Comments Posted By Larry (your brother)
Displaying 1 To 7 Of 7 Comments
"This was a protest to counter defeatism and the ideology of self-loathing that has had the national stage pretty much to itself for a generation or more." I guess it's all in your perspective. All I have seen for a generation is a massive military buildup started by Ronald Reagan that sent the national debt into the trillions. All I hear from the 40 year olds I work with (in MN,of all places) are the canned lines of any and every conservative voice out there, from Bush to O'Reilly. The only feeling I've had from political "debate" for a generation has been the "my way or the highway" approach.
"As much as it can be said that anti-war protests give aid and comfort to the enemy, the reverse should be true; that by coming out in such huge numbers, the pro troops demonstration should give heart to the Iraqi people and cause the insurgents a bit of discomfort." I am tired of the notion that disagreement and reasonable protest is somehow un-American, even traitorous. If I remember my history corrrectly, protest and questioning authority is how we got here. And I'm not talking about rock throwing, rabid anarchists. I'm talking about people who feel passionately about the direction they feel the country is going, and love it enough to want to change it for the better. What we need--from both sides of the debate--is this passion turned to workable solutions, while maintaining the ability to compromise. And to be honest, I don't see anyone or any movement out there that can incorporate those two goals into their message.
Comment Posted By Larry (your brother) On 19.03.2007 @ 10:01
SCANDAL HYSTERIA GRIPS THE CAPITOL
"I don’t think paranoia is what motivates these scandal mongers. I think it is hate." It's been going on for the 6 years this president has been sitting, and went on for the 8 years the previous president was sitting. Partisan politics is being fed by the extremes, who make the most noise and have the most rabid followers. Somebody needs to figure a way out of this mess.
Comment Posted By Larry (your brother) On 16.03.2007 @ 11:07
Thanks for an intelligent and (surprisingly!) fair summary of key races. It helped me watch returns with a little more purpose.
Interesting to see all the comments and then come back to this site after most of the races have been decided. I don't think it means much of anything in terms of getting things done, but does change the agenda.
Comment Posted By Larry (your brother) On 8.11.2006 @ 09:48
Let's get real. Kerry's comments and tactics, right or wrong, are no different than those hurled at him in 2002. It's this kind of nauseating, disgusting accusation coming from both parties that convince me that the 2 party system is irreparably broken. There's not a politician I can honestly vote for as a presidential candidate out there right now, save maybe one.
And by the way, I don't think this President Bush was ever accepted at Harvard. It was Yale.
Comment Posted By Larry (your brother) On 31.10.2006 @ 17:29
The problem with current news reporting, in whatever medium, is that it needs to appeal to a population with the attention span of my pug (whose attention span, while long for a pug, is short for a sentient being). Look at the newspapers in the 5 largest metropolitan markets and there may be one or two I will sit and read regardless of editorial content. USA Today? TIME? SI? All have the same problem. Most choose not to challenge readers by trying to explain issues in detail. The result is that people that run newspapers try to find more and more ways to make the publication appealing to the eye. Usually, that means catchy headlines, stupid pictures, silly and short stories, and color. I have taken the Mpls paper for the better part of 33 years, and we are pretty sure we will cancel our subscription after the elections in November. I am tired of hunting for the news.
But the timing of our decision illustrates the problem: for most people, news is LOCAL. Yes, I can go to the online edition, but annoying ads and reading the newspaper on a screen is irritating and not comfortable--I can't put my feet up, have the baseball game on, and have a drink.
Blogs aren't the answer. I prefer my news less varnished and more than half baked. While I find blogs interesting, I don'f find them informative.
The real answer, as it has always been, is to go to many sources and try to distill the "truth" from various voices. That's why major cities always had two papers (The Chicago Tribune and The Chicago Daily News, when we were growing up) with different editorial views. So what happens now? Those various voices scream so loud at each other that I can't stand listening.
I fear for the future of the Republic.
Comment Posted By Larry (your brother) On 29.08.2006 @ 16:41
LA TIMES OFFERS MORE PROOF WHY NO ONE BOTHERS TO READ IT ANYMORE
Rick--
As someone said in a movie once: "You never have an egg timer when you need one."
From the Wall Street Journal, June 20. Third news story:
"The Dow Jones Industrials declined 72.44 to 10942.11 and the S&P 500 fell back into the red for the year on worries about stagflation."
The way the WSJ has changed over the years, I would not look at this as deep economic analysis, but it shows some people are thinking about it.
Comment Posted By Larry (your brother) On 20.06.2006 @ 07:17
Rick:
A few comments:
1. You have the GDP growth for the 4th/1st quarters backwards: 4th was stronger than the first (probably for some technical reasons).
2. While stagflation may not have been used in the popular press in a quarter of a century, the Wall Street Journal has mentioned it (small possibility) as have many Wall Street firm's commentators. And stagflation doesn't have to be really high inflation and really low growth; abnormally high, or the EXPECTATION of abnormally high inflation and the EXPECTATION of really low growth is enough to get people worried and affect the economy and the markets. I don't see much evidence of it either, but the twin deficits (trade and budget) have a real possibility of increasing inflation, lowering confidence in the U.S. economy, and as a result lead to a low/no growth environment. Again, I don't see it happening very soon but it's something that needs to be addressed, and soon.
Hope all is well.
Larry
Comment Posted By Larry (your brother) On 16.06.2006 @ 08:46
