BCuzICan

Will Obama Be A One Term President?

2011-03-30T10:09:00.001-07:00

Two and a half years into his first term as President one has to wonder if this will be his only term? His campaign for the Presidency was promising and full of hope. But history may have dealt him a bad hand. The economy was in the pits as he took office. Trying to deal with the economy was tremendous job and the solutions seen back them were full of pitfalls. May mistakes were made and this was to compound the many problems facing a young president! Many events have taken place in during his term. So may be called of Biblical Proportions. So what does the future have in store for President Obama?

Once More Its The Ugly Season

2010-08-30T17:34:00.001-07:00

Op-Ed Columnist

It’s Witch-Hunt Season

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: August 29, 2010

The last time a Democrat sat in the White House, he faced a nonstop witch hunt by his political opponents. Prominent figures on the right accused Bill and Hillary Clinton of everything from drug smuggling to murder. And once Republicans took control of Congress, they subjected the Clinton administration to unrelenting harassment — at one point taking 140 hours of sworn testimony over accusations that the White House had misused its Christmas card list.

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Paul Krugman

Go to Columnist Page »

Blog: The Conscience of a Liberal

Readers' Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

Read All Comments (426) »

Now it’s happening again — except that this time it’s even worse. Let’s turn the floor over to Rush Limbaugh: “Imam Hussein Obama,” he recently declared, is “probably the best anti-American president we’ve ever had.”

To get a sense of how much it matters when people like Mr. Limbaugh talk like this, bear in mind that he’s an utterly mainstream figure within the Republican Party; bear in mind, too, that unless something changes the political dynamics, Republicans will soon control at least one house of Congress. This is going to be very, very ugly.

So where is this rage coming from? Why is it flourishing? What will it do to America?

Anyone who remembered the 1990s could have predicted something like the current political craziness. What we learned from the Clinton years is that a significant number of Americans just don’t consider government by liberals — even very moderate liberals — legitimate. Mr. Obama’s election would have enraged those people even if he were white. Of course, the fact that he isn’t, and has an alien-sounding name, adds to the rage.

By the way, I’m not talking about the rage of the excluded and the dispossessed: Tea Partiers are relatively affluent, and nobody is angrier these days than the very, very rich. Wall Street has turned on Mr. Obama with a vengeance: last month Steve Schwarzman, the billionaire chairman of the Blackstone Group, the private equity giant, compared proposals to end tax loopholes for hedge fund managers with the Nazi invasion of Poland.

And powerful forces are promoting and exploiting this rage. Jane Mayer’s new article in The New Yorker about the superrich Koch brothers and their war against Mr. Obama has generated much-justified attention, but as Ms. Mayer herself points out, only the scale of their effort is new: billionaires like Richard Mellon Scaife waged a similar war against Bill Clinton.

Meanwhile, the right-wing media are replaying their greatest hits. In the 1990s, Mr. Limbaugh used innuendo to feed anti-Clinton mythology, notably the insinuation that Hillary Clinton was complicit in the death of Vince Foster. Now, as we’ve just seen, he’s doing his best to insinuate that Mr. Obama is a Muslim. Again, though, there’s an extra level of craziness this time around: Mr. Limbaugh is the same as he always was, but now seems tame compared with Glenn Beck.

And where, in all of this, are the responsible Republicans, leaders who will stand up and say that some partisans are going too far? Nowhere to be found.

To take a prime example: the hysteria over the proposed Islamic center in lower Manhattan almost makes one long for the days when former President George W. Bush tried to soothe religious hatred, declaring Islam a religion of peace. There were good reasons for his position: there are a billion Muslims in the world, and America can’t afford to make all of them its enemies.

But here’s the thing: Mr. Bush is still around, as are many of his former officials. Where are the statements, from the former president or those in his inner circle, preaching tolerance and denouncing anti-Islam hysteria? On this issue, as on many others, the G.O.P. establishment is offering a nearly uniform profile in cowardice.

So what will happen if, as expected, Republicans win control of the House? We already know part of the answer: Politico reports that they’re gearing up for a repeat performance of the 1990s, with a “wave of committee investigations” — several of them over supposed scandals that we already know are completely phony. We can expect the G.O.P. to play chicken over the federal budget, too; I’d put even odds on a 1995-type government shutdown sometime over the next couple of years.

It will be an ugly scene, and it will be dangerous, too. The 1990s were a time of peace and prosperity; this is a time of neither. In particular, we’re still suffering the after-effects of the worst economic crisis since the 1930s, and we can’t afford to have a federal government paralyzed by an opposition with no interest in helping the president govern. But that’s what we’re likely to get.

If I were President Obama, I’d be doing all I could to head off this prospect, offering some major new initiatives on the economic front in particular, if only to shake up the political dynamic. But my guess is that the president will continue to play it safe, all the way into catastrophe.

A version of this op-ed appeared in print on Au

Bilderberg Club ?

2010-08-18T12:30:00.001-07:00

Fidel Castro fascinated by book on Bilderberg Club

By WILL WEISSERT, Associated Press Writer – 26 mins ago

HAVANA – Fidel Castro is showcasing a theory long popular both among the far left and far right: that the shadowy Bilderberg Group has become a kind of global government, controlling not only international politics and economics, but even culture.

The 84-year-old former Cuban president published an article Wednesday that used three of the only eight pages in the Communist Party newspaper Granma to quote — largely verbatim — from a 2006 book by Lithuanian-born writer Daniel Estulin.

Estulin's work, "The Secrets of the Bilderberg Club," argues that the international group largely runs the world. It has held a secretive annual forum of prominent politicians, thinkers and businessmen since it was founded in 1954 at the Bilderberg Hotel in Holland.

Castro offered no comment on the excerpts other than to describe Estulin as honest and well-informed and to call his book a "fantastic story."

Estulin's book, as quoted by Castro, described "sinister cliques and the Bilderberg lobbyists" manipulating the public "to install a world government that knows no borders and is not accountable to anyone but its own self."

The Bilderberg group's website says its members have "nearly three days of informal and off-the-record discussion about topics of current concern" once a year, but the group does nothing else.

It said the meetings were meant to encourage people to work together on major policy issues.

The prominence of the group is what alarms critics. It often includes members of the Rockefeller family, Henry Kissinger, senior U.S. and European officials and major international business and media executives.

The excerpt published by Castro suggested that the esoteric Frankfurt School of socialist academics worked with members of the Rockefeller family in the 1950s to pave the way for rock music to "control the masses" by diverting attention from civil rights and social injustice.

"The man charged with ensuring that the Americans liked the Beatles was Walter Lippmann himself," the excerpt asserted, referring to a political philosopher and by-then-staid newspaper columnist who died in 1974.

"In the United States and Europe, great open-air rock concerts were used to halt the growing discontent of the population," the excerpt said.

Castro — who had an inside seat to the Cold War — has long expressed suspicions of back-room plots. He has raised questions about whether the Sept. 11 attacks were orchestrated by the U.S. government to stoke military budgets and, more recently suggested that Washington was behind the March sinking of a South Korean ship blamed on North Korea.

Estulin's own website suggests that the 9/11 attacks were likely caused by small nuclear devices, and that the CIA and drug traffickers were behind the 1988 downing of a jetliner over Lockerbie, Scotland, that was blamed on Libya.

The Bilderberg conspiracy theory has been popular on both extremes of the ideological spectrum, even if they disagree on just what the group wants to do. Leftists accuse the group of promoting capitalist domination, while some right-wing websites argue that the Bilderberg club has imposed Barack Obama on the United States to advance socialism.

Some of Estulin's work builds on reports by Big Jim Tucker, a researcher on the Bilderberg Group who publishes on right-wing websites.

"It's great Hollywood material ... 15 people sitting in a room sitting in a room determining the fate of mankind," said Herbert London, president of the Hudson Institute, a nonpartisan policy think tank in New York.

Technorati Tags: Castro,world govenment,speculation

"As someone who doesn't come out of the Oliver Stone school of conspiracy, I have a hard time believing it," London added.

A call to a Virginia number for the American Friends of Bilderberg rang unanswered Wednesday and the group's website lists no contact numbers.

Castro, who underwent emergency intestinal surgery in July 2006 and stepped down as president in February 2008, has suddenly begun popping up everywhere recently, addressing Cuba's parliament on the threat of a nuclear war, meeting with island ambassadors at the Foreign Ministry, writing a book and even attending the dolphin show at the Havana aquarium.

The BRIC Countries – A Reason Why The World Is Becoming Flatter

2010-07-29T15:33:00.001-07:00

From The Times

June 17, 2009

Brazil, Russia, India and China form bloc to challenge US dominance

Tony Halpin in Yekaterinburg

With public hugs and backslaps among its leaders, a new political bloc was formed yesterday to challenge the global dominance of the United States.

