Archive for the ‘Miscellaneous’ Category.

Trump America

I was having a lovely day wine tasting when the ignorance and stupidity of Trump America raised its ugly head.  I was sitting sipping some wine outside a lovely winery when an acquaintance sat down next to me so we chit chatted for a few minutes and it turns out he has worked for a firm or with a firm I consult for.  I mentioned the Request for Proposal for the prototype border wall, and he launch into maybe we won’t need it since it would seem Trump’s rhetoric had scared many away and they would not be going to school tuition free and stealing our tax dollars.  Now none of that is true and is easily fact-checked on the web if you go to reliable sources.  But their minds are not up for changing.  Facts, real facts do not matter.

There are loans dedicated to undocumented immigrants to help them, but understand who we are talking about, Dreamers.  These are kids who know no other home and they just want to productive Americans.  Again a little work on the internet and you can educate yourself, but they just want to believe somebody is getting a better deal than they are.  They want to hate.

I tried to change the direction by saying what we really need is an immigration system where workers (especially farm workers) can come into the country fairly simply and leave again.  He stated that was already the system we have and they just need to get their green cards an we would have no problem in the fields.  I said that was not the case .  He lives in a different world than I do.

My point is simple.  We live with people who actually believe that somehow immigrants are stealing from them.  Somehow they were not getting their fair share and immigrants are the root of our problem, getting some kind of free ride..  And facts or the gray areas just don’t make any difference.  That is the Trump America we live in.  It is so much easier to blame someone who is different, than to see the humanity in their striving.  And in good Christian America, we are slapping the hand reaching out for help.

Was Vietnam Winnable?

That is the title for an op-ed in the NYT arguing it was. The author wrote and based his argument on American strategy and the North Vietnamese’s papers at the time.  Since this is a war that consumed me as a young man, and finally found me flying reconnaissance missions in the early 70’s there, I found it hard to read.  There are a lot of deep emotions in my and many of my fellow countrymen who were also consumed by this war.  I have a gut reaction to these arguments that they are nonsense, that we did not understand the war in any social or cultural sense, and the war was bound to fail.  So reading through this was hard.  It was one of those things you have to force yourself to do.

His argument was about strategy and he provided 3-things we could have done. “The most momentous blunder was the decision of the American ambassador to South Vietnam, Henry Cabot Lodge, to foment the coup that overthrew Ngo Dinh Diem, which wrecked the South Vietnamese security apparatus and led North Vietnam to initiate a huge invasion of the South.” My thought here is most Americans will not remember this history.  Diem was Catholic in a Buddhist country and he was becoming ever more totalitarian and divisive making the country ungovernable.  We were propping him up.  So you don’t remove him and create a police state like North Korea?

Another mistake was Johnson’s decision to not insert American ground forces into Laos to block the Ho Chi Minh Trail, a move that would have transformed the war and reduced the need for American forces.” I flew in these “friendly skies” almost daily tracking the flow of war materials into the South, and we bombed it all the time.  Laos was a forbidding country where if you were shot down, they did not take prisoners.  So we just throw troops at it and we would not get bogged down in another war in Laos?  This makes little sense to me.  If we learned anything, the Vietnamese were resourceful. They would have found another way.

Finally the author argued that we needed to change the conversation about the war in the U.S. to support it so there was not so much resistance at home. I would argue here that the reality of the killing being presented on TV in a country that had no impact our national security made that idea inoperative.  Here is his argument:

During 1967, White House advisers and foreign leaders repeatedly urged Johnson to change course, to tell the American public why the United States was in Vietnam and what it was trying to achieve. But Johnson could not bring himself to do it, even as he increasingly recognized the damaging consequences of his silence. “If history indicts us for Vietnam,” Johnson admitted in the fall, “it will be for fighting a war without trying to stir up patriotism.”

Stir up patriotism?  We lost the war and Vietnam is now a good friend and trading partner, offsetting Chinese influence in the area. what are you talking about?  The war was for nothing.

I found this kind of thinking a tutorial on how we get into wars we don’t belong in.  First of all, why did we fight there?  The author never made the point of why 58,000 Americans and over 3 million Vietnamese had to die.  What was our strategic interest?  What have been the consequences of our losing it?  This just use better tactics approach to war is what got us in major problems in the Middle East.  Wars are not tactics on a game board.  They are about cultural and social issues that if not understood, undermine our whole endeavor.  That is the key to our failures in the Middle East and was the key to losing a war we could not win in Vietnam.

Finally, I would argue, define winnable?  How many killed, how much destroyed, and how long will the invading round-eye be resisted in a gorilla war and resented as an imperialist?  These are things he never addresses.  But the answer to all this is in the fact that Vietnam today is a good trading partner and they have forgiven us, so what again was the need to win this war? There are a lot of us out here who fought that war and know this is the nonsense that will continue getting Americans killed for ego and vanity.  Winning for winning.  The reader comments are what makes my day and here are three of my favorites:

AW:  “It’s slightly bizarre that the author of this piece does not so much as mention the question whether the US had the right to intervene in a civil war on the other side of the earth. We killed three million Vietnamese, lost 58,000 of our own people, dropped a greater tonnage of bombs on Vietnam than were dropped in all of World War II, dropped colossal amounts of Agent Orange, which killed thousands and is still making people sick, dropped an immense tonnage of bombs on Laos and Cambodia, killing hundreds of thousands of people and leading in the latter case directly to the genocide of Pol Pot, and the murder of 1.7 million people, and this author is sorry we didn’t go further. This is a pretty good definition of moral idiocy.”

Doc Kevorian: “We DID “win” the Vietnam War. Ten years after the fall of Saigon, all of our war aims were achieved. The new Vietnam is stable, prosperous, and is our staunch ally against China. Most amazingly, the Vietnamese people have forgiven us for what we did to them. That’s victory, but it shows how stupid and pointless the war was. I served two tours there, 1966-67, and 1970 and am a disabled veteran.”

mancuroc: “If the US had won the war, Vietnam would have been a good trading partner to the United States and its people would have been friendly to the Americans.

Oh, wait……”

I could not have said it better.

In Other News…

The news channels I watch, mostly CNN and MSNBC have a fix on the VIIC (Village Idiot-in-Charge).  The lies and inconsistencies are starting to cascade so I thought I would turn to other news while the VIIC is in Saudi Arabia and Israel.  I mean, what harm could he possibly do there?  Obviously we need to sell them more arms to keep our war machine happy, but does anyone  then wonder why peace is so hard over there?  I just hope when he goes to Israel he doesn’t try to plant an American flag at the Wailing Wall.

So my first thought is on driverless trucking of the very near future.  As I drove back from Monterey yesterday on I-5, it occurred to me that there is so much trucking traffic that the drive could be described as cruising between truck passing zones.  Truck passing zones are those places where one truck must pass the other and for the next seven or eight miles they block both lanes as one creeps by the other.  So what happens on our two lane interstates when massive lines of trucks, driverless, chug along, I assume in the right lane actually doing the speed limit, so that the only available lane for travel is the left lane (pretty much as it is now)?  I would think we would need a massive building project to add another lane so that traffic is not totally controlled by trucks as it is now.

My second thought is the new study of the Antarctica ice sheet.  Did you know that it contains 60% of the fresh water on the earth and if it completely melted it would raise sea level by 160′.  Did you know it is melting much faster that we thought so what does that do to our predictions of a foot or two in the next 50 years?  Scientists are studying what is happening there so they can make better predictions.  Meanwhile our government under the VIIC and idiot minions are removing scientific data from websites so we won’t know what is coming until it is up to our…

On MSNBC, WTF.  First they bring in Greta to attract maybe more conservative listeners, but her bias is so pronounced conservative that she has a hard time processing all the stuff coming out about the VIIC and tries to make excuses. Chris Mathews processes information like it was still the 1990s, and Chris Hayes tries to present both sides to be fair and balanced when there is only one side. I switch over to CNN which seems more realistically in the hunt.  Now I hear they want to move Lawrence out of his prime time spot so they can give Brian William’s a better time slot. Lawrence is not having it.  Lawrence and Rachel are the heart of intelligent and thoughtful coverage.  Brian Williams’ coverage is fawning and lacks a there, there.  So we are again what, trying to dumb down news so we can dumb down America and make conservative palatable for idled brains?   Goodbye MSNBC if you pull that one off.

Finally, just a thought about the special counsel.  He, like the FBI, will be doing his investigation in the back room.  We still need to continue to dig in the committees if the Republicans will let them.  Last night it was reported that there were 18 more contacts with the VIICs campaign than earlier reporting.  You know there are recordings of those conversations somewhere.  How long does this take?  We the people need to see the truth, the earlier the better.  And as Bernie Sanders reminded us yesterday, focusing on the VIIC as Hillary did in the campaign as unfit to serve, does not provide an alternate path that most voters who don’t read this blog really care about.  It is still, was, and eternally about the economy.  Democrats have to pay attention and attack Republicans for their ideological necrophilia:  passionate love for the dead, ineffective political ideas. America needs options.

Oh, and one final back to the news of the day:  Joe Lieberman for FBI.  Yuck!  My first thought was the VIIC picked someone who was a member of the Senate Club, like Sessions, who would get a free pass.  No smell check required. Apparently that is not the case thankfully.  Why keep putting these old politicos in these positions and expect that anything will change?  Aren’t there professional/non-political people in either the Justice Department (think of all the U.S. Attorneys) or the FBI?  Lieberman is another political hack with a political agenda.  I wonder what those people who voted for change, think about this.  Oh, wait, they don’t think.

Remember Your History?

The latest is that maybe the Village Idiot in Chief (VIIC) may have actually said what Comey alleges, but he really did not mean it. It is the way business people talk.  Remember Thomas Becket who was appointed by Henry II to take over the Church in England back in the 1100s and put it under the control of monarchy.  But Thomas eventually rebelled and the King got so frustrated that he was reported to utter, “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?”, at which point the knights did just that with their swords. Henry was then faced with revolt and he is purported to claim he did not mean to have him killed. He was just talking casually.

Now the VIIC claims the same.  It is the consequences that change the meaning of words, apparently.

Lessons From Around the World

Our march to an autocratic government has been noted by several writers from autocratic societies or ones on the march to them.  Cheeto-head has all the characteristics of an autocratic leader and we are seeing disturbing tendancies like trying to breakdown the independent judiciary, his attack on the free press, his clear lack of understanding of the fundamental principles of the Constitution, his attempt to sully our intelligence agencies to just tell him what he wants to hear, and of course his attempt to intimidate the independent Justice Department and FBI to loyality to him, not the Constitution.  We saw Republicans fall in line when Republican Senator Cornyn from Texas attack Sally Yates for hold to the very independence he demanded in her confirmation hearings.

There is an amazing underlying story of how “principled” individuals are being compromised.  National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster  provided a very brief press conference and parsed his words to not tell the truth without lying.  Rod Rosenstein was used as a dupe to identify the false reasons for firing Comey and now seems to resist doing the right thing by appointing a special prosecutor.  How many more are there, and the elephant in the room is that if the intelligence community decides Cheeto-head is unbalanced and dangerous (he is), will we have a true crisis in government itself in revolting against this presidency, whether overt, or covert?

Now as the WaPo tells us, the Administration is involved in a below the radar attack on information that is counter to Cheeto-heads beliefs:

The Trump administration has removed or tucked away a wide variety of information that until recently was provided to the public, limiting access, for instance, to disclosures about workplace violations, energy efficiency, and animal welfare abuses…Officials also removed websites run by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Interior Department that provided scientific information about climate change, eliminating access. for instance, to documents evaluating the danger that the desert ecology in the Southwest could face from future warming. (On Friday, protesting against the disappearance of the EPA website, the city of Chicago posted the site online as it had existed under the Obama administration.)

All the signs are there and were there way before we elected this man.  How could we elect such a poor choice to represent this country?  Well, in an essay today about how Turkey is losing their moderate secular democracy, The Turkey I no longer know, by Fethullah Gulen, he gave advice on how to win back their democracy and I found it the best advice we could give for our own citizens who threw away democracy when they voted for Cheeto-head:

Second, a school curriculum that emphasizes democratic and pluralistic values and encourages critical thinking must be developed. Every student must learn the importance of balancing state powers with individual rights, the separation of powers, judicial independence and press freedom, and the dangers of extreme nationalism, politicization of religion and veneration of the state or any leader.

He is describing where we are today.  We had almost half the nation who did not understand who and what Cheeto-head represented and we are where we are today because of it.  And it is no surprise.  Cheeto-head was quite clear about who he was and his ignorance, misgynomy, racism, autocracy, and nativism was there for everyone to see.  Those who are shocked, shocked, shocked today, are lying hypocrites.  It was out there for all of us to see for those who had their eyes open.  It is impeachment time.

Just a Few Monday Morning Thoughts

The Sunday shows pretty much took a hard look at the latest insanity from Cheeto-head and for the most part did not try to legitimize it.  However, they all try to be upbeat and happy which gives a false impression about the threat we face.  As anyone with an iota of common sense can tell you, there is a there in the Russian collusion thing.  Or let me put this another way.  If there is not anything there, the man in nuts.  So either way, we have to get to the bottom of it.

But here is the thing that keeps rattling around in my brain, here expressed by E.J. Dionne in the WaPo this morning:

Of course, Trump can be fairly regarded as both incompetent and authoritarian. We may be saved by the fact that the feckless Trump is often the authoritarian Trump’s worst enemy. If we’re lucky, Trump’s astonishing indiscipline will be his undoing.

I would say it another way.  We should thank our lucky stars that Cheeto-head is so incompetent, because if he were shrewd and with the complicity of the Republican Party so on display today, he could have done all of this damage to our country quietly without the bull in the China Shop atmosphere.  And that should terrify you.  That we are so complacent about our democracy and our fundamental values that an incompetent boob could first be elected president and then do the things he is doing without a mass uprising does not lend much confidence to our longevity.

Maybe this is a wakeup call and we were lucky we got such an incompetent fool and the damage could be so much worse and permanent.  But as Charles Blow warned us this morning in the NYT:

Trump is now a wounded animal, desperate and dangerous. Survival is an overwhelming, instinctual impulse, and one should put nothing beyond a being who is bent on ensuring it.

But at least we see the danger.  But a recent poll noted that on the Comey firing:

Twenty-nine percent of respondents said they approve of Trump’s decision, compared to 38% who disapprove and 32% who said they did not have enough information to provide an answer.

It’s the 32% who said they did not have enough information we should be worrying about.  That is the 32% that let the 29% of fools control the country.  And in a nutshell, that is a problem.  We have a nation that no longer cares and takes for granted what we have and what is wrong.  They assume they can do nothing when they really do have all the power.  And so far they are using their power to empower the 29% who will always be clueless.

So we are left in the hands of Republicans who are pedaling failed ideas once again believing the market place will solve healthcare, tax cuts will create jobs, we have a voter fraud epidemic, that more incarcerations for drug crimes actually helps, climate change is a fraud, and we need to outsource our natural resources.  I heard a great quote on Sunday by Moisés Naim of Venezuela talking about how Venezuela is collapsing under bad and failed economic ideas, but it so applies to the Republicans:  Ideological Necrophilia: passionate love for the dead, ineffective political ideas.  That is what the 32% is empowering.

Trump Fires Comey Over Handling of Hillary’s eMails, Really?

Comey certainly showed extremely poor judgement in his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, and I agree with the findings of Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein that Comey’s press conference in July to excoriate her and explain why no charges would be filed and notifying Congress of the reopening of the investigation barely a week before the election was wrong.  But it makes no sense.

Rosenstein has been on the job two weeks and he writes a memo dated 9 May (yesterday) that is immediately acted upon by the President?  There is an ongoing investigation of Comey for those actions in the Justice Department and no initial findings were cited nor was the inquiry even consulted?  The memo itself is an opinion piece and not a typical Justice Department legal finding. I would hazard a guess he did not write it.

Now let’s look at the White House.  While Cheeto-Head was upset that they did not lock her up, he must have enjoyed (and quoted) her public shaming by Comey, and later praised him profusely for his “bravery” in reopening the investigation in late October, maybe impacting the election.  After he became President, he again praised Comey and expressed his confidence in him.  Now he gets a memo and acts on in within minutes after waiting 18 days in the General Flynn affair?  It does not make sense.

And just as an aside, note that what Cheeto-Head did not like about the whole affair is the fact that they brought no charges.  While even Republicans noted that there was no intent in the Clinton affair and therefore no legal basis for prosecution, Cheeto-Head could not accept this.  The rule of law be damned.  King Cheeto-Head did not get his way.  This should have disqualified him for the presidency, but the morons in Red America were blind to the threat and his ignorance.

Finally, Comey is out in California talking to field agents and sees on TV that he is fired.  What does that say about an Administration that praised a man for his actions and then does not have the decency to look him in the eye and allow him to step down?  What does it say that the personal body-guard of Cheeto-Head delivered the letter to the FBI, after they announced it?

In Cheeto-Head’s letter to Comey, the elephant in the room that explains everything is strangely right there:

While I greatly appreciate you informing me, on three separate occasions, that I was not under investigation, I nevertheless concur with the judgement of the Department of Justice that you are not able to effectively lead the Bureau.

WTF?  See, this has nothing to do with Russia, See?  See?  Or not so WTF.  Here is the reason for the whole thing:  The Russian investigation.  See yesterday’s blog for why this almost a raging fire.  The President won’t release his tax returns that could clear him of financial ties to the Russians, so why not?  Continued attacks on the intelligence community to try to delegitimize anything they turn up.  His continued attack on the Russia investigation as fake news.  The firing of all the Attorney Generals at one time to disrupt on-going investigations including into his dealings in New York.  The firing of Acting Attorney General Sally Yates two days after she exposes Michael Flynn’s duplicity, and now the firing of the Director of the FBI, heading up the investigation of the Russian involvement, shortly after he announced that there was an investigation into the ties of the Cheeto-Head administration/campaign and the Russians.  This is pure and simple about the Russian investigation and it is a power play by Cheeto-Head.

We have a clear Constitutional Crisis.  The investigation is getting too hot and the President has done a Dick Nixon.  Here is a test for Republicans.  We will see who defends this action and who calls for an independent counsel.  This is no longer murky.  The Cheeto-Head administration just pointed a shiny light on their corruption.  The stupidity and incompetence of this move should tell anyone with operating brain cells that democracy is at stake.  And if as Cheeto-Head claims, there is nothing there, what’s the problem?  Because there is a lot there.  The Republicans have given Cheeto-Head a free pass to violate all sorts of ethical standards around the presidency.  Now will they give him a free pass as he destroys our institutions?

One last thing.  I expect big things to happen in the next few days.  If a special prosecutor is not appointed expect to see massive leaks on what is really going on.  The career Justice Department, Intelligence, and FBI personnel will not stand by and let democracy and our institutions be wrecked by political ditto-heads.  Maybe Republicans will in their lust for power, but not those who have given their lives to serving our country.  As Sally Yates said in her hearing when she was asked by Senator Cruz who she worked for, I work for the people of the United States and the Constitution.

What If…?

What if Hillary had been elected in November and then her National Security Advisor had been caught lying about contacts with the Russians, did not vet him/her as required, and then being informed that the National Security Advisor was compromised, taking no action for 18 days until the story was leaked to the press?  What if White House Press secretary was caught lying multiple times about what really happened, and it is not believable that the President or Vice President did not know about the NSA’s issue as they were told by the last administration and it was in the press? There would be massive investigations and real talk of impeachment.  Does the hypocrisy here bother anyone but me?  Oh no, wait, both sides do it right?  The Trump administrations was just overwhelmed right?  There is nothing criminal here right?  Can we start chanting Lock him up yet?

Squirrel II or Wag the Dog

“President Trump’s most senior military and foreign policy advisers have proposed a major shift in strategy in Afghanistan that would effectively put the United States back on a war footing with the Taliban.”  WaPo

Well it was either that or North Korea to distract us from the Russia/Flynn investigations.  We are in very dangerous times.  The healthcare debacle and now the 18 day gap.  Oh, I know.  Let’s go to war.  Are you awake out there yet?

Some Insight

One of MSNBC’s newspeople, Katy Tur, likes to play the fair and balanced game and ask Democrats what is their plan for a healthcare fix and why don’t they work with Republicans on fixes to Obamacare.  There is two problems here, the basic assumption in the question, and Democrats who don’t answer it firmly.  Before I go on, there is a related piece this morning when a French pundit was explaining the difference between Macron in his race in France, and Hillary’s race in the United States.  She pointed out that Hillary tried to be all things to all people on the tough questions, while Macron stakes out a firm position on the hard questions.  You may or may not agree, but that is a French perspective on our politics that I think is one reason why so many did not trust Hillary.

But there is a parallel here to Democrat’s response to Katy’s question.  Now the problem with Katy’s question is that Democrats can’t do anything about healthcare so quit asking them to work with Republicans.  Republican’s control the agenda thanks to the voters. The second problem with Katy’s question and the problem with most Democrats answer is the elephant in the room.  There is no market place solution to fixing Obamacare.  As Ali Velshi, the MSNBC Business reporter, said again today, “I am a capitalist, but somethings simply do not lend themselves to market place solutions, and health insurance is one of them.”  The answer is to expand the pool of insured and that is only done with government action.  Democrats equivocate trying to be all things to all people and make the Hillary mistake cited above in that the hard but true answer is single payer and Republicans are never going to go for it.  So except for Bernie they equivocate.  

