Sure you don’t, chief, you just keep believing that. To be charitable, let’s just say you virtually define the word, supercilious.

“… but that does not mean I have to be below it all.”

Well now of course you don’t, little fella, but with that noxious whiff of arrogance you’re giving off, I’d say that somehow you’ve managed to pull it off, eh?

“Son, go to the web and look up Lavrentia Beria.”

Now I promise not to tell anybody if, while doing your research, you find it necessary to look up the meaning of the word, supercilious. I haven’t got the slightest doubt that you’ll need to. :-)

Now if you feel it is an honor to express your opinions under that pseudonym, that’s your right but just the same my right is to feel no qualms to self serve myself objecting this.

Daddy daddy what did my grandfather opine? Son, go to the web and look up Lavrentia Beria.

http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/1207-Geithner-Bankers-STOOGE.html

Make sure to view the video, it epitomises a vision of humanity at its sordid worst.

George Wallace owned the taxi company??? Hmmmmm……

Blaming an oligarchy (which I quite agree is what we have) doesn’t solve the problem. We need that alternate vision that Simon refers to in his piece on Upton Sinclair.

Politically, Obama ran on a vague notion of change that sometimes in his speeches peaks out, but I suspect that whatever that fuller vision is, he fears it is too radical to fly politically.

Problem: without a compelling political vision that substantially restructures the relationship between government and the people, much as Lincoln did at Gettysburg and Roosevelt with the New Deal, there is no significant recovery. Instead we will plod along like a character from a 19th century novel dying from tuberculosis, the flush high spirit and rosey cheeks mask the progression of a fatal disease.