A NYTimes Editorial provides an appealing argument that a number of recent court rulings deregulating political campaigning by outside groups is pushing the US deeper into „pay-to-play politics“. And provides some interesting numbers on the game:

[…]

In a NYTimes Opinion, Frank Rich argues that the Tea Party and G.O.P agendas are in reality miles apart. He depicts the former as honest, if maybe not too smart folks with good intentions, and the latter as basically representing big money and corporations. And they are using the Tea Party to advance their own goals:

[…]

Ein wiederkehrendes Thema von mir, meiner Meinung nach von Ökonomen vernachlässigt, die über optimale Regulierung von Märkten nachdenken, aber die Rückwirkung der Märkte (bzw. ihrer großen Akteure) auf die Politik übersehen: Der Einfluss von Geld in demokratischen Wahlen.

Das Thema ist in den USA entweder größer als hier, oder wird dort offener diskutiert. Jedenfalls berichtet die NYTimes in einem spannenden Artikel, dass sich gerade den Republikanern nahestehende Gruppen massiv in den Wahlkampf einschalten. Das Tollste dabei ist, dass diese als unabhängige Organisationen sehr viel mehr Freiheit haben als die Parteien selbst. Ihr Schwerpunkt liegt oft auf Angriffskampagnen gegen die Kandidaten der Demokraten und, es wird immer besser, die Spender können anonym bleiben (und tun das in der Regel auch).

Macht schon Sinn, zu vermuten, dass ein Unternehmen kein Geld auf den Tisch legt ohne einen entsprechenden Vorteil dafür zu bekommen? Die Republikaner sehen das verständlicherweise anders:

[…]

Stephen Colbert explores in his usual wonderfully entertaining and at the same time thought-provoking manner the topic of taxing the rich, subject of some recent posts of mine. I also like that Greg Mankiw blogged about it as well — he seems to be a good sportsman . Here is the video:

[…]

Looking from the outside, I have been shaking my head in bewilderment at the Tea Party’s surge of popularity with mostly absurd ideas and world-views. I’m really relieved to read in the NYTimes that a pretty much unknow (but apparently smart and moderate) Delaware democratic candidate for Senate is leading by about 15 points in the polls against a tea party-backed republican who surprisingly won in the primaries against a well-established moderate republican. And he’s even playing it nice:

[…]

After giving quite some space to Greg Mankiw recently, I’d like to share an article by NYTimes Op-Ed columnist (and economist) Paul Krugman with you. He can be considered a member of the opposing (i.e. liberal, democrats-leaning) camp to Mankiw. In the column, he argues convincingly (and surprisingly) that the big rise in government spending that failed to really boost the US economy did so because it never really happened:

[…]

As a long-time fan of Stephen Colbert, I’d like to point you to a video of him „testifying“ in Congress on the issue of immigration. Here’s my favorite line in it:

Apparently, even the Invisible Hand doesn’t want to pick beans. — Stephen Colbert, Opening statement during a hearing of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship and Border Security (from C-SPAN 9/24/10 coverage)

Der gröbste Prüfungsstress ist vorbei, und ich vergnüge mich mit meinen virtuellen Zeitungsstapeln. Gut, dass die nicht verstauben können …

Ein NYTimes Op-Ed vom März beschäftigt sich mit Antