Is it time for Congress to actively intervene to promote a public good? Perhaps if the automakers can’t cooperate effectively…

If you say Eastern Europe is a bastion of social conservatism I have to say you are incorrect… In Europe a lot of people are secular and that also counts for Eastern and Central Europe: they had the horros of WOII and the not religious policies of the USSR.

And for the rise of the far right in Europe? Jorg Haider, who recently lost his life in a car accident, had a homosexual relationship. As for Philip De Winter in Belgium and his party ‘Vlaams Belang’: it lost more and more seats in the parliaments (during the citycounsil-elections in ‘06 and later on in ‘07 in the federal elections) and has a declining support in the national polls. And the Front National of Jean-Marie Le Pen in France even has no seats in the parliaments what so ever!

And if you consider gaymarriage: you are right if you say that only 4 European countries allow it, but there are only 6 worldwide! You also forget to say that in most EU-memberstates that don’t allow GM they have civilunions or registered partnerships that give gays in Europe more rights than in the most states of the US. Not less than 19 American states have absolutly no anti-discrimination laws for sexual orientation, and 9 more only have protection for state employment! This is absolutly unthinkable (even illegal) in the European Union!

And for immigration I have to say you are right if you say that the EU looks more and more on a Fortress… but that’s only perception: we always had bordercontrole but the last years it became more effective because it was made supra-national (meaning: it went for a large part to the European Union, though national memberstates have still a say in it).
I don’t like Sarkozy that much, he maybe isn’t interracial but he also is a son of an immigrant. In a lot of national governements there are interracial (a lot of them aren’t even interracial) ministers (France, Spain, The Netherlands, Belgium,…) it just isn’t a big issue here.
And what do you say about the fact that Obama would have been elected with an enermous landslide in Europe?
And don’t be mistaken: we didn’t need marshes to Capitol Hill to give ‘those’ people rights.

Foreign Policy under the neo-cons? Radical systemic change?
I found your post very intresting, but the part on foreign policy is just ridicule!

So I’m incredibly disappointed in Obama for rehashing this favorite excuse of protectionists. Plus his support of the Farm Bill, one of the most horrendous pieces of legislation in recent years, and his stance on Midwestern ethanol (a sinkhole for federal funding if there ever was one) are appalling. He should know better.

If McCain wants my sympathy (if not my vote, which he won’t have courtesy of Sarah Palin), he should hammer Obama on these points: [1] Free trade, [2] Farm Bill, and [3] Energy policy.

P.S. What do you guys think about her non-answer to Couric’s question about what she reads? I think — for the purposes of “her audience” — that it was a smart move. She says WSJ, and Joe Appalachia may think “Isn’t that the newspaper of all those Wall Street boys who have screwed my 401k?” She says NYT, and her friends from Alaska will wonder if she’s not an East Coaster in disguise. She says National Review and most of the country will say “What’s that?” She names a local Alaska newspaper and intelligent people will say “That’s her WORLDview source?” Etc. etc. etc.

I think we can all agree that the arguments initially tendered for the Iraq war were full of falsehoods and misrepresentations. That doesn’t necessarily imply that there weren’t good grounds to go to war, however. While I certainly wouldn’t commit to the position that it was a good decision, I can see a not unreasonable argument being made in its favor.

My guess is that most people don’t know what the smart policy is in most settings – and who can blame them? Many of the questions we face, as a society, are extremely complicated ones, and a detailed look at them is time-consuming and often fruitless, especially if the person looking doesn’t have the sort of expertise that is required to parse large amounts of unorganized information and theories. In fact, the way we get around this is to elect politicians to analyze this information for us, and proceed accordingly. In other words, we, the principals, select agents to act on our behalf.

So how do we go about choosing agents? My sense is that many people look for someone who, they believe, “understands” them, and shares their values. And this is, to some extent, a question of character and values, particularly as reveled through track record. It’s also probably driven by unconscious elements as well.