Annals of career "progressive" idiocy
Sorry I seem to be writing the same headline over and over again, but there's rather a lot of career "progressive" idiocy about, these days. I think they must be losing it. That's a good thing. Booman:
But a lot of progressive opinion leaders have developed a relentlessly negative narrative that is being sopped up by loyal readers.
Right. I should be writing about the positive aspects of 10% real (20% nominal) unemployment as far as the eye can see. I'll get right on that.
Again, this is mainly a problem not of style but of an infantile need to be hugged and patted on the head on the part of a bunch of cry babies.
Still riding the Unity Pony, I see.
But the cry babies are also an important constituency who have the best track record of being right of any political group in the country.
In the vast majority of cases, policy would be better if their advice was followed (or if it were possible to follow their advice). Progressives haven't gotten what they wanted, at least not in untarnished form. They need a jolt. They need* something that tells them that the president shares their objectives.
Wait for it....
And nominating Elizabeth Warren to head the Consumer Financial Protection Agency would be just what the doctor ordered.
Jeebus. Nothing against Warren, who I like a lot, but did anybody notice that Booman, right after 'splaining how [true] progressives cared about policy, and were right about policy, and were ignored on policy, has nothing to say about policy at all, but proposes to buy them off with a single appointment?
FinReg is a second financial debacle in the making, because the too bigger to fail banks aren't reined in, and a personnel decision in a single new agency is supposed to make that all better? Dear Lord.
NOTE Don't you love it when other people tell you what you need? Especially after calling you a baby? I know I do. Especially when Booman does it.