recommend the 2012 film “No.” The plot is summarized on IMDb.com as follows”

            “Military dictator Augusto Pinochet calls for a referendum to decide his permanence in power in 1988, the leaders of the opposition persuade a young daring advertising executive – René Saavedra – to head their campaign. With limited resources and under the constant scrutiny of the despot’s watchmen, Saavedra and his team conceive of a bold plan to win the election and free their country from oppression.”

            See:
            http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2059255/plotsummary?ref_=tt_stry_pl

    • HonestDebate1

      I thought this was an interesting comparison between Egypt, Libya and Tunisia. It touches on the Pinochet thing but not from the WSJ. Evidently someone at IBD concurs and I know how much you like them. I’m not endorsing anything other than it’s a mess and Obama is on the wrong side of it IMO. But it is interesting.

      http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/06/why-did-democracy-fail-in-egypt-but-succeed-in-tunisia/

  • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

    he saw it on tv it must be true

  • HonestDebate1

    I happen to think guns don’t murder, people do. But I’m in the minority around here where the conventional wisdom says get rid of assault rifles and violence will decrease. Those of you who endorse this view should be furious that fast and furious has claimed yet another victim.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-atf-fast-furious-20130705,0,2692834.story

    • Steve__T

       That’s old news it happened in January. Try to keep up.

      • HonestDebate1

        It wasn’t reported until yesterday but really, does it matter? 

        • jefe68

          Not to you, it’s just more muck raking in your case.

          • HonestDebate1

            Do you realize what you are saying? And weren’t you up in arms about what Paula Deen said 30 years ago?

          • jefe68

            Nope, I was not. Could not care less about Paula Deen’s dumb comments.

        • Steve__T

           That’s funny I heard about it.

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      you just are failing to convert newspeak to newthink. its called “gun violence” because guns are the source of violence. as soon as they are banned they will cease to exist and no one will ever be the victim of any sort of violence. the fact that rifles of all sorts are used almost never in crimes and kill very few people relative to most other means is irrelevant, what ever an assault weapon is is the problem. once guns are banned people will be free to die as god intended by drowning is a swimming pool or a boating accident.

  • davecm

    Business leaders meet with Obama telling him the facts about Obamacare and what is coming down the pipe. CBO has already stated the adverse effects, prices going up, people losing their current health plans, move to more temp positions, etc.
    It has already happened where I work.
    So! if this is the norm of the future for Obamacare starting in 2014, a mid-term election year, what might be your best political move???
    Delay the storm that will come so you can help your Democratic buddies get re-elected.
    Think about it, if Obamacare does what it is forecast to do starting in Jan 1 of 2014, Democrats will have a hard time blaming or even explaining themselves to a mad voter.
    But!!! I am sure this is not the reason for delaying till 2015!

  • Bill Landrum

    I kept waiting for the story on the firefighters, but it never came.  There were at least four or five teasers before and during the program (and in the title on the web site), but no content.  I have come to expect that type of thing on local news, but I thought that NPR was above it.

    • hennorama

      May the intrepid firefighters lost in the Arizona wildfire Rest In Peace.

      They will not be forgotten.

  • Steve__T

    Disqus

  • HonestDebate1

    The 7.5% U3 unemployment rate is awful but it’s the new normal. It’s been there or higher for 54 straight months which is the longest stretch since they began keeping track.

    • HonestDebate1

      Only 47% of adults have a full time job. Yep, it’s gotta be Bush’s fault.

      • Mike_Card

        Well, yeah, it actually is.  Or, more significantly, Cheney’s–because Bush couldn’t, can’t, reign in him and Cheney’s neocon thugs.

        As awful as 7.5% unemployment is, just think about how wonderful 0% inflation is.  (They come as a package.)

        • jefe68

          You need some inflation, as deflation is not a world that would be good for any of us.

        • HonestDebate1

          The 7.5% rate doesn’t tell the whole story as well as the 47% number. Fewer people looking for work in a smaller universe of available jobs means a lower unemployment rate. That’s the only reason it’s not even higher.

          Regarding inflation, you know more about that than I but I do think QE 1,2,3 through umpteen will rear it’s head sooner or later. Others look at inflation as a solution of sorts but I don’t entirely understand it, maybe you could enlighten me a little. I would have understood it a little better if you had said interest instead of inflation. But that can’t last forever either and if the interest on our massive humongous debt goes up even a tiny bit it means big trouble. It’s already impossible to ever pay back and I don’t even see a chance of it getting paid down.

          But sorry, I can’t buy into the notion there is anything good about so many people out of work regardless of interest or inflation. But what’s worse is I don’t see anything on the horizon to make things better, just ticking time bombs.

          Why didn’t Cheney make Bush pardon Scooter if he was running things? Eh, never mind, I’m not going to even entertain the notion that Obama doesn’t own this five years in. The massive new regulations, the stupid and failed “stimulus”, a ridiculous energy policy, a hostile business environment that has sucked all the confidence out of the dollar, rudderless leadership, new taxes and most of all Obamacare are the culprits. None of it had to be this way or would have been if not for Obama. It’s his. 

          So I’m curious, do you see anything on the horizon that makes you think things will get better? And I don’t mean delaying Obamacare because it’s coming. Anything at all?

      • 1Brett1

        Fair enough, you don’t like anything about Obama, and you will seize on anything not completely turned around during his time in office to use as criticism against him, and the weak economy is easy to point to as something that should be stronger. 

        However, there is an inherent comparison at play in your opinion, not only regarding Obama but Bush. Would the economy be any better if Romney had become president? Would the economy have been any better had McCain become president last time around? Would the economy have fallen (read plummeted) like it did if Bush hadn’t been president? None of us has a crystal ball/a view into parallel universes/realities to be able to answer those questions. We just have out opinions. 

        And, for every, “the-current-hostile-environment-for-businesses-hurts-the-economy” arguments, there are counter, “companies-have-gotten-narrowly-greedy-and-are-sitting-on-their-profits-while-treating-employees-as-completely- dispensable-objects-that-will-put-up-with-poor- pay-poor-benefits-low-hours-an-extremely-erratic and-non-secure-work-environment-while-companies-have-sent-manufacturing-jobs-offshore” arguments.

        See, in these times in which we live, we’ve needed a truly great president who possesses great leadership, even in the face of a legislative body not particularly productive, innovative, or creative. What we got with Obama has been an exceedingly mediocre president in conjunction with an incredibly obstructive Congress.

        • JONBOSTON

          Obama is America’s first affirmative action president. Judged by normal standards, he would be regarded as one of the worst presidents America has ever had. Instead the media treats him with kid gloves, never questions his policies, and never criticizes his actions.

          Presidential economic policies do make a difference. A different president with a pro-growth agenda would not:
          1) demonize business –ex: big pharma; oil & gas; insurance companies;
          2) tax medical device companies
          3) oppose at the NLRB  Boeing’s opening a new airplane factory in South Carolina , jeopardizing 2500 middle class jobs when unemployment was 9.4%
          4) oppose the Keystone pipeline (and the 2000 jobs it would create) despite numerous environmental approvals
          5) promote tax reform —  such as repatriating overseas $trillions in corporate profits that would stimulate the US economy w/o any additional government spending; lowering corp rates 
          6)wasting billions on worthless green energy programs, thereby distorting allocation of capital
          7) push Obamacare, resulting in increased costs to business and encouraging part time hiring
          8) encourage EPA’s increased regulation of coal, oil & gas , etc., the one sector of economic growth  and job creation in the US. Net result is higher electricity costs ( May’s avg. cost was the highest on record) which is a burden to the poor and middle class
          9) would not promote amnesty to 11million illegal immigrants which will lower overall wages and increase unemployment of unskilled workers replaced by illegals because employers needn’t provide Obamacare to illegals
          10) higher deficits due to runaway spending increase concerns of businesses and entrepreneurs that taxes will be going up–such as the recent Obamacare surtax on investment profits. Net result is decreased investment of risk capital.

          I could go on but won’t….

          • 1Brett1

            “Obama is America’s first affirmative action president. Judged by normal standards, he would be regarded as one of the worst presidents America has ever had. Instead the media treats him with kid gloves, never questions his policies, and never criticizes his actions.”

            That is such utter nonsense…yeah, the President was elected based on a quota need for an African-American president, sure, or a “half” African-American? Is that it? Nonsense. The press never criticizes the President? More nonsense. 

            As far as your “laundry list,” I got as far as the first one enumerated…one minute you guys say big business keeps him in their back pocket, that his “ObamaCare” was just a way to give a huge profit to big pharma, that oil companies are his biggest donors, etc. The next minute you say he is hostile toward them…more nonsense (and contradictory nonsense at that). 

          • JONBOSTON

            You’re confusing comments made by extreme left wing kooks, Occupy wall street types , and progressive(ly) stupid groups like move-on .org  that Obama somehow favors big business. What a total bunch of crap. How do you explain Obama’s attack on big pharma, big oil and gas, venture capital groups, companies that outsource, the US Chamber of Commerce, NLRB actions against Boeing and other large companies,  refusal to approve Keystone pipeline, corporate jets, Las Vegas trips, capital gains tax rates, etc.  It would be laughable if you weren’t being serious. Some on the right  have argued that Obama is a borderline socialist or even Marxist. I don’t happen to believe that but each day and each new policy initiative makes it harder to argue the contrary.

          • jefe68

            So you like paying more for pharmaceuticals than any other nation on the planet? 

            If Obama was so against Big Pharma then why did he let them write portions of the ACA.

        • HonestDebate1

          It would be pretty silly for me or anyone to  dislike Obama just because he’s [insert black, Democrat, liberal, or whatever], I never understood that. I don’t like his policies and what he has done to America. 

          I am not here to speculate on what might have been. There is nothing to compare to other than fantasy. I am concerned about what he has done here in the real world.

          • 1Brett1

            I didn’t say why you disliked him; all I know for sure is that you don’t. Your first paragraph indicates I said something about why you don’t like him, yet I didn’t.

            And, as far as speculating and “what he has done in the real world” you are saying that whatever is happening in the “real” world is the result of his doing, as if another president would be doing the country and the “world” much more good (or at least not doing the so-called “bad” that Obama is), and that is speculating.

          • HonestDebate1

            Then why do you think I don’t like him? I don’t even know him. Why do you assume I’m searching for things to criticize? Why? It’s silly, it’s not about me. Do you have anything to say about Obamacare killing jobs especially full-time jobs?

            Obama has been a disaster, that’s it. That’s all I’m saying.  That’s not speculation. There is no “as if”.

          • 1Brett1

            I don’t know and don’t care why you don’t like him. You are a conservative, which may be the foundation upon which you base your opinion, but it doesn’t matter. 

            Your opinions are not facts, no matter how much your arrogance thinks they are.

          • HonestDebate1

            That’s funny! 

            It’s not an opinion he’s been a disaster, open your eyes. Look at the evidence… or just say, “poor Obama,  they don’t like him and I don’t know why. He’s trying so hard”.

          • 1Brett1

            I already mentioned my opinion of Obama and his ineffectual presidency. But you are in your Obama bashing mode so my answers weren’t probably good enough for you to argue with; you’ve got to make my opinions more one dimensional, as they are easier to argue with then.

          • HonestDebate1

            “I don’t know and don’t care why you don’t like him.”

            Why are you playing dumb?

            How many times have you mocked my claim of not being a Republican by accusing me of agreeing with everything Republican and disagreeing with everything Democrat? Plenty. You have flat out called me a racist and a bigot more times than I can count. You have engaged in entire threads with other commenters about it. If you truly believe that then how does it follow that his being half-black is not the reason I dislike him? And why do you put it in those terms anyway, I don’t like HIS POLICIES. We might get along fine on a fishing trip.

            Add to that your reply assigned an irrational view to me.

            “…you don’t like anything about Obama, and you will seize on anything not completely turned around during his time in office to use as criticism against him…”

            You did not address my criticism at all. Saying he didn’t turn it around is hardly the point. There were a hell of a lot more people than 47% of the country who had full-time jobs when he was sworn in. 

            I always enjoy the comments of JonBoston even though we sometime disagree (not today BTW). I especially think his first sentence is apropos to you. It’s not me that made you one-dimensional.

          • 1Brett1

            “How many times have you mocked my claim of not being a Republican by accusing me of agreeing with everything Republican and disagreeing with everything Democrat? Plenty.”

            As I said, that could very well be the reason you don’t like Obama as president.

            You are, like many neocons, of the opinion (as you’ve agreed with OPC above) that Obama deliberately is destroyingthe country; you have absolutely no proof of that. You have none. I could make many guesses why you don’t like Obama, but I am not going to. Only you know why you don’t like him as president. 

          • HonestDebate1

            ” I could make many guesses why you don’t like Obama…”

            Why would you have to guess? I’ve been clear. I’ve written chapter and verse on the myriad of reasons. Here’s a recent one on this board:

            http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/08/05/week-egypt-firefighters-delay#comment-952795231

            Also, as I said, I endorse Jon’s comment today 100%. Those are the reasons, you don’t have to guess. Think about it, I ‘ve written libraries of reasons I don’t support Obama, you ignore them, you call me a racist and then imply I’m a racist who may not care that he’s black. Please, don’t insult my intelligence.

            I also endorse the Egyptian’s view in the comment no one wants to touch.

          • 1Brett1

            When have you disagreed with JonBoston? 

            Prove that there were more full-time jobs when Obama was sworn in than now? Corporations have developed the practice of creating part time jobs instead of full time ones, besides. You continually dress up your opinions as facts, the epitome of arrogance. 

            My statements about Obama’s race were in reference to JonBoston’s saying he was the first Affirmative Action president. You are taking them out of context. 

            I do think you are a racist pig, but that’s beside the  point, Gregg. You may very well might simply hate Obama because he’s black, I just don’t know that. I judge your racism by the comments you have continually made on this forum. You have never said you don’t like Obama because he’s black, so I don’t know that.

          • 1Brett1

            Since you are in agreement with the other neocons, why do you agree he’s the first “Affirmative Action” president”? 

             

          • HonestDebate1

            Because so many people, of all races, voted for him because he was half-black. Because he wasn’t vetted. Because the bar was lowered for a freshman Senator, who quit after two years, with zero executive experience; zero business experience; zero foreign policy expertise; or even any private sector experience.   Because he blamed all criticism of his policies on race as affirmative action does. Because he was judged by the color of his skin as affirmative action must.

          • HonestDebate1

            Jon agrees with you that Sarah Palin is an idiot. I disagree, so there’s that.

            The U3 unemployment rate is virtually unchanged since Obama was sworn yet part-time jobs (which are counted in the U3 as jobs) just surged to an all time high. That can only mean one thing.

            Corporations are moving to part-time because of Obama and Obamacare, that’s my point. It’s undeniable.

            I have repeatedly said I don’t care about Obama’s race. I’ve even said I like his black half better than his white half. His race has zip, zero nada to do with my opinion of him. None. Here’s a clue: white racist don’t like blacks. You’re making no sense at all as you continue to avoid the issue and talk about me. And no, I was not referring to your reply to JB in any way. I was referring to your reply to me.

          • 1Brett1

            No, I’m not avoiding anything. You simply want me to answer you in a certain way, which I won’t, and that infuriates you; you want me to say that Obama is black and you don’t like him because he’s black. For the last time, I don’t know that. 

            You criticize 100% of his actions, policies, ideas, etc. It’s difficult for me to believe that your dislike for him is simply because of his policies. I didn’t like Bush, but I never roundly condemned everything about the man and every one of his actions. 

            I think you didn’t like Obama from even before the first election absolutely. Why? I don’t know; I don’t care. I don’t think you are honest about much of your approach on this forum…sue me.

            jefe had it right: you’re like a gnat or mosquito  .

          • HonestDebate1

            I don’t want you to do squat. I don’t care at all, certainly not enough to be infuriated. Life’s too short and this is just a stupid blog. I’m just saying your position is not consistent nor honest.

            All I said is 47% of the country doesn’t have a full time job. That’s not a recipe for recovery. It’s awful. That has nothing to do with my feelings about Obama. It is what it is. It will get worse when Obamacare is implemented. But you’d rather not talk about that to me or anyone else as this board proves.

      • jefe68

        I blame Bush for you.

    • Steve__T

       So why are the Republicans killing unemployment benefits in our state?

      • HonestDebate1

        There seems to be many assumptions in your question. It is not happening in a vacuum. I will say that many of the unemployed are that way through no fault of their own. It is not their fault that Obama’s policies have had such a devastating affect on jobs. So there’s that.

        But paying people not to work is not a plan for growth. It’s can’t go on forever. McCrory is also taking action to create jobs.

        http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/06/06/2943901/mccrory-decker-plan-moves-past.html

        I know many people who collected unemployment for nearly 2 years and had no intention of looking for a job until the benefits ran out. One neighbor (and I’m sure many other people) calculated the numbers and decided there was no reason to take a $8 or $9/hour job until he had to. 

        I don’t know how old you are but when Welfare was reformed in the 90′s the doom and gloomers predicted a humanitarian nightmare that never happened. 6 million people were booted out of welfare. Lo and behold, they got jobs and went from receiving taxpayer money to being taxpayers. That had a huge effect on the economy. It was a good thing.

         

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          I would like to see a study done to see how long after unemployment benefits run out it takes people to get a job

          • HonestDebate1

            Hunger is a great motivator.