The first summit of heads of state of the BRIC countries — Brazil, Russia, India and China — ended with a declaration calling for a “multipolar world order”, diplomatic code for a rejection of America’s position as the sole global superpower.

President Medvedev of Russia went further in a statement with his fellow leaders after the summit, saying that the BRIC countries wanted to “create the conditions for a fairer world order”. He described the meeting with President Lula da Silva of Brazil, the Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, and the Chinese President, Hu Jintao, as “an historic event”.

The BRIC bloc brings together four of the world’s largest emerging economies, representing 40 per cent of the world’s population and 15 per cent of global GDP. The leaders set out plans to co-operate on policies for tackling the global economic crisis at the next G20 summit in the US in September.

Top 10 Things You Should Never Discuss Online

2010-07-19T17:16:00.001-07:00

Top 10 Things You Should Never Discuss Online

Share This- Published November 18, 2009 by Aaron - 1090 Comments

The late comedian George Carlin made a good living on his famous “Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television” monologue. In the monologue, he details seven particular words that one could never use on television (or radio either) regardless of intent or context. Use of any of those seven words would (and will) get you bleeped out. Use of enough of them at one sitting and the FCC (in America) will have you up on fines or worse.

Well, Mr. Carlin’s seven dirty words won’t usually cause an eye blink on the Internet; however, some topics are tacitly taboo regardless of the site one is surfing or the point one is trying to make. The introduction of any of these verboten topics into a comment stream, blog post, or general web discussion will invariably result in the immediate cessation of whatever was being discussed and the explosion of a full fledged flame war. These particular topics are so incendiary because they have little or no perceivable middle ground. One must chose a side and any refusal to chose a side will usually result in taking fire from BOTH sides.

Pretty much all of these topics have been around for years, but none of them show the slightest sign of becoming any less inflammatory. If anything, the rapidity of communication available via the web has polarized these issues even more. They are all grenades and a wise man once said, “when the pin is pulled, Mr. Grenade is not our friend.” So, without further ado and with apologies to the late Mr. Carlin, Ten Topics You Cannot Discuss on the Internet (without serious drama following shortly thereafter).

The Middle East

Everyone has an opinion about the Middle East. It may be about the Palestinian State; it may be about oil; it may be about Israel; but that little area of land is blood-soaked for a reason. Trying to talk about the Middle East will almost always end up in a fight because no one has been able to come up with a win-win solution to the area’s problems in a few thousand years. Any solution requires one side or the other to give ground and so far, no one has decided to. This mentality carries over into the supporters of the different positions. Israel is evil. The Palestinians are evil. The Jews are evil. The Arabs are evil. Round and round it goes. Again, no middle ground.

Homosexuality

Can’t be discussed rationally. No way, no how. To some it’s a perfectly acceptable lifestyle. To others, it is anathema. It is genetic. It is a choice. It can be “cured”. Once a homosexual, always a homosexual. Nature – or nurture. What’s really upsetting is no middle ground is usually available. If one happens to be a live and let live type of person, he or she is still in some danger of being painted negatively by the other side. One thing that makes this particular topic so explosive is homosexuality is much more mainstream now than it used to be. To some, that is a positive and sought after development. For others, it is a sign that the apocalypse is at hand.

Jesus Christ

Arguably the most discussed man in all of history. His life traditionally splits the dating system of the Western World into BC and AD. He is also probably the single most divisive person in all history. He was a good man and a great teacher but nothing else. He was God in the flesh. He never existed. Strangely, many people of all stripes who can rationally and calmly discuss the existence of God devolve into name calling and mudslinging once Jesus is brought up. Jesus is another guaranteed firestorm starter.

Race Relations

“Can’t we all just get along?” isn’t really an option. Things are better than in the past in some instances, but in others, not so much. Regardless, trying to talk about it reasonably is nearly impossible. Moderate voices are usually shouted down. Even in the 21st century some people still believe in the superiority of one race over another, despite the fact that, organically, race is a myth. We have ethnicities, yes, but race is an artificial construct based almost solely on the amount of melanin in a person’s skin and the size and layout of the facial bones and musculature. We’ve come a long way, but a long way remains and to discuss it reasonably is difficult. Cries of discrimination start coming in from all sides and before anyone knows it, the “discussion” is in the crapper.

Abortion

Pro-Choice. Pro-Life. Anti-choice. Baby. Fetus. When does birth begin? I have read more than once that civil debate on abortion is difficult in person and absolutely impossible online. The reasons are plain. It’s a topic that is naturally polarizing. It pits men against women, one religion against another, freedom against bondage, and for some it is literally a matter of life and death. The most divisive facet of the abortion debate, however, is the tendency for both sides to apply black and white thinking to a subject with way too many gray questions to fit into those pigeonholes. The result in “real life” can be crazy mad protests all the way up to clinic bombings. Online isn’t much better as otherwise nice, civil, rational people go from zero to pissed off in less than a second. Too visceral. Avoid at all costs.

Gun Control

This is mostly an issue for Americans and there is a certain amount of politics involved, but even those who live in countries with very strict gun control, or no gun control (and little concern about it) are sure to weigh in on this controversial topic. It is, of course, all the more controversial for Americans because it goes to the very core of the nation – the constitution and the right (or not) to bear arms. We have already had at least one incident of comment war over this topic.

The Holocaust

The Holocaust is ALWAYS a fire starter. It never happened. It happened but the numbers are inflated. It happened but why is it so important. The Holocaust is about the Jews. The Holocaust is about all the targeted populations of the Nazis. The Holocaust didn’t get the job done. One reason this topic is so toxic is enough people are around who were eyewitnesses to make a strong case one way, but enough people are around who must rely on second hand information to be subject to influence by deniers. Either way, almost NOTHING elicits the strong feelings that the Holocaust does, and if one makes the mistake of saying one doesn’t care either way, well, god help you.

Politics

Of all the topics on this list, politics is the one that seems to have shown the most recent increase in rancor (though not on Listverse – item 6 takes the cake there). In the US we have the Republicans and Democrats, and in many other countries (such as the UK and most of the Commonwealth there is a similar variation of partisan political parties. For the diehard political pundit, his party is his team. It’s his family. It’s a mountain he’s ready to die on. I’ve seen people get physically sick upon learning “their” candidate had lost an election. The saddest part of this polarization is the gridlock it creates in governments. After all, the politicians know about the splits and they’ll pull out all the stops to add to their camp so they can stay in office.

Origins of Man

Evolution or Creation? The books that have been written on this subject for either position could probably fill a modest library. Each side has reams of data and boatloads of facts to back up its position and each side roundly thinks the other side’s data and facts are so much excrement. The worst part is, again, no middle ground. If one tries to adopt a position that incorporates both sides, each side will rip him or her to shreds. When the origins of man come up, the gloves come off.

Religion

More people have died in the name of God, whatever name that may be, than pretty much all other causes combined. Christian. Muslim. Buddhist. Atheist. Scientologist. No matter the stripe, a surefire way to get EVERYONE mad is to disparage another’s religion or lack thereof. It’s simple, really. Religion or, spirituality if you will, is probably the most intensely personal part of anyone’s being and that includes those who reject religion and spirituality altogether. Also, religion is a family affair. When someone feels his religion is under attack, that attack immediately becomes personal and familial. One push leads to a counter push and the atomic explosion goes off. To make matters worse, some religions have as an integral part a command to proselytize. Also, some people, not from a sense of command, but of desire, will want to proselytize. When that happens, your intensely personal experience collides with another person’s intensely personal experience and the result is a perfect storm of firestorm.

So, there it is. The ten topics you cannot discuss online (without serious drama following shortly thereafter). A word for the wise: it might pay to discuss the reasons behind this inability to discuss certain topics without a war, rather than discussing the merits of the items mentioned specifically. Let’s keep this more civil than the last list that mentioned one of the topics here.

Technorati Tags: The Middle East,Homosexuality,Jesus Christ,Race Relations,Abortion,Gun Control,The Holocaust,Politics,Origins of Man,Religion

Seven Dirty Words

2010-07-19T16:40:00.001-07:00

A recent court ruling brought to mind George Carlin’s Seven Dirty Words comedy routine. I am hoping that the political correctness the has permeated American society will soon go away!

Seven Dirty Words

Court Cites Internet in Ruling Against FCC’s Indecency

July 13, 2010

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit said the FCC’s rules on indecency are too vague and violate the First Amendment, undermining the government’s primary tool for policing civility over the airwaves. The ruling questioned how the FCC can single out broadcast TV while most American families subscribe to cable or satellite TV, watch Internet video on cellphones, and play lifelike video games with few standards of decency.

Read the article: The Washington Post

Technorati Tags: political correctness,freedom of speech,dirty words,indecency,word police

So What Is This Tea Party?

2010-07-18T15:49:00.001-07:00

When I first hear about the Tea Party I dismissed them as irrelevant to American politics. I thought this even more so after Sarah Palin associated herself with them! But after hearing them out a bit I get that they are not as radical as they first appeared to be. They are sincere about wanting real change in government. They are tired of the old politics and just want government to function. They also want for government to stop growing as much as it has. There some things that the Tea Party champions with which I agree.

On the other hand there are those extreme radical elements that have loudly embraced the Tea Party. These are what one might call Right Wing Nuts! These are the Minutemen, neo-Nazi groups, and other self-styled vigilante groups that espouse racial hatred and violence toward those who do not agree with them!

I am glad that the Tea Party has finally started to not only distance themselves from these but in fact kicked some of them out of the original Tea Party.

Technorati Tags: Sarah Palin,Tea Party,hate groups

The World Is Flat

2010-07-12T12:31:00.001-07:00

I'm not saying that world is literally flat.

Growing up in the fifties it was my understanding that the United States of America was the pinnacle of all things. It was way up on the list of countries in almost every category. It was even at the top of the list of countries favored by God! Favored nation or favorite nation the good old US of A could do not harm. And by sheer force it was bound to stay on top. Not only did it have the most powerful armies in the world but even its currency was approved by God. It had printed in its currency ‘in God we trust’! Jingoistic words such as ‘might make right’ were readily accepted. It has such a run of good luck! So the concept of upward mobility for everyone of its citizens went without question. They were endowed with this inalienable right. This was a short run till it ran of luck.

Probably luck had nothing to do with what really happened. There were some clues along the way. Working in a factory in the seventies I noticed machine shop workers grinding away the made in Japan stamp on metal girders. They did no want the company owner to see that it was not ‘made in the USA’! Back them few people noticed that all was not well, that the upward climb of the nation’s economy was slowing.

At the time I was working for a famous manufacturer of pants and other garments. It was big company with factories in several US locations. Shortly thereafter it stopped making pants in the US and contracted to have this done in Mexico and Central America. So much for made in the USA! Labor problems and the cost of manufacturing were reasons for going offshore but bad business practices contributed too.

More observations on this and why I call this blog The World Is Flat later.

Technorati Tags: business,flat world,made in the USA,upward mobility,inalienable rights

Hiding Our Heads In The Sand!

2010-06-02T15:27:00.000-07:00

These day many Americans wish we could isolate ourselves from the rest of the world. We want to bury our heads in the sand and hope that our problems will go away!

We blame the rest of the world because American jobs have gone south. At one time I could say this was literally true. Some jobs have gone to Mexico but the vast majority are now in China. Weak efforts to bring the jobs back have not succeeded. Its just not going to happen! Those old rustbelt factory jobs are never coming back. Why should they? No one wants to work in a factory 9 to 10 under sweatshop conditions these days! Undocumented workers might toil at these for awhile but only until they find a better job.

Who can we blame for our hard luck? That is who is to blame for our high unemployment, home foreclosures, political gridlock, and the next crisis that comes along? News media is quick to point fingers and ask “What can ‘they’ do to see that this never happens again?” The news people seldom provide solutions! And yet they sit in judgment whenever anything goes wrong! This may sell papers, expand their followers and maybe even get their networks more subscribers. We all know how important Nielsen ratings can be!

The American public grimaces, shake their fists and demands action! This makes me wonder about the education level of my fellow Americans. They have stopped reading newspapers so this may have had a dummying down effect. They are not even following what is going on around the world on the news networks! Let me correct that, I must admit that Fox News has a growing following. But that tends to prove my point. Education, or the lack of such, probably started the outflow of good job to other places. I would start to point out how far the US has fallen on educating its children but that’d be part of another blog blurb.

Let me stop here for now and ask the question “How did we get into this mess?”

Also "Exactly who is this so-called American Public?”

To be continued …

Peter Prescriptions

2010-05-29T10:20:00.001-07:00

Next time you're on an elevator and feel bored, liven up the moment with some of these insightful ideas.
These are also useful ideas to add to your list of "Peter Prescriptions", ( How not to raise to your level of incompetence.)

