Texas Republicans owe more to the American people for the damages they've caused and the expenses we've incurred due to their influence, control and decisions that this would only be acceptable if a Dallas Fed chair never be permitted to have the position.

At a minimum, there should be the military equivalent of an Admiral or General resigning regardless of blame on a screw up, forcing immediate resignation. If a prosecutor convicts an innocent person and that conviction is later overturned, then the prosecution if still in office must immediately resign. Whether there was prosecutorial misconduct then becomes a separate issue. it should be made an ABA Canon of prosecutorial ethics.

So why isn't he talking about this now?

This is what happens when the Southern Strategy metastasizes. Kevin Phillips realized fifteen to twenty years ago diagnosed that the Republican Party had cancer. He realized that he helped the every white and pasty party sit out in the sun without sunscreen or hats and put it on a diet of fried red, and processed, meats, no vegetables and lots and lots of alcohol. But when he tried to get the Republican Party to act rationally and deal with facts, he was pushed aside to write angry books about the Bush Family and Wall Street. The Republican Party let the crazies take it over. Whatever they had been using to keep their cancer in check (rather than cure it, they sought to use it -- sorta like someone who thinks his or her cancer is keeping them thin so it is a benefit) - lost its power. I for one hope they die. We can use some rational rich people who will understand that Clinton Years tax rates (or a bit higher) are the cost of doing business in a well functioning society.

The Nobelists fiddle while U. Chicago burns, . . .

My question is whether the powers that be at Harvard will call him out on the carpet for ship shod work touching on plagiarism. Summers took Cornell West to task for what he deemed less than top notch work. Why shouldn't Mankiw get the same treatment? He has shown himself to be a hack for the right wingers.

Prof. Yellen is the person to pick. Summers has too much baggage: pro de-reulation of financial industry, on the financial industry's payroll, the whole stupid comment about women and science spots in academia which was really poor articulation while trying to be cutesy controversial on a panel, losing the debate about stronger fiscal stimulus during Obama 1, snide public political bickering with Stiglitz and Krugman who had no aspirations for political appointments, quitting then trying to rehabilitate himself (understandable but poor form the way he carried himself). From my vantage point, it seems that Summers has been considered such a great talent from early on and a person that much was expected from. It also seems to me that Summers would tell you the same but he never fulfilled that promise, i.e. you never hear him being listed as a prime candidate for the Noble Prize or hear about a "Summers Rule." I think he knew he'd never fulfill that early promise so switched his attentions to being a policy player and political infighter. This all seems to be about his ego and not primarily getting the job done right. I think that Prof. Yellen is mostly concerned with getting it right and less, much less, about stroking her ego. It's time to let the quiet competent person lead and let the bombastic one sit on the sidelines and contribute with public commentary.

Coates makes one error: Zimmerman is not "innocent," he is "not guilty." I think all these Zimmerman defenders filling the rightwing apologia air waves should be forced to say, "OJ was innocent." Make no mistake, the NRA and the Florida legislature set the stage for this. Whether it was Zimmerman or someone else, it was bound to happen.

Ferguson is a hack simply trading on his accent. He has no advantage in UK, and would actually have to defend himself, but here he impresses the hell out of lazy television news producers and conservatives to are lulled into respecting him by his accent. He's a hack.

Why are you not surprised that Mankiw is a hack?

Krugman has labored mightily trying to expose the holes and lack of critical reassessment based on facts about the Austerians and the Chicago School. There needs to be more straight up, in your face smack down and public challenges thrown at them. I think anyone of them could have made a joke, "to paraphrase Shakespeare, the first step to reconstructing macroeconomics is to kill all the Freshwater tenured professors . . ." That would catch the academy's attention . . . (and get a large amount of laughs).

I once went to each of my law school professors and asked, "what does it mean to 'think like a lawyer?'" I got a different answer from each of them.

It's a debt incurred by the US Government, it has to be paid pursuant to the 14th Amendment; employers can't stiff their employees of their wages. Or make up bs reasons to withhold pay from them.

But use of the word "tragic" in this instance implies some sort of heroic context for Bork. But his judicial philosophy, like Scalia, is one of convenience. It was constructed to impress and please their political masters. They weren't fighting against an unjust system, or to make that system more just; they were fighting to make the system more protective for narrow political interests. He wasn't "tragic," he was a jerk.

This is the way Soros made his billions and billions

I'll never forget that I once commented that the only thing that could explain Sullivan's support of the Bush Administration was that he must have been in love with someone inside. I was heaped with vitriol as a homophobe, etc etc etc. I'm still trying to understand how he could have supported the Bush Administration and even he has come to realize that he was wrong about them.

He's blaming it on Europe. He thinks he's been had by a bunch of pseudo-communists posing as socialists.

Mankiw is a now, and has been since at least 2003, a political hack. Throw him on the heap with Greenspan.

These opt out states do not amount to anywhere near a majority of votes in Congress or the electoral college. So why don't the other States just gang up and say, join or we will vote to move federal installations out of your States. Good bye Huntsville, good bye Houston, good bye Florida for NASA. It'll be more stimulus to rebuild these places elsewhere to boot. Move military bases. Any Federal agency that plays a role in licensing and permitting major businesses in these States, move those offices a thousand miles away to jack up costs to securing such permits and licenses. The other States don't have to suffer these fools. And, quite frankly, the Texas Republicans owe all the other States a boat load of money for the costs of the BushCo Administration.

It's time to re-write the farm support laws, so that corporate farming gets off the public dole, eco-friendly farming is encouraged, but make it a whole lot less costly -- and start taxing the hell out of corn syrup as an ingredient.

And why isn't this read to the German bankers to be asked, "the shoe is on the other foot, what are you going to do?"

The next time either of these gentlemen goes to a doctor, said physician should affix a leech to their testicles. Why? None of them want science to intrude on their lives. So give them what they want.

Mitt doesn't get it: God stunted his momentum. Sandy was an act of God. Deal with it Republicans.

Romney ran his campaign like someone selling securities in a private placement (which was his expertise, so he did it well). He just acted as if his lawyers had made all the disclosures about how you can lose all your money and that this whole venture is really speculative, while at the same time telling everyone that this was a sure thing. The real facts, his tax returns and actual policy details, were withheld from scrutiny; he treated the public in the same way. One group he sold in order to get money to run his campaign, they other he sold to for their votes. It never mattered what he said: the assumed fine print was that this is speculative, you can lose all your money and I'm going to do whatever I want, and think I need to do, in order to win. Oh, and by the way, at the end of the day, I will take my fees. Romney had no moral or ethical policy compass to navigate himself through the campaign, so that the public could clearly know what he stood for and what he intended to do when he took office. The public could smell a rat, especially those who are used to an unfair playing field. The rightwing never saw it coming, because they never thought they could lose their money. This was an investment that was going to pay. Now there is no bailout or an army of lawyers to tie up the parties until some capital can be returned to them through settlement. That is, unless Obama caves on this "grand bargain" we keep hearing about.

Because Harvard won't throw the Feldsteins and Mankiws out on their ears, and those who introduce them as speakers at conferences won't refer to them as political hacks and journals won't return their papers, envelopes unopened, and stamped, "who cares what you think."