The Atlanta Journal Constitution has the article Obama compares ISIS to the Crusades, receives heavy backlash.

“Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” President Barack Obama said Thursday at the annual National Prayer Breakfast.

Later on the article had this,

Faux Noise contributor Laura Ingraham said, “We’ve evolved, and sorry, this Islamic Jihadist movement is regressing. So the president could just say that, but, instead, he always has to lecture us. It’s something in his DNA.”

Sharon and I both broke out in spontaneous laughter at reading this.  If anybody has a problem with lecturing built into her DNA, then this woman is the prime example.

In response to some of the blatantly racist comments on the Journal’s website, I reminded people of the infamous words of Jack Nicholas, ‘You want the truth?  You can’t handle the truth.’

Several people commenting on the article jumped to the ridiculous conclusion that Obama meant that  “we can’t be upset with what ISIS is doing today.”  I think these people must have DNA problems, too. Maybe it is just a case of too much intermarriage, talking about stereotypes about the readers of The Atlanta Journal Constitution.

February 8, 2015

I did a terrible disservice to the President in this original post.  I did not do a follow-up to try to find a video of his remarks.

Today, I found The Christian Science Monitor article Obama criticized for ‘Crusades’ remark: What did he really mean? (+video).

Obama criticized for ‘Crusades’ remark: What did he really mean? (+video)
President Obama’s opponents took strong issue with his comments linking Christianity to some violent episodes in the religion’s past. But are they missing his essential point?
.
.
.
Obama’s point seems to have been that Islam, like Christianity, isn’t inherently violent and extremist. But the backlash highlights a commonly-held notion, held by many, that America is involved in a religious war where the enemy is fueled by the religion’s founding documents.

When you hear the full context of his remarks, I don’t think there is much you can criticize. It is unfortunate that this video clip stops where it does, because you still don’t get to hear all of what he said.

February 9, 2015

Wisely, The White House has posted the transcript of Remarks by the President at National Prayer Breakfast.

I am not a believer in a deity, but I can respect the humanity in what the President had to say. Anybody who is absolutely sure that the President is wrong in his remarks is certainly not practicing the humility that the President is suggesting.

In trying to track down an interview I saw about Davos 2015, my search started here.

The Socialist Party in the UK has the article Davos summit: ‘The pitchforks are coming!

At a packed Davos session a retired hedge fund manager made an interesting revelation. His former peers are planning their escapes. They’ve been buying airstrips and farms in remote locations just in case they need to make a quick getaway! Perhaps they’re heeding the advice of multi-millionaire Nick Hanauer who warned fellow oligarchs last year that “the pitchforks ARE coming!”

The interview I am looking for is with this unnamed hedge fund manager. I finally tracked down the article WEF Davos 2015 Hub Culture Interview Robert Johnson of the Institute for New Economic Thinking which featured the video below:

Robert Johnson of the Institute for New Economic Thinking feels that this Davos is quiet, people aren’t talking. And explains why, and what they should do about it.

There is also the interview Davos Economist: Elite Are Afraid of Ferguson-Style Riots.

Davos economist Robert Johnson, who made headlines this week for revealing that the wealthy are buying secret boltholes as a hedge against global instability, warned in a subsequent interview that the elite are also afraid of more riots in the mould of Ferguson, Missouri.

Along the way of my search, I found a number of other articles.

The Guardian in the UK has the article Davos 2015: world leaders ‘failing on social cohesion’, Davos 2015: overriding pessimism over growing inequality, As inequality soars, the nervous super rich are already planning their escapes. CNBC has many video in the article Davos 2015 – World Economic Forum. Many of the article themselves have links to other article.

Naked Capitalism has the article What Thomas Piketty and Larry Summers Don’t Tell You About Income Inequality by Lynn Parramore, Senior Editor at INET. Originally published at INET.  I think the article is an interview of economist Lance Taylor by Lynn Parramore. The article introduction explains the following:

In a new paper for the Institute For New Economic Thinking’s Working Group on the Political Economy of Distribution, economist Lance Taylor and his colleagues examine income inequality using new tools and models that give us a more nuanced — and frightening —picture than we’ve had before.  Their simulation models show how so-called “reasonable” modifications like modest tax increases on the wealthy and boosting low wages are not going to be enough to stem the disproportionate tide of income rushing toward the rich. Taylor’s research challenges the approaches of American policy makers, the assumptions of traditional economists, and some of the conclusions drawn by Thomas Piketty and Larry Summers. Bottom line: We’re not yet talking about the kinds of major changes needed to keep us from becoming a Downton Abbey society.

I’ll let you read the article to see what Taylor says about the causes and what can be done about it.  One thing that struck me was the following question and brief answer:

LP: In your view, is there anybody in the U.S. offering meaningful approaches to income inequality?

LT: Not in the general political debate.

In my opinion, our best hope for a politician who might offer meaningful approaches to the problem is Bernie Sanders.  In this department, he is even way ahead of Elizabeth Warren.  Elizabeth Warren certainly has an excellent understanding of the causes of the problem.  However, I believe that she is way behind Bernie Sanders in understanding economics well enough to be able to propose solutions that will have much impact.

The main indication I have that Bernie Sanders gets this is his appointment of Stephanie Kelton as the head Economist for the minority on the Senate Budget Committee.  She was sitting beside Bernie Sanders when he made an important presentation to the committee.  I’d bet my bottom dollar that she is the one who suggested the chart around which his presentation focused.  I would also be willing to bet that she is the one who prepped him on the words to speak.

