<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Gene Lyons</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/writer/gene_lyons/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 May 2012 16:08:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>In defense of Obama&#8217;s drones</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/16/in_defense_of_obamas_drones/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/16/in_defense_of_obamas_drones/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Terrorism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12685451</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Targeting al-Qaida operatives isn't tyranny. It's a legitimate way to protect America from another attack]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To hear some people tell it, the United States hovers on the brink of tyranny. President Obama has seized dictatorial power to murder any American citizen he secretly deems a terrorist. Attorney General Eric Holder’s craven rationalization of the so-called “CIA assassination” of U.S.-born Muslim cleric Anwar al-Awlaki in the wilds of Yemen last September struck some as the veritable death-knell of democracy.</p><p>“The President and his underlings,” <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/06/attorney_general_holder_defends_execution_without_charges/singleton/">writes one fiery critic</a>, “are your accuser, your judge, your jury and your executioner all wrapped up in one, acting in total secrecy and without your even knowing that he’s accused you and sentenced you to death, and you have no opportunity even to know about, let alone confront and address, his accusations.”</p><p>Sounds grave, doesn’t it? No less penetrating a critic than <a href="http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/eric-holder-drone-speech-7124146">Esquire’s Charles Pierce</a> characterized <a href="http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2012/ag-speech-1203051.html">Holder’s March 5 speech</a> at Northwestern University’s School of Law, as “a monumental pile of crap that should embarrass every Democrat who ever said an unkind word about John Yoo.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/16/in_defense_of_obamas_drones/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/16/in_defense_of_obamas_drones/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>141</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The economic story Obama must tell</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/08/the_economic_story_obama_must_tell/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/08/the_economic_story_obama_must_tell/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democratic Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Great Recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12599751</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We need government investment to restore prosperity. The president needs to explain that in a way that makes sense]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Look at it this way: If the Wall Street banking crisis had taken place in 2007 instead of 2008, George W. Bush wouldn't be able to leave home without being jeered. (As it is, he rarely leaves Texas.) Hardly anybody would buy the brand of tycoonomics GOP presidential candidates are selling. People would understand that save-the-millionaires tax cuts and deregulation had dramatically failed. President Obama would get more credit for pulling the economy out of a nose dive.</p><p>Alas, people have short attention spans and a weak understanding of abstract economic issues. You have to tell them a story. The failure of policymakers to do that has been driving progressive MVP Paul Krugman crazy. How can it be, he asks, that governments foreign and domestic are repeating the mistakes of the early 1930s — slashing government spending to reduce budget deficits, putting more people out of work, reducing demand, and inadvertently increasing  deficits? Rinse and repeat.</p><p>Part of it is that the lessons of the Great Depression belong to history, and, as such, are infinitely malleable. Arguments your grandfather would have dismissed — such as Mitt Romney’s plans to assure prosperity by topping off Scrooge McDuck’s bullion tank — are given credence today. Granddad may not have grasped Keynesian economic theory, but he remembered “Hoovervilles” and bread lines. Scrooge McDuck wasn’t a cartoon figure for nothing.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/08/the_economic_story_obama_must_tell/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/08/the_economic_story_obama_must_tell/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>99</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Romney&#8217;s only principle</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/01/romneys_only_principle/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/01/romneys_only_principle/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12455901</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mitt flip-flops on everything else but there's one thing he does believe in: That he deserves to be president]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If he weren’t so smug, it would almost be possible to feel sorry for Mitt Romney. Beyond the flip-flopping, has any worse actor ever attempted the role of presidential candidate? It’s beyond Romney’s powers to persuade most people of his sincerity about things he <em>d</em><em>oes</em> believe, much less the many tenets of contemporary GOP faith he probably doesn’t share — assuming for the sake of argument that anybody, including himself, knows which is which.</p><p>There’s little doubt, however, that Romney believes he deserves to be president, in rather the way the fictional Lord Grantham deserves to preside over Downton Abbey. It’s his inability to conceal that sense of entitlement that makes him such an awkward politician.</p><p>The candidate’s cringe-inducing attempts to present himself as a Regular Joe almost invariably end in boasting. Campaigning in his native Michigan, he assured voters that his wife drives not just one $50,000 Cadillac, but two — one at their Boston home, the other at their seafront mansion near La Jolla, Calif., as aides subsequently clarified. No word how Mrs. Romney gets around at their New Hampshire lakeside compound or their Park City, Utah, ski palace.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/03/01/romneys_only_principle/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/03/01/romneys_only_principle/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>46</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The futile search for meaning in &#8220;Linsanity&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/23/the_futile_search_for_meaning_in_linsanity/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/23/the_futile_search_for_meaning_in_linsanity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Basketball]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeremy LIn]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12404201</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Real fans aren't shocked at the sight of an Asian-American star. The hype is just New York being New York]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>About two weeks ago, my son asked me how a team with an imposing lineup like the New York Knicks could possibly have a losing record. “Because they have no point guard,” I said. They played like strangers. Either nobody wanted the ball or everybody did. Long intervals would pass without the Knicks putting up a decent shot -- although being NBA players they often made enough bad ones to stay close.</p><p>Well, as the world knows, they have a point guard now. The feel-good story of Jeremy Lin, the underdog Chinese-American player from Harvard, has made NBA fans of millions who scarcely know the 24-second clock from a goaltending call. Here’s hoping they stick around, because it’s a heck of a show. Meanwhile, how about if we dialed down the ethnic sensitivity meter until the kid settles in?</p><p>As a lifelong basketball guy married to a coach’s daughter, I’m bewildered by people who say they love the college game but dislike the professionals. Around our house, the end of the NBA owner’s lockout was cause for celebration. It was going to be a long winter without “Da lig” as ESPN’s Hubie Brown pronounces it.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/23/the_futile_search_for_meaning_in_linsanity/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/23/the_futile_search_for_meaning_in_linsanity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>61</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Catholic hypocrisy at its worst</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/16/catholic_hypocrisy_at_its_worst/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/16/catholic_hypocrisy_at_its_worst/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Birth Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Catholic Bishops]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12365021</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bishops condone much more direct contradictions of church dogma. The birth control uproar is a cynical power play]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For the record, the priest who married my wife and me in 1967 advised us that we could in good faith practice birth control. He reasoned that as Pope Paul VI was then preparing an encyclical regarding faith and sexuality, young Catholics could reasonably assume that church dogma regarding contraception would soon change to reflect contemporary realities: specifically that a couple intending to bring children into their marriage might legitimately seek to do so in their own time.</p><p>A university chaplain, he no doubt understood how the combination of Rome’s authoritarianism and theological nit-picking tended to drive educated young people from the church. Anyway, everybody knows how that worked out. Next came Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI’s 1968 doubling down on the church’s blanket condemnation of artificial means of birth control — a blast from the medieval past as most American Catholics now see it.</p><p>“Vatican Roulette,” we called it, and like the vast majority, declined to play. Surveys have shown that approximately 13 percent of the faithful agree with the Roman Catholic Church’s categorical ban on birth control; a mere 2 percent actually practice what the bishops preach. For most, it isn’t a serious personal issue. Sure, Your Grace, whatever.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/16/catholic_hypocrisy_at_its_worst/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/16/catholic_hypocrisy_at_its_worst/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>217</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Israel&#8217;s real target: Obama</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/israels_real_target_obama/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/israels_real_target_obama/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12316831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Prime Minister Netanyahu\'s threats have more to do with challenging Washington than with actually attacking Iran]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After being elected in large part because he’d opposed a “dumb” war in Iraq, President Obama finds himself confronting an even dumber one in Iran. Exponentially dumber, actually.</p><p>Dumb because like the targeted assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists rarely cited by columnist commandoes, bombing raids alone can’t achieve the alleged goal: preventing the Ayatollahs from acquiring nuclear weapons.</p><p>Slow them down, probably. Stop them, no. Short of a full-scale invasion and occupation of a nation three times larger than neighboring Iraq in population and five times larger in land area, that can’t be done. Global disapproval didn’t stop North Korea, Pakistan or, for that matter, Israel.</p><p>Exponentially dumb because it could set the entire Middle East aflame.</p><p>You’d think the Israelis, of all people, would recognize that threatening a people with death and destruction hardens their resolve. Yet the New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/world/middleeast/israelis-see-irans-threats-of-retaliation-as-bluff.html?pagewanted=2&amp;ref=ethanbronner">reports that</a> Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “told visitors that he believes the Tehran government to be deeply unpopular, indeed despised, and that a careful attack on its nuclear facilities might even be welcomed by Iranian citizens.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/israels_real_target_obama/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/israels_real_target_obama/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>242</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama&#8217;s &#8220;post-partisan&#8221; strategy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/02/obamas_post_partisan_strategy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/02/obamas_post_partisan_strategy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mitt Romney]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12277161</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[His rhetoric about consensus politics has sent the GOP off the deep end. Maybe that was the point]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To the extent that he ever believed much, if any, of his own soaring rhetoric about a transformative, post-partisan presidency during the 2008 campaign, President Obama would have to be judged a failure. Even after the election, his inaugural address called for “an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics.”</p><p>Was it really possible, I wondered, that Obama had mistaken the U.S. government for the Harvard Law Review, where the emollient balm of his personality persuaded rival factions to reason together? Did he actually believe that the political battles of the Clinton and Bush years could be laughed off as “the psychodrama of the Baby Boom generation,” easily transcended by an Ivy League raisonneur like him?</p><p>I’ve never thought any Chicago politician could possibly be so naive. Rather, Obama appeared to be an opportunistic shape-shifter like most successful candidates, enacting the pose of healer to set him apart first from Hillary Clinton, then Sen. John McCain — two figures hopelessly identified with the Washington trench warfare most Americans had grown heartily sick of. A fresh face, a proverbial outsider. “Mr. Hopey-Changey,” as an embittered Clinton supporter of my acquaintance called him.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/02/obamas_post_partisan_strategy/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/02/02/obamas_post_partisan_strategy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>55</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Newt&#8217;s no-win political appeal</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/26/newts_no_win_political_appeal/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/26/newts_no_win_political_appeal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newt Gingrich]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12235801</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The neo-Confederate wing of the GOP cares more about humiliating Obama than about beating him in November]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Look, nobody’s third wife is going to be first lady. In the privacy of the voting booth, American women won’t stand for it. Regardless of how flawlessly the bejeweled Callista enacts the role of pious matron, she remains the embodiment of the Trophy Wife — younger, more adoring, unencumbered by children, a climber on the make. In effect, a successful Monica Lewinsky, although unlike Bill Clinton’s paramour, Callista was no kid.</p><p>Even Ann Coulter knows that. Having placed an early bet on Mitt Romney, the GOP’s vestal virgin pronounced herself shocked to hear South Carolina Republicans accepting “Democratic” arguments excusing Newt Gingrich’s serial adultery. On “Fox &amp; Friends,” Coulter said, “I promise you, if Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum had cheated on two wives — that we know, the ‘open marriage’ thing is the only thing he contests, we know he cheated on two wives — I wouldn’t support Mitt Romney.”</p><p>Ah, but there were deeper passions at play in South Carolina. So let’s switch metaphors. Judging by the whooping and hollering of the CNN debate audience, the GOP’s neo-Confederate wing wishes for nothing less than an electoral replay of Pickett’s charge — the doomed infantry attack at Gettysburg most historians believe marked the beginning of the end of the Civil War. A sizable proportion of South Carolinians have yearned for a rematch ever since.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/26/newts_no_win_political_appeal/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/26/newts_no_win_political_appeal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>98</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Newspapers, &#8220;truth vigilantes&#8221; no more</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/19/newspapers_truth_vigilantes_no_more/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/19/newspapers_truth_vigilantes_no_more/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The New York Times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12189651</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The NYT's fact-checking question was absurd, but the real problem is that the press has lost its credibility]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Time was when newspaper journalists prided themselves on being working stiffs: skeptical, cynical and worldly-wise. “If your mother says she loves you, check it out.” I’ve always preferred the unofficial motto of my native New Jersey: “Oh yeah, who says?”</p><p>Fact-check politicians? Here’s how H.L. Mencken saw things in 1924: “If any genuinely honest and altruistic politician had come to the surface in my time I’d have heard of him, for I have always frequented newspaper offices, and in a newspaper office the news of such a marvel would cause a dreadful tumult.”</p><p>Mencken could recall no such excitement. “The unanimous opinion of all the journalists that I know, excluding a few Liberals who are obviously somewhat balmy,” he added “… is that since the days of the national Thors and Wotans, no politician who was not out for himself, and himself alone, has ever drawn the breath of life in the United States.”</p><p>Alas, such attitudes went out of fashion with snap-brim fedoras, smoke-filled rooms and bottles of rye in desk drawers. Today’s national political reporters have attended fancy colleges, regard their professional affiliations as valuable status symbols, hence give every sign of identifying more with Washington courtiers and political professionals than the great unwashed.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/19/newspapers_truth_vigilantes_no_more/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/19/newspapers_truth_vigilantes_no_more/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Paul&#8217;s damning effect on foreign policy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/pauls_damning_effect_on_foreign_policy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/pauls_damning_effect_on_foreign_policy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ron Paul]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12082191</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[His anti-Semitism-tinged opposition to an Iran war makes it easier for neocons to dismiss legitimate objections]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, sailor, just how strange a political bedfellow have you got in mind?</p><p>That’s the question raised by the suggestion in certain quarters that the real progressive in the 2012 presidential contest may be Texas Rep. Ron Paul. Democrats who fail to acknowledge this brilliant insight are alleged to be either blinded by partisanship or actively in league with that warmonger and baby-killer President Obama.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/10/what_makes_a_progressive_president/">The latest rationalization</a> by Salon’s David Sirota involves distinguishing between the powers of the president as commander in chief and those requiring the cooperation of Congress. That President Paul would move to abolish Social Security and Medicare and repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964 isn’t supposed to matter because he couldn’t do so unilaterally, while President Obama could presumably ignore the War Powers Act (as some allege he did in Libya) plunging the nation into war “with the stroke of a pen.”</p><p>Of course, so can any president. But hold that thought.</p><p>Meanwhile, anybody who questions the character and judgment of a politician who until fairly recently peddled “The Original Famous Ron Paul Survival Kit” in his eponymous newsletter isn’t playing fair.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/pauls_damning_effect_on_foreign_policy/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/12/pauls_damning_effect_on_foreign_policy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>283</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ron Paul, still loony</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/05/ron_paul_still_loony/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/05/ron_paul_still_loony/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ron Paul]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=11864021</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Even when the Texas congressman is right on an issue, it's for the wrong reasons]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Revolution<br />
Is the affair of logical lunatics.<br />
The politics of emotion must appear<br />
To be an intellectual structure. The cause<br />
Creates a logic not to be distinguished<br />
From lunacy…<br />
-- Wallace Stevens, “Esthetique du Mal”</p></blockquote><p>Let’s start at the starting place. Rep. Ron Paul has no chance whatsoever of securing the Republican nomination, nor of being elected president under any imaginable circumstances. Ain’t gonna happen. Even Newt Gingrich has basically said he’d vote for President Obama over Paul. Given that Newt would probably back Vladimir Putin over Obama -- robust foreign policy, after all -- that’s definitely saying something.</p><p>So don’t tell me about Paul’s political courage. It’s easy to be a fearless iconoclast when nothing’s at stake. That said, it was heartening to hear the Texas congressman, during a Fox News-sponsored Iowa debate of all places, stress the similarities between the current “bomb Iran” chorus and the 2003 propaganda campaign that led the U.S. to invade Iraq. Paul dismissed as “absurd” Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann’s assertions that the Iranian government’s “theology” would lead it to start a nuclear war for the sake of national martyrdom.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/01/05/ron_paul_still_loony/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/01/05/ron_paul_still_loony/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>304</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The real problem in Iowa</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/29/whats_really_wrong_in_iowa/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/29/whats_really_wrong_in_iowa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Ryan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10799831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The issue isn\'t the indecisiveness of the caucus voters. It\'s the terrible GOP field]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pardon me if I fail to join the crowd handicapping next week’s Iowa GOP caucuses like race track touts peddling betting tips on the Kentucky Derby.</p><p>To begin with, I have no clue. Except on the sports page, I normally skip articles speculating about what might happen tomorrow. Damned if I’m going to start writing them.</p><p>Also, who cares? History teaches that Iowa Republicans have a particularly poor record of supporting the eventual presidential winner. In six contested GOP primaries dating back to 1976, Iowans have gotten it right exactly once. They chose George W. Bush in 2000 -- definitely nothing to brag about.</p><p>In essence, the Iowa caucuses amount to a marketing device for cable TV news channels; it’s “American Idol” for the politically obsessed. Their secondary function is to introduce cosmopolitan news correspondents to the homespun wisdom of Real Americans in places like Ankeny, Iowa, a Des Moines suburb where John Deere tractors are manufactured.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/29/whats_really_wrong_in_iowa/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/29/whats_really_wrong_in_iowa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>85</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why do people still deny climate change?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/15/why_do_people_still_deny_climate_change/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/15/why_do_people_still_deny_climate_change/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10362941</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[2011 was plagued by droughts, floods and tornadoes. It's high time we take global warming seriously]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At the expense of being tedious, from a climatological perspective, 2011 was a real killer — both figuratively and literally. If not quite so hot as 2010, which tied 1998 for the warmest in recorded history, it’s likely to end up among the top 10, all occurring over the past 15 years according to the World Meteorological Organization.</p><p>Extreme weather plagued much of the world. Drought in East Africa has caused mass starvation; catastrophic floods came to Thailand, southern Africa and Australia. Winter temperatures across Russia averaged 4 degrees Celsius (roughly 9 degrees Fahrenheit) above average. Arctic sea ice was the second lowest on record.</p><p>Closer to home, extreme drought and wildfires turned Texas and adjacent Southwestern states into a living hell last summer. In Texas alone, 3 million acres burned up. Conditions haven’t improved much since. Cattlemen wonder if their way of life can be sustained there very much longer. F5 Tornadoes destroyed huge swaths of Tuscaloosa, Ala., and Joplin, Mo. In August, Vermont and upstate New York suffered record hurricane damage — Vermont!</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/15/why_do_people_still_deny_climate_change/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/15/why_do_people_still_deny_climate_change/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>451</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why smart conservatives suddenly hate Newt</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/08/why_smart_conservatives_suddenly_hate_newt/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/08/why_smart_conservatives_suddenly_hate_newt/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newt Gingrich]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republican Party]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10299187</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Right-wing intellectuals have turned on Gingrich. They\'ve also realized he\'d be terrible in a general election]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Newt Gingrich is the Jimmy Swaggart of American politics, a confidence man so transparent as to test the faith even of True Believers. Paradoxically, that’s precisely why the disgraced former speaker looks a good bet to secure the GOP presidential nomination.</p><p>Not seeing through Gingrich’s bare-faced mendacity requires an effort of the will so profound it can only be accomplished with the aid of strong countervailing emotions — essentially the envy, resentment and fear that right-wing media have fomented among the faithful ever since the election of President Clinton and the 1994 “Contract With America.”</p><p>Metaphorically speaking, Gingrich’s candidacy is the love child of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, with Fox News throwing the baby shower.</p><p>This only makes the horror of intellectually inclined conservatives at the prospect of Newt’s ascendancy more remarkable. Where have they been all this time? Back in 1994, Gingrich and Frank Luntz circulated a list of hurtful words conservatives should always call liberals. “Traitors” was at the top, also some that sound particularly ironic today: “waste,” “corruption,” “self-serving,” “greed,” “cynicism,” “cheat,” “steal” and “patronage.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/08/why_smart_conservatives_suddenly_hate_newt/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/08/why_smart_conservatives_suddenly_hate_newt/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>116</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Politics makes people stupid</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/01/politics_makes_people_stupid/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/01/politics_makes_people_stupid/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Elections]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10276070</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We all need to remember the distinction between person and caricature]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Like sex, politics makes almost everybody stupid. With a presidential election in the offing, Americans are increasingly inclined to divide into rival tribes contemptuous of the “other.” It often seems that the higher the stakes, the more foolish the national dialogue.</p><p>Sometimes it feels as if we’re living in Swift’s Lilliput, with Big-Endians perennially at war with Little-Endians over the proper way to open a soft-boiled egg. Of course, Jonathan Swift himself engaged in furious political and religious controversy all his life. He could also laugh at himself.</p><p>But hold that thought.</p><p>Recently I wrote a column in praise of rusticity and the values of my rural Arkansas neighbors. A surprising number of readers saw it as what one called “reverse elitism” — an attack on Yankees and city people generally, although no comparison was stated or intended. Yes, white country folks mostly lean Republican, although readers couldn’t have known my neighbor’s race, and I have no idea how he votes. Therefore, to a tribalized sensibility, he must be a bad person, and I an apostate.</p><p>Lighten up, y’all: If I praise my wife, it’s not an attack on gay marriage.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/01/politics_makes_people_stupid/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/12/01/politics_makes_people_stupid/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What the 1 percent can learn from cow farmers</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/24/what_the_1_percent_can_learn_from_cow_farmers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/24/what_the_1_percent_can_learn_from_cow_farmers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thanksgiving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10248996</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We\'re all still working to make a profit, but no one practices Mitt Romney-style cutthroat capitalism]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Living on a gravel road in a rural Arkansas county with more cows than people, I have much to be thankful for on my favorite American holiday. Hence a Thanksgiving lesson in boondocks economics: Last week I paid my hay man $2,200 for 55 round bales to see my cows and horses through the winter. That’s $40 apiece, a more-than-fair price.</p><p>Weighing 1,200 pounds, a single bale feeds half a dozen cows for roughly a week, depending on the weather. The colder it gets, the more they eat. There’s always a celebration among the big girls whenever I bring them a new one. Spontaneous head-butting matches, that kind of thing. The horses too start running and bucking when they hear my neighbor’s tractor coming to lift a new bale out of the barn and over the fence.</p><p>Anyway, here’s the deal: Due to the terrible Texas drought, buyers have been all over Arkansas paying upwards of $75 to $100 a bale. Flatbed trucks loaded with hay are a familiar sight headed westward on I-30 and I-40 toward Dallas and Oklahoma City. That’s a "save the ranch and pray" price. Nobody can pay anything like that amount to feed livestock and hope to make money. The alternative is to liquidate the herd—too painful to contemplate.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/24/what_the_1_percent_can_learn_from_cow_farmers/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/24/what_the_1_percent_can_learn_from_cow_farmers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>28</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don&#8217;t believe the education &#8220;reformers&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/18/dont_believe_the_education_reformers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/18/dont_believe_the_education_reformers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 16:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Education]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10233589</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Public schools are better than we think and efforts to quantify teacher performance are typically destructive]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Three mildly heretical thoughts about American education: First, given the impossible assignment we’ve given them—an egalitarian mission in a nation rapidly growing more stratified by income and class—American public schools are probably doing a better job than they ought to be. One big reason is greater professionalism among teachers. A lot has changed since I wrote a Texas Monthly article documenting the awful state of teacher education back in 1979, mostly for the better.</p><p>Despite melodramatic pronouncements to the contrary by sundry politicians, tycoons, tycoon/politicians and media-enhanced “reformers” like former Washington, DC schools chancellor Michelle Rhee, the available evidence shows American students performing steadily better on standardized assessments of educational progress over the past 30 years.</p><p>“The only longitudinal measure of student achievement that is available to Bill Gates or anyone else,” writes Richard Rothstein of the Economic Policy Institute, “is the <a href="http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/">National Assessment of Educational Progress</a> .” Scores on the NAEP have trended steadily upward to where the most underprivileged African-American children do better in 8th grade reading and math today than white students did back when the measurements began in 1978. But no, they haven’t caught up because white kids’ scores have improved too.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/18/dont_believe_the_education_reformers/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/18/dont_believe_the_education_reformers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>98</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Yes, it is Wall Street&#8217;s fault</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/10/yes_it_is_wall_streets_fault/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/10/yes_it_is_wall_streets_fault/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Great Recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Occupy Wall Street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10179727</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bloomberg joins Republicans in claiming Congress "forced" banks to give bad loans. Don't buy the propaganda]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So here’s my question: If the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 effectively caused the Wall Street meltdown of 2007 by forcing banks to make bad home loans to improvident poor people (and we all know exactly who I mean), how come it took 30 years for the housing bubble to burst?</p><p>Next question: If fuzzy-thinking Democratic do-gooders enacted such laws in defiance of common sense and sound economics, why didn’t Republican Presidents Reagan, Bush I or Bush II do something? Was Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., secretly running the country?</p><p>Exactly how did the wealthiest and most powerful individuals in the United States -- the investment bankers and corporate execs who host the $1,000-a-plate fundraisers, scoop up the Cabinet appointments and ambassadorships, and party down at White House galas -- end up having less power over the U.S. economy than unskilled day laborers in Newark, N.J., or Oakland, Calif.?</p><p>Maybe some “resident scholar” at the American Enterprise Institute, or another of the comfortable Washington think tanks devoted to keeping Scrooge McDuck’s bullion pool topped-up, can teach us how things got so upside-down. Because under normal circumstances, the national motto is neither “e pluribus unum” nor “In God We Trust.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/10/yes_it_is_wall_streets_fault/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/10/yes_it_is_wall_streets_fault/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>30</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How the rich created the Social Security &#8220;crisis&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/03/how_the_rich_created_the_social_security_crisis/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/03/how_the_rich_created_the_social_security_crisis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10160855</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Bush tax cuts coupled with a decades-long smear campaign are the real threat to the successful program]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now and then, George W. Bush told the unvarnished truth—most often in jest. Consider the GOP presidential nominee’s Oct. 20, 2000, speech at a high-society $800-a-plate fundraiser at New York’s Waldorf-Astoria. Resplendent in a black tailcoat, waistcoat and white bow tie, Bush greeted the swells with evident satisfaction.</p><p>"This is an impressive crowd,” he said. “The haves and the have-mores. Some people call you the elites; I call you my base."</p><p>Any questions?</p><p>Eight months later, President Bush delivered sweeping tax cuts to that patrician base. Given current hysteria over what a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-debt-fallout-how-social-security-went-cash-negative-earlier-than-expected/2011/10/27/gIQACm1QTM_story.html">recent Washington Post article</a> called “the runaway national debt,” it requires an act of historical memory to recall that the Bush administration rationalized reducing taxes on inherited wealth because paying down the debt too soon might roil financial markets.</p><p>Eleven years later, the Post warns in a ballyhooed article, reading like something out of Joseph Heller’s “Catch-22,” that Social Security—the 75-year-old bedrock of millions of Americans’ retirement hopes—has “passed a treacherous milestone,” gone “cash negative,” and “is sucking money out of the Treasury.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/11/03/how_the_rich_created_the_social_security_crisis/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/11/03/how_the_rich_created_the_social_security_crisis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>62</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The real reason OWS terrifies conservatives</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/27/the_real_reason_ows_terrifies_conservatives/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/27/the_real_reason_ows_terrifies_conservatives/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Occupy Wall Street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tea Party]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=10146732</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It\'s not the dirty hippies. It\'s because the protesters could find natural allies in the Tea Party]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In politics, it’s tempting to turn matters of temperament into matters of principle. Having disliked the hippie-dippy mellow aggression of the '60s, my first instinct was to dismiss the Occupy Wall Street movement as feckless left-wing tribalism—as unlikely to survive the winter’s first strong cold front as the black flies pestering my cows.</p><p>Conservative by nature, I dislike big cities, and tend to avoid crowds. Even in my 20s, I’d no more have joined the drug-addled migration to Woodstock than volunteered for sex-change surgery. We spent that week in Dublin, visiting Jonathan Swift’s tomb—the 18<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 11px;">th</span> century Irish satirist who took a dim view of human nature.</p><p>Everything else being equal, all it might have taken to put me off Occupy Wall Street was a widely circulated photo of an overweight Jerry Garcia lookalike wearing nothing but a loincloth, dancing barefoot and tootling on a flute.</p><p>That said, things are very far from being equal. Or even halfway fair.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/10/27/the_real_reason_ows_terrifies_conservatives/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/10/27/the_real_reason_ows_terrifies_conservatives/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>47</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

