I don't think so. I think it will be much, much more quick than that. Here's why...
Unless you think the job market is going to get a lot better, a lot sooner, the unemployment extension is going to end sooner rather than later. These poor folks have nothing left to lose. Think Wall St. and the Dow is going to keep going up? I don't. I think we're papering over huge structural flaws. When it finally blows up, what about those formally middle class people depending on what was left of their 401k? Pissed off somewhat? I'd sure think so. Of course, Obama and the Republics will have removed even more of the Social Security safety net in the name of fiscal austerity. What happens when Social Security has been crippled? Finally, what happens when oil prices keep going up along with other commodities and people can't afford to heat their homes?
Mix these things together and you have one flammable stew. I think we're talking about Populism writ large. If government no longer addresses people's basic needs, there WILL be changes. Our challenge will be to keep those changes as positive as possible.
I don't waste my time reading Booman any longer. It's really too bad because he used to be a lot more thoughtful. Now, it is various degrees of Clap Louder. It would really serve him and the other Obama fantasy bloggers to read some of the financial blogs. Naked Capitalism and The Automatic Earth are non political blogs and they simply excoriate Obama's handling of the financial mess. Booman will have none of it though. I don't have time for people in fantasyland.
But I'm afraid I have to agree with you. We've had a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress in the midst of the worst economy in years, and the Catfood Commission has Social Security in the crosshairs?!?! What is wrong with this picture? The Dept. of Justice has yet to prosecute anyone responsible for this mess except for the fall guy, Madoff.
If you really want to get depressed (but enlightened), start looking at the economic blogs. I especially like Jesse's Cafe Americain and Naked Capitalism.
I'm afraid little Timmy Geithner won't be leaving Treas. Secy. for the simple reason that his replacement would need to be confirmed by the Senate. Given how disfunctional that body is, virtually anyone Obama nominates will be opposed by the idiot party.
Well, 1st on the list, I expect not to be called an 'effen retard'. If it was just that, however, I could still let it go. Combine the overall lack of respect with an outright conservative agenda indicates to me that this administration just doesn't give a darn about Liberals. Let's count a few examples, shall we:
1.) Continuation of Bush bankster bailout policies & zero serious efforts to leash and collar them;
3.) Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, Afghan escalation, etc...
4.) Zero efforts to exert influence over the anti democratic Federal Reserve.
5.) The disappearance of the Justice Dept. Where are the prosecutions?
In summary, every one of those items I've mentioned is either the direct responsibility of the Executive, or subject to substantial pressure. Instead, we have a president who STILL does not understand that no one gives a bleep about bipartisanship except him. Certainly not the Republics. So perhaps we can all send David Axelrod a quarter and he'll have enough money to buy a clue.
It's been a year now, and I can't decide if Obama is incompetent or corrupt. He obviously is doing a piss poor job on HCR. Has he been bought off by big pharma and the other big players, or does he really have no idea about how to negotiate? A depressing choice. It's been a year, and I'm tired of hearing about 11th dimensional chess.
I beg to differ. You are automatically assuming that federal regulation will be superior to state. I understand your point...namely, insurers will gravitate towards the most lackadasical state regs out there.
It was a FEDERAL statute that outlawed each state's ability to prevent usury laws like South Dakota's. Specifically, in Marquette National Bank v. First of Omaha Service Corp., the US Supreme Court allowed banks to charge the highest interest rate in the bank's home state as opposed to the borrower. Then, the Depositors and Monetary Control Act of 1980 gave statutory authority to Marquette. Finally, Gramm, Leach, Bliley of 1999 enabled all federally chartered banks to charge the highest rate regardless of state laws. (source: http://www.bankrate.com/finance/credit-cards/credit-cards-trump-state-usury-law.aspx)
Therefore, while I won't credit Ezra with grounding into a double play, I won't give him a base hit either. It's more like a pop fly to end the inning.
Let's not forget the state regulators for AIG did their job in requiring sufficient capital and reserve requirements while the federal regulator, the Office of Thrift Supervision, was completely asleep on the job. My point is that if you have a federal agency that actively blocks appropriate regulation, (see SEC ineptitude vs. Eliott Spitzer's state AG office for example), then give me the state regulator every time.
A federal regulator would have to, you know, regulate. I think a public option would do more to keep insurers honest than any combination of state vs. fed regulators.
Thankfully, unlike GWB and the wingnuts, Obama is not getting a free pass. The unthinking love for 'Dear Leader' was, and is, nauseating whether it is Bush or Obama. Much of the recent criticism of Obama is very well deserved.
What sets LGF and most of the Liberal blogs apart is the willingness to criticize where criticism is due. I for one am thankful for Mr. Johnson in stepping back from the CRAZY wing, however.