    1.    When there's only one other person in the elevator, tap them on the shoulder and then pretend it wasn't you.
    2.    Push the buttons and pretend they give you a shock. Smile, and go back for more.
    3.    Call the Psychic Hotline from your cell phone and ask if they know what floor you're on.
    4.    Swat at flies that don't exist.
    5.    Grimace painfully while smacking your forehead and muttering, "Shut up, all of you, just shut up!"
    6.    Crack open your briefcase or purse, and while peering inside, ask, "Got enough air in there?"
    7.    Lay down a Twister mat and ask people if they'd like to play.
    8.    Leave a box in the corner, and when someone gets on, ask them if they hear something ticking.
    9.    Ask if you can push the button for other people, but push the wrong ones.
    10.    Pretend you are a flight attendant and review emergency procedures and exits with the passengers.
    11.    Stand silently and motionless in the corner, facing the wall, without getting off.
    12.    Stare, grinning at another passenger for a while, and then announce, "I have new socks on."
    13.    Draw a little square on the floor with chalk and announce to the other passengers, "This is my personal space!"
    14.    Fart loudly then exclaim "Was that you. There's no way I could do that one because unfortately mine don't come out loud."
    15.    Before the elevator door opens shout "DING" and then laugh and say "beat you again Mr Elevator."
    16.    Stand really close to someone, sniffing them occasionally.
    17.    Hire a labrador, wear sunglasses and repeatedly walk into the walls whilst pretending to not hear the other passenger's direction.
    18.    Drop a pen and wait until someone reaches to help pick it up, then scream, "that's mine!"
    19.    Hold the doors open and say you're waiting for your friend. After a while, let the doors close and say, "Hi Greg. How's your day been?"
    20.    Stare at another passenger for a while, then announce in horror, "You're one of THEM!" and back away slowly.

HELL OH!

2010-05-28T16:51:00.000-07:00

Think that I will just have a little fun with this blog site just because I can! After all, that is the name of the place. Have not posted to this place in ages. Could it be that I was very comfortable with where I am at. Hell I don't know but a lot has happened since my last post. The world seems to be revolving backwards. Any gains that the human race has made has to gone to hell in a what? Oh yes, handbasket.

Q From Brian Walker: Can you please tell me anything about the origin of the phrase going to hell in a handbasket?

A This is a weird one. It’s a fairly common American expression, known for much of the twentieth century. But it’s one about which almost no information exists, at least in the two dozen or so reference books I’ve consulted. William and Mary Morris, in their Morris Dictionary of Word and Phrase Origins, confess to the same difficulty. A handbasket is just a basket to be carried in the hand (my thanks to the Oxford English Dictionary for that gem of definition). The Dictionary of American Regional English records to go to heaven in a handbasket rather earlier than the alternative, which doesn’t appear in print until the 1940s (Walt Quader tells me that Burton Stevenson included a citation in his Home Book of Proverbs, Maxims and Familiar Phrases from Bayard Kendrick’s The Odor of Violets, published in 1941). But DARE quotes a related expression from 1714: “A committee brought in something about Piscataqua. Govr said he would give his head in a Handbasket as soon as he would pass it”, which suggests that it, or at least phrases like it, have been around in the spoken language for a long time. For example, there’s an even older expression, to go to heaven in a wheelbarrow, recorded as early as 1629, which also meant “to go to hell”. I can only assume that the alliteration of the hs has had a lot to do with the success of the various phrases, and that perhaps handbasket suggests something easily and speedily done.

We may never know but I think that you get the essence of the phrase. In other words things are just not going that well. Perhaps God is playing tricks with us. Maybe he always has but this time it is way to cruel. But what the heck, he owns the football!

BCuzICan

Will Obama Be A One Term President?

Once More Its The Ugly Season

Op-Ed Columnist

It’s Witch-Hunt Season

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: August 29, 2010

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Go to Columnist Page »

Blog: The Conscience of a Liberal

Readers' Comments

A version of this op-ed appeared in print on Au

Bilderberg Club ?

Fidel Castro fascinated by book on Bilderberg Club

The BRIC Countries – A Reason Why The World Is Becoming Flatter

Brazil, Russia, India and China form bloc to challenge US dominance

Related Links

Top 10 Things You Should Never Discuss Online

Top 10 Things You Should Never Discuss Online

Seven Dirty Words

Court Cites Internet in Ruling Against FCC’s Indecency

So What Is This Tea Party?

The World Is Flat

Hiding Our Heads In The Sand!

Peter Prescriptions

HELL OH!