• You have no idea how many Democrats voted for Brown. 


    Sorry for waking you.

    You realize Reagan left office 22 years ago, right?  Care to join the 21st Century?

  • on a comment on What's the Point? over 4 years ago

    The only attack the progressives strategy in this diary is being performed by the FireDogLake crowd.  That's kind of the point of the diary, you see.

  • on a comment on What's the Point? over 4 years ago

    for people like this.  It's called the Green Party.  But party-building is hard work, low-visibilty, and thus not something the Jane Hamsher Vanity Project is into.  Much easier and more emotionally gratifying to destroy what someone else did than to create something of your own.

  • We're talking about the Democratic Party.  Not the party of Reagan, silly.

    I was also unaware that Hillary Clinton had served in an executive capacity.  Please keep the jokes coming!

  • comment on a post Is It Me John Edwards? over 4 years ago

    nobody is saying anything about this because nobody gives a fuck about John Edwards any more.

  • comment on a post UPDATED: Hillary Doesn't Look So Bad Now... over 4 years ago

    Any sign of it?

  • comment on a post Not a true "diary" per se, but... over 4 years ago

    The fuck you talkin' about?

  • on a comment on Looming date for HCR's fate over 4 years ago

    I'm a lawyer and don't find op-eds by Kenneth Blackwell particularly enlightening on Constitutional issues.  Who is your relative?  William Jacobsen?

  • comment on a post Looming date for HCR's fate over 4 years ago

    The mandate is constitutionally questionable now?  Talk about late to the party.

  • Do they deserve state?  How about the Pashtuns?

  • comment on a post Palin Needs 20+ Seconds To Name a Founding Father over 4 years ago

    I like the implication that her quitting as Gov. of Alaska is similar to Washington's resignation of the presidency.

    Obligatory:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbRom1Rz8OA


    Also, Glenn Beck is really letting himself go.

  • Workers definitely have limited bargaining power in a bad economy like this one, but believing that employers can get away with slashing insurance benefits and giving nothing in return is tantamount to claiming that there's no market at all.  I think there is a market, and I think I am currently paying my employees according to what the market will bear, not some overgenerous amount that stems from the goodness of my heart.

    While this is undeniable as a matter of basic economic theory, I think it is also heavily dependent on one of the heroic assumptions of capitalism - perfect information - that is particularly flawed when you're talking about health care compensation.  Unlike wages, which are relatively straightforward and easily comparable, health plans are complicated.  Thus it is not easy for a worker to determine if a competitor is offering a better deal.

    Put another way, if Steve M's Trucking cuts driver rates from $17 and hour to $13 an hour, the employees can easily determine if they'd be getting a better deal from JJE's Trucking, which pays $15 an hour, by asking one of their buddies who work for JJE's Trucking.  But if Steve M's Trucking changes its plan in a variety of ways, it is much more difficult for the employees to make an apples-to-apples comparison to the package of benefits offered by JJE's Trucking.  Thus there may be more room for an employer to cut benefits, as opposed to wages, without suffering from undesirable attrition as a result.

  • because if you could reliably extrapolate a poll to an election, John Kerry would be President and, as Vecky points out, the Swiss ban wouldn't have passed.

  • for comprehension is indeed difficult for you.  You can't say "Israelis oppose minaret ban" when fewer than half of them in fact oppose the ban.

  • comment on a post Israeli Jews oppose banning minarets over 4 years ago

    Math is hard.


Advertise Blogads