Quantcast

Web Letters | The Nation

Web Letter

CFPA sounds like it may work for a few years--unless, of course, you give the job to Ralph Nader. No one's bought him yet.

james mcmahon

Columbia Cross Roads, PA

Oct 8 2009 - 5:19pm

Web Letter

Yes, they do. Because it doesn't matter what they say--it won't be reported. Only the scare tactic ads will be televised and remembered. That, and maybe some "critical report" about the veracity of the proposed agency by a well-manicured corporate poodle on one of the major networks (my money's on ABC/Disney). Hopefully Obama and the "Democratic" Congress won't use such trivialities as an excuse to cut and run, as they have on so much else.

Even then, without re-introducing Glass-Steagall, repealing the Telecommunications Act (the two came into existence in the same year, and are critically linked) and offering single-payer care, the "consumer" is pretty much cooked anyhow. Ten percent lack a job to buy anything.

Melinda Gonzalez

Upland, CA

Oct 6 2009 - 10:34pm

Web Letter

In a word? "Yes." Just as in the discussion (?) concerning healthcare reform, our elected officials have develpoed a deaf ear and are acting instead as the "chosen few." Instead of listening with any sensitivity to the opinions, desires and wishes of the consitutuents who elected them, with the exception of Barney Frank and handful of others, they have chosen to become aloof and unresponsive.

With respect to both healthcare and this credit regulation legislation, the "represenatatives" are failing to represent and choosing to ignore the will of the very people who entrusted them with this critical responsibility of oversight and shepherding.

The word that comes to mind is "arrogant," and if one takes a quick trip through the dictionary, you find that this word comes from the Latin, meaning "to claim." In these cases it would seem to mean to lay claim to a superiority of wisdom and intellect that they have conferred upon themselves. The definition also mentions "haughtiness," thereby implying (again) a self-imbued sense of a heightened ability to make value/judgement calls on behalf of others they seem to deem incapable of doing for themselves (us).

The sadness of this conundrum is that we seem to be facing the need to legislate fiscal morality, and the task has fallen to those who have no moral compass to guide them in their task.

To be regarded as a schmuck is to be regarded as inferior and stupid, and I am sorely offended. You should be, as well.

Ivan Hentschel

Austin, TX

Oct 5 2009 - 6:12pm

Web Letter

They take us for schmucks because it's never any skin off their... uh, noses, since our no-account president and two years before him, his no-account Dem Party have taken no effective action to reverse the travesties of the miseRepublicans to our moral, economic and environmental constitution.

Victor Bruce Anderson

Eagle Lake, FL

Oct 3 2009 - 2:13pm

Web Letter

Fox: Frankly, I see no need for a Chicken Protection Agency.

Senator Lamm: Well, we couldn't help noticing that as of September of last year you had 586 chickens and as of last Monday you have six.

Fox: A lot of people lost chickens in the last year.

Senator Lamm: Yes, and this would seem to indicate that a new regulatory body is called for.

Fox: Mistakes were made, I grant you, but I promise to do better.

Senator Lamm: And we're just supposed to trust you?

Fox: Hey, I just promised.

Senator Lamm: Hmm, well, that's true.

Fox: You can trust me.

Senator Lamm: How do I know I can trust you?

Fox: I just said so.

Senator Lamm: Gosh, that's good enough for me. No further questions.

David Durham

Chattanooga, TN

Oct 3 2009 - 8:49am