See my previous post Senator Bernie Sanders presents Tcherneva’s research to Show How Reagan Helped Destroy the Middle Class for the evidence.

If Bernie Sanders and Stephanie Kelton don’t manage to change the country’s thinking on a whole lot of economic mythology, then we are in for a very long and unhappy time in America that is not going to end nicely.  Think of how well the French nobility came out in the the French Revolution. (Did you get the sarcasm of that last sentence?) (If you think that Hillary Clinton has a chance of getting a clue about getting a clue, I have only one thing to say, “Oh, puhleeze!” She probably still bows down at the altar of Larry Summers. At least Elizabeth Warren has demonstrated that she doesn’t think very highly of Larry Summers.)

Sarah Clark started a conversation on this topic with a post on her Facebook page.

My response to the question she posed was:

Don’t mistake the anti-abortionists’ highjacking of a legitimate technique for illegitimate purposes as deligitimizing the technique for legitimate purposes.

If a woman decides to have an abortion, that does not endanger me, my relatives, or society as a whole. In this case, I have no right to tell the woman what she should or shouldn’t do.

If a parent decides not to vaccinate a child, then that does threaten me, my family, and society as a whole. If the author of the article has proof, as he suggests he does, that the technique he suggests does work, then I would support it. If the technique does not work well enough, then I would suggest going back to a policy that I think we used to have. If you want to send your child to a public school, then you have to provide evidence of the required immunizations.

If you do not want to have your child vaccinated, then find some other way to provide for the child’s education.

In continuation of the conversation, Sarah posted two very useful links. Massachusetts Department Of Public Health – Immunization Exemptions and Vaccine Preventable Disease Exclusion Guidelines in School Settings and State Vaccination Exemptions for Children Entering Public Schools.

Talking Points Memo has the article Jon Stewart Skewers Netanyahu Over Accepting GOP Invite To U.S. (VIDEO).  Originally, I wasn’t going to post this because I didn’t feel that it was a very significant or pointed segment.  However, after thinking about this one part, I changed my mind.

Jon Stewart broke out in laughter on Thursday’s edition of “The Daily Show” at news that President Obama would not be meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Obama told press that he was declining to meet with Netanyahu because “general policy” said U.S. leaders don’t meet with a foreign leader too close to that country’s election, lest it appear America is meddling in another country’s affairs.

I am very disappointed in President Obama’s reaction. We all can see that figuratively Netanyahu has slapped Obama in the face. Obama’s reaction is to try to pretend that it didn’t happen. When will the President show the outrage that Netanyahu deserves? As my previous post suggested, Obama should at least declare Israel’s ambassador as persona non grata and force him to be recalled by Israel. Why the ambassador? Because he has been reported as purposely negotiating with Speaker Boner to arrange this visit without prior knowledge of our President. This is an intentional attempt to embarrass our President.

President Obama needs to read my previous post Nixon’s Madman Theory. Unless the President learns to apply this theory liberally (pun intended), then people are going to continue to walk all over him.

Roots Action has sent me an email with a link to a petition to sign.

Instead of letting diplomacy work, Netanyahu wants the U.S. to impose harsher sanctions on Iran, all but ensuring that talks collapse and increasing the risk of war.

I am not about to let Netanyahu dictate to us when we should go to war.  His attempt to influence U.S. politics has gone way beyond the acceptable. Congress’s negotiation with a foreign power probably violates a number of U.S. laws – see the Logan Act.

Violation of the Logan Act is a felony, punishable under federal law with imprisonment of up to three years.

Perhaps the members of Congress want to prove that they know what an impeachable act is.  Maybe they want to try it on for size before seeing if they can accuse the President of other impeachable acts.

What will it take for the majority to recognize that the Republicans have just gone too far?

When will President Obama declare Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S. persona non grata and have him recalled to Israel?

New Economic Perspectives has the cross-post Senator Bernie Sanders presents Tcherneva’s research to Show How Reagan Helped Destroy the Middle Class.

But when Sanders took to the Senate floor Thursday evening to offer a broad vision for how to do something to help the declining middle class, he offered a stunning chart that showed just how poorly most Americans have fared during economic recoveries since the advent of Reaganomics.

Here is a good look at Pavlina R. Tcherneva’s chart.

Notice that the top 10% got more than 100% of the income growth in this latest recovery. If you are in the bottom 90%. not only did the top 10% take all of you share of the income growth from the economic recovery, but they also took a good chunk of the income you were getting before the recovery. And Obama wonders why the voters didn’t turn out in droves to elect his party to majority control of the Congress.

Here is the presentation by Senator Sanders.

The article mentions:

The socialist Democrat is certainly aware that other factors such as technology, the waning of the union movement and globalization all played their roles, but his data makes for an awfully stark portrait.

Well, I object to that.  It is not that the other factors aren’t part and parcel of the concerted effort by the oligarchs of this country to redistribute the wealth upward.  So, being aware of these other factors does not change in any way the story Sanders is presenting.

Comments on the New Economic Perspectives post identify the woman in the video as Stephanie Kelton. For the uninitiated, Stephanie Kelton is the chief economist for the minority on the Senate Budget Committee that Bernie Sanders recently appointed. She is in the vanguard of promoting and explaining the precepts of Modern Money Theory. With her being in this position and Bernie Sanders’ using her advice so prominently, I predict that the American (and world) conversation about government debts and deficits will be turned up-side-down. This may have been an historic moment that you just watched.