Archive for March 4, 2012


There’s no “principle” in the hereditary principle!

Don’t be silly, Keith. Of course there is…

No there’s not. I think it’s a load of rubbish.

Why, why, you’re too young to really understand, aren’t you. Peter, Peter, isn’t he. Isn’t Keith being silly?

Hmmph, yes dear. Look Keith, there are some very decent people in the royal family!

How do you know? Have you ever met any of them?

Hmmmph, yes, as a matter of fact, I have.

Yes, yes. Peter actually met Princess Anne…

So what?

Hmmph, now look here, young fella. Princess Anne sometime late summer and she was actually terribly nice.

They are parasites and why do you think it is good that other people are just born into power and then ride around on their fat bums?

Ohh, silly boy. You just don’t understand, do you? You think you do, but you do not. They are good people doing a difficult job….

Hmmmph, yes, yes, listen to your mother, Keith. You sound like a spoilt brat.

I’m not and I think they’re a bunch of bloody parasites!

35 years on and I believe as strongly as ever that there is no principle in the hereditary principle.

The sentence above serves as an indictment of the further and intensive financial deregulation that characterised the Bush/Cheney years.In Australia, the Abbott Junta phurphy of business can do no wrong is punctured by the reality check of the US experience for ordinary Americans:

“It bears repeating one last time that average compensation (wages) never grew as slowly in American industrial history than it did over the course of the age of greed.”

Jeff Madrick (Roosevelt Insitute Snr Fellow and NY Times contributor) Age of Greed, Random House, 20011

In reality, as worker productivity rose, the ensuing gains went to…CORPORATE PROFITS.

1. Reinforcing the church-state wall (LA Times)

Christianity thrives when the state stays out of its business and allows a marketplace of ideas to thrive, writes Jim Burkee.

2. The two Cadillacs fallacy (Washington Post)

Romney’s rather authentic moments suggesting he doesn’t understand the lives of average people (such as his comment on his wife’s two Cadillacs) are dismissed as “gaffes,” while Santorum’s views on social issues are denounced as “extreme,” says E.J. Dionne.

3. When Will Social Media Elect a President? (Wall Street Journal)

Twitter and Facebook will change US politics, as new technology always has. Think Nixon or ‘Obama Girl,’ says Andy Kessler.

4. Super PACs can’t crown a king (Washington Post)

The one certainty about campaign finance laws is that all of them are, and ever will be, written by incumbent legislators, writes George Will.

5. A Civil Right to unionize (New York Times)

The greatest impediment to unions is weak and anachronistic labor laws, write Richard Kahlenberg and Moshe Marvit.

6. Romney and Paul, what a curious couple (Boston Globe) (£)

It’s rare to see a bromance flourish in the hot glare of the GOP primary spotlight, but Mitt Romney and Ron Paul have something positively special going on, writes Joshua Green.

more @  papers-obama-today-romney-work

%d bloggers like this: