“Punting the Pundits” is an Open Thread. It is a selection of editorials and opinions from around the news medium and the internet blogs. The intent is to provide a forum for your reactions and opinions, not just to the opinions presented, but to what ever you find important.
Thanks to ek hornbeck, click on the link and you can access all the past “Punting the Pundits”.
Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt
Dean Baker: Wall Street Rocks!
For those who closely follow financial markets the first two weeks of 2016 have been the most fun since the financial crisis triggered by the collapse of the housing bubble. The market has lost more than 10 percent of its value since its late December peak, destroying more than $2 trillion of stock wealth.
Markets elsewhere in the world have experienced comparable declines. Slowing economic growth has sent oil prices plummeting to less than $30 a barrel, pushing many oil companies to the edge of bankruptcy and devastating the economies of countries that are heavily dependent on oil exports. All this may sound very grim, but unless you were borrowing to buy large amounts of stock or oil futures, there is no reason to look for a ledge from which to jump.
As Herbert Hoover famously said, the fundamentals of the economy are strong. Okay, that’s not serious.
The fundamentals are not strong, but the economy is also not about to fall into another recession. The basic story is the one we were seeing before all the fun on Wall Street, we are looking at an economy that is growing slowly and still has not come close to recovering from the last recession. The rollercoaster ride on Wall Street has little effect on this picture.
Ali Gharib: Delicacy and compromise were key to the Iran deal, not bluster and prayer
Saturday turned out to be a momentous day in US-Iran relations. American Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif took to the dais in Vienna to announce Iran’s compliance with the terms of last July’s nuclear accord and, therefore, the lifting of nuclear-related sanctions on the Islamic Republic.
“This evening, we are really reminded once again of diplomacy’s power to tackle significant challenges” Kerry said, citing all the curbs Iran had – according to the International Atomic Energy Agency – verifiably placed on its nuclear program.
But Implementation Day, as it came to be called, wasn’t the only thing Kerry was talking about it, and it wasn’t even the biggest news to come out of US-Iran diplomacy. [..]
Supporters of engaging with Iran to resolve our differences took a moment to savor the soon-to-be homecomings of the men. This was yet another victory achieved with talks, not bombs, bullets or threats: the culmination of another painstaking process that required patience and, as with the early rounds of nuclear talks, secrecy. But after a moment, the time to savor was over.
That’s because, like any action President Obama takes on Iran, a firestorm of criticism soon came down from all directions. Hawks on presidential trail, Capitol Hill and, most of all, among Washington’s bevy of think tanks and advocacy organizations either came down swiftly against the deal or denounced its parameters so vociferously as to engender the same effect.
Jeb Lund: Ted Cruz isn’t presidential material, but not because of where he was born
When I found out that Ted Cruz has his own birthers – that the eligibility of the Canadian-born candidate to become President of the United States is being contested in a “poorly written, 28-page complaint” – my first thought was, “It’s nice when two people find each other.”
I thought that 28 pages of rambling would, should contain some kind of right-wing treasure (like, at least one mention each of “chemtrails” and “purity of essence”) but, alas, Newton B Schwartz Sr, the 85-year-old Houston-based attorney who filed the suit against Cruz, appears to be a Democrat still grinding his teeth about the Obama birther non-conspiracy. And, in any case, he’s wrong about Cruz.
So the only thing left to do is have fun with this anyway. We’ve all earned it.
It’s easy to forget just how plain nutty and self-contradictory the original birther thing was. Building on the decades-long conceit that any Democratic defeat of a Republican presidential candidate must represent a fundamental thwarting of the will of the American people, it naturally followed that Barack Obama was not actually president at all.
Scott Lemeiux: Is it corruption for a politician to take a bribe if he doesn’t follow through?
Post- Citizens United, the political world is awash in cash and distinguishing between scandalous-but-legal and illegally scandalous attempts by the wealthy to influence public officials is becoming increasingly difficult. On Friday, the US supreme court agreed to hear a case in which a former elected official, convicted of taking extravagant gifts to influence policy, now argues that because he failed to deliver on his promises to the person trying to corrupt him, he isn’t guilty of corruption.
The case in question is that of former Republican Virginia governor Bob McDonnell who in 2014 was convicted of 11 charges related to federal anti-corruption statutes. (His wife Maureen McDonnell was convicted of 8 in the same case). I don’t have a great deal of sympathy for McDonnell, who accepted large amounts of money from someone clearly seeking political influence while also enacting repugnant policies. But he has a decent chance of winning – and, should he prove successful, it’s fair to say that Americans concerned with the corrupting influence of money in politics should be even more concerned.
Jim Hightower: Why the GOP’s Fence Fantasy Is a Farce
A long time ago, in a not-so-faraway land, a civilization existed that was governed through a fairly rational political system. Even conservative candidates for high office had to have a good idea or two — and be quasi-qualified.
That land was the USA. It still exists as a place, but these days, Republican candidates don’t even have to be qualified — much less sane — to run for the highest office in the land. All they need is the backing of one or more billionaires, a hot fear-button issue to exploit and a talent for pandering without shame to the most fanatical clique of know-nothings in their party. Also, they must be able to wall themselves off from reality, erecting a wall of political goop around their heads so thick that even facts and obvious truth cannot get through to them. [..]
There are, of course, certain problems that you might expect them to address, such as the exorbitant cost of the thing, the extensive environmental damage it’ll do, and the futility of thinking that people aren’t clever enough to get around, over, under or through any wall. But don’t hold your breath waiting for any common sense to intrude on their macho posturing.
Recent Comments