And that brings me to the next “insight”.  The case for single payer is based upon facts.  I won’t bore you with them here as I have done in many, many blogs, but my point is what do political pundits know?  And that is who we hear, either brainless spinners from either side of the aisle, or Congress people/Senators, again with their agenda, not facts.  When you talk about the current Republican Plan where is the Professor from MIT, Jonathan Gruber, who designed Massachuettes’ version, or Obamacare itself, to explain the mechanisms of why it works or will not work?  Yesterday I was in the car and I listened to Kathleen Sebelius, ex-Secretary of Health and Human Welfare, explained about how Obamacare works including all of the subsidies and incentives in the system that Trump has threatened to end, which make insurers even less likely to want to offer plans in an incressingly unpredictable market.  In other words it might just fail because they are making fail.

“If the insurers don’t get certainty soon, there’s going to be a dramatic exodus even if Congress does nothing,” says Kathleen Sebelius, who was President Obama’s Health and Human Services secretary during the law’s passage. “They need stability, or they’ll just leave.”

In the link above to Ali Velshi interviewing Oklahoma Senator Tom Colburn, Ali is one of the few that went after him with facts.  

“That’s not really the problem with healthcare,” Velshi told the ex-senator, in response to Coburn bringing up Medicaid fraud. “The idea that America pays double per capita than any other developed nation is not including people who are relying on their Medicaid. The problem is costs are twice as much as they are of other developed nations with lower outcomes and lower life expectancies.”

“That’s not true at all,” Coburn shot back.

“That’s 100% true, sir, with all due respect,” the MSNBC host retorted. “Those are not poll numbers. That’s 100% true.”

That is what we are missing, not a panel of political pundits jocking for air time, but real subject experts that can explain the real details of how a plan works or does not work.  In healthcare insurance this is obvious.  The only way to cover more people and reduce costs is to expand the insurance pools.  The best way to do that is to insure everyone with substantive coverage and we collectively pay for healthcare.  All market place solutions have failed at this as the profit motive in health insurance negates the goal of good affordable substantive insurance for everyone.  This is not rocket science.  The rest of the world has shown us the way.  The point is we are not dealing in facts and reality and until we do, we have these endless policy discussions. Having a discussion about how the Senate might “fix it” is ignoring the reality that there is no market place fix and the fact that Republicans will never approve a single payer system.

The final insight that I will throw at you is that Progressives are not as advertised by conservatives.  They don’t hate capitalism.  Capitalism has and will continue to improve the lives of many many people.  Pure conservatism (before bastardized by current day Republicans) was small government, low taxes, little regulation.  But it became an ideology where the goal regardles of the impact was small government, low taxes, little regulation.  Counter to that are Progressives, but unlike Republicans their goal is not opposite of conservative ideology, big government, high taxes, or tons of regulation.  That is not the metric they judge policies by.  Universal single payer healthcare may increase the size of government, but it is also the best way to provide affordable universal healthcare at the lowest cost (at least according to the rest of the world).

Progressive do not want high taxes, but taxes needs to be much fairer and low taxes on the wealthy does not create jobs or create flowdown.  Progressives want a more equal distribution of the wealth in this country so that we all grow when our economy grows, not just a few.  They also know that as lower income people earn more money, there is more money spent in our economy to create more jobs.   Progressive do not want regulation for regulations sake.  They want rules to prevent the excess of capitalism and make workers victims.  Finally, Progressives, unlike most conservatives, understand the limitations of capitalism in terms of short and long term planning.  Global warming is a long term threat and doing something about it now helps ameliorate that threat, but it will reduce profits in the short term.  Profits are not gods anymore.

The insight here is that we need to operate on facts and data, not polls.  And even more basically that relying on ideology to solve every problem is ignorance in the face of change.  Progressive certainly do not have all the answers nor will the things they want to do be “free” as Republicans try to sell their market place solutions.  But they recognize change, can learn from successful policies, and are not afraid to change direction if it does not work.  Conservatism, in this case, is in fact just the opposite of that.