          • jefe68

            Tell me something.
            If there are there were only one job for every three people, do the other two and their families just starve or go begging on the streets?

            At some level the laws of physics come into play here, and not just right wing conservative rhetoric.

          • HonestDebate1

            I say that from experience, it’s not a partisan thing. It just is.

          • jefe68

            Hunger is hunger that’s for sure. 

            But the reality of a job market will not create jobs if there is no demand.

            Again, you’re using generic rhetoric based on nothing more than your own conjecture. 

          • HonestDebate1

            There is all kinds of demand, even for things that don’t yet exist. Bookoos.

            All we need is for someone to put their money at risk to identify it and supply it.

            Passing around other people’s money doesn’t work.

          • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

            there are lots of jobs available. begging can be quite lucrative. unemployment benefits have nothing to do with physics

  • HonestDebate1

    “Obama supports Terrorism”
    “Obama you jerk… you idiot”

    The Egyptians are not happy.

    http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/07/15-photos-from-tahrir-square-protests.html

    Whose side is he on?

  • JONBOSTON

    I struggle with trying to understand why anyone who engages in reason, logic and a strong dose of common sense would regard Obama as anything but one of the worst presidents to ever occupy the oval office. Frankly, the only real debate should be over which is worse, his handling of domestic matters or handling of foreign affairs. When you combine total absence of presidential leadership with misguided poor policies and general incompetence you get the mess were in as a country in rapidly escalating decline. Just to cite the past several weeks events: Obama travels to the G8 summit meetings to discuss Syria with Russia’s Putin and accomplishes virtually nothing. Putin knows his country’s interests and is prepared to pursue them. We, on the other hand, have a president who increasingly lives over the rainbow. World disorder is growing by the day, and Obama seems to not notice or care. His big moment in Berlin–a speech at the Brandenberg Gate–was noteworthy for its inanity and irrelevance.  Nuclear disarmament makes no sense with chemical weapons floating around Syria, Iran on the verge of becoming a nuclear state, China increasing its nuclear capability, and Pakistan infested with Islamic terrorists who would love to get their hands on Pakistan’s stockpile. Our pretend president’s pathetic performance raises questions: Is Obama giving up on containing the chaos or have the world’s problems simply overwhelmed him. Or worse , maybe he’s clueless as to what’s happening in the world. Never fear — don’t you feel secure knowing Chuck Hagel, Susan Rice and Barack Obama are handling our national security affairs? I can’t imagine America ever being so poorly served by such third rate people.  And then our president travels to Africa to promote electrification projects while Egypt is in flames, the EU is upset over NSA spying , and Putin , China , Ecuador , and Nicaragua shun their noses in contempt of Obama when asked to deliver Snowden for prosecution.

    Meanwhile , the situation domestically is no better. Forget about the IRS scandal, Benghazi, the attack on press freedom, and NSA surveillance.  The economic situation remains awful notwithstanding recent increased optimism. The improving jobs picture disguises the fact that the vast majority of job gains last month was driven by increased part time hiring –360k jobs. At the same time, full time jobs decreased by 240K resulting in only 47% of jobs in America today being full time jobs. How can a nation continue to fund everything and everyone (including non-citizens) and prosper with so few people employed in full time jobs? Do you left wingnuts who frequent this board ever stop to consider why employers are hiring so many part timers? Do you think Obamacare may have something to do with it? In a period of economic difficulty, no growth and putrid hiring, do you ever question the wisdom of obama burying business with ever more taxes, regulations, and costs of doing business? I realize many of you despise capitalism , but who do you think hires people and contributes to economic growth and increased prosperity? [hint--it's not government]. Do you realize that U6 unemployment, the real measure of the state of unemployment, increased last month from 13.8% to 14.3%.  Never fear , Obama and Democrats  want to absorb into our workforce another 11 million unskilled illegal immigrants with the likely effect of increasing unemployment, lowering wages, and increasing our welfare rolls and national debt.

    • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

      one has to consider two possible explanations of obomas behavior
      a) he is clueless and incompetent 
      b) he is in on it

      • OnPointComments

        IMO, it is uncautious to think that President Obama is clueless and incompetent, and more wise to believe that everything he does and everything that happens during his administration is part of his plan to fundamentally change America.

        • 1Brett1

          If you think it is “uncautious” (how about simply “not cautious”?) to think Obama is clueless and incompetent and that his plan is to fundamentally change America, then you must also have an opinion about what should be done. He can’t be re-elected, so there’s no worries there. Whether one thinks he is incompetent or diabolical might mean some action against him? Should he be removed from office altogether? Brought up on criminal charges? Treason? Hanged? What, pray tell?

        • HonestDebate1

          I absolutely agree, it’s what he said he would do. I had hope he would fail but he is succeeding. I don’t know if the feckless PC Republicans even yet understand the sinister nature of his agenda. They are out matched. They brought a knife to a gun fight, Obama warned about that too.

        • http://www.facebook.com/futo.buddy Futo Buddy

          perhaps a plan

    • pete18

      Least experienced, least tested, least prepared and most divisive President to every take office in modern times, who has, up until very recently, been shielded and lifted by a fawning press. Superb politician, who came along at a moment when all the forces were right for him to slip in. I don’t believe the idea that the current state of poor affairs is part of his Machiavellian plan to “change America.” I think he believes the destiny narrative of his own speeches that his Presidency was the beginning of healing for the planet and he thought there would be full employment, free health care for all and world peace by now.  The great plus of his election is that the color barrier has been broken for the Presidency, which I think is profoundly important, but given the disaster of most of his policies it has come at much too high a cost.

      • JONBOSTON

        I couldn’t agree more with everything you’ve said. His incompetency is coming at a very significant cost for this country. He’s a pathetic president who reflects accurately the general overall decline of this once great nation. 

    • disqus_fw2Bu1dEsd

      In the largest sense, capitalism is an unsustainable phase in human development. Some better system will rise, evolve and and overtake it, as we begin to understand that resources are not infinite.  You are in the unfortunate position of denying the new reality, the incipient now. That’s why you spew tiresome logorrhea. Obama takes the long view: he frustrates your expectations by playing a brilliant game with the odds stacked against him. Whether or not he’s a great president, or the greatest president will be judged by history, not you.

      • JONBOSTON

        Elegantly stated crock of —t.

  • Steve__T

    Disqus rides again

  • Steve__T

    Thanks again Disqus

  • disqus_fw2Bu1dEsd

    Read below and weep. or hold your ears: the sad clangor of the echo chamber grows tinny.

  • Gary Clement

    I don’t understand why WBUR won’t make this show available either on the website or in iTunes? It won’t even play on the site.

  • HonestDebate1

    Whatever the verdict for Zimmerman is, the narrative was wrong. The racial outrage was ginned up. This is what happens when a community organizer becomes President. The DOJ spent money and sent operatives to inflame the racial strife. To divide us. To influence the charge and attempt to influence the verdict. That’s not justice. This administration is disgusting.

ONPOINT
TODAY
Aug 1, 2014
A close up of newspaper front pages focusing on the Ebola outbreak, including a newspaper, left, reading 'Burn all bodies' in the city of Monrovia, Liberia, Thursday, July 31, 2014. The worst recorded Ebola outbreak in history surpassed 700 deaths in West Africa. (AP)

Israel-Gaza conflict heats up. The House votes to sue Obama. Ebola spreads in Africa. Our weekly news roundtable goes behind the headlines.

Aug 1, 2014
Rodrigo Sanchez and Gabriela Quintero make up the popular rhythmic guitar duo, Rodrigo y Gabriela. (Peter O'Neill)

Mexican duo Rodrigo y Gabriela bring a heavy metal flavor to classical guitar. We’ll listen.

RECENT
SHOWS
Jul 31, 2014
A comical sign suggest the modern workplace is anything but collegial . (KW Reinsch / Flickr)

When the boss is a bad apple. How some pretty dark traits can push some to the top.

 
Jul 31, 2014
Russian President Vladimir Putin heads the Cabinet meeting in the Novo-Ogaryovo residence, outside Moscow, Russia, Wednesday, July 30, 2014.  (AP)

The US and Europe face off against Russia. Are we looking at Cold War II? Something hotter?

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Criticism, Conservatism And Dinesh D’Souza
Thursday, Jul 31, 2014

Best-selling conservative author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza and On Point host Tom Ashbrook disagree about what makes America great…or do they?

More »
7 Comments
 
This 15-Year-Old Caller Is Really Disappointed With Congress
Tuesday, Jul 29, 2014

In which a 15-year-old caller from Nashville expertly and elegantly analyzes our bickering, mostly ineffective 113th Congress.

More »
9 Comments
 
Our Week In The Web: July 25, 2014
Friday, Jul 25, 2014

Why the key to web victory is often taking a break and looking around, and more pie for your viewing (not eating) pleasure.

More »
Comment