Our President gives our Secretary of Defense the power to simply dissolve collective bargaining agreements with over 750,000 defense workers because, get this, unionized workers present a threat to national security. A threat to the security of pampered, overfed Chief Executives who've never worked a real job, maybe! What do our President's unionized votaries think about this? That he must be referring to someone-else-and-not-them? Or do they merely care that he gets away with saying stuff they wish they could get away with saying? Bunch of big babies, all of them.
Ho hum, Dean Baker catches our "liberal" media dispensing a whole lot of scare numbers when discussing Democratic candidates' plans. 30 TRILLYUNZ!!!! 40 TRILLYUNZ!!!! 50 TRILLYUNZ!!!! They're awfully big, aren't they? But not necessarily when you consider a) our "liberal" media typically gives 10-year figures and almost as typically never says they're 10-year figures and b) our CBO puts the size of the economy over the next 10 years at $280 trillion. Also, too, you may recall that Ms. Warren's plan for funding Medicare-for-All would replace all spending by large employers on private health insurance, meaning it would cost more in the neighborhood of zero trillions of dollars.
From the "Because We Deserve Some Good News, Dadgummit!" file: Greyhound announces that it won't let Border Patrol agents conduct fishing expeditions on their buses unless they have a warrant. That is literally all we asked for! I do wonder why getting this news from Greyhound was like pulling teeth, though -- could it be they were actually embarrassed about contending that the law makes them let Border Patrol agents on board under pretty much any circumstances even though you don't need to be a Constitutional scholar to see that's utter horsedoodle? But for some folks, embarrassment shows evolution, and I do like to think the best of people.
Media executives gloat over how much money Michael Bloomberg is spending on ads on their stations. And they wonder why we hate them! All they care about is money! None of them care that pitting billionaire against billionaire recalls that point in the Roman Republic's history when you had to be a general to run for Consul, because none of them would know a history book if someone hit them over the head with it. (As an aside, I'm glad Les Moonves fell from grace because he stuck his prick where it wasn't welcome, but I'd have been even happier if he fell from grace simply because he was a prick.)
Finally, I won't tabulate every objection I have to Jonathan Chait's latest piece of Bernie-slam, since they number approximately one per point made, but Jesus Mary and Joseph does Sen. Sanders really have "deeply unpopular policy positions"? Like Medicare-for-All, which routinely gets majority or supermajority support in polling? How does majority or supermajority support equal "deeply unpopular"? Mr. Sanders's policy prescriptions might be "deeply unpopular" with pampered, overfed pundits, and maybe those are the only folks Mr. Chait ever talks to -- I mean, if he'd workshopped that appalling dog catcher metaphor before an audience who didn't care about pleasing him, he might not have inflicted it on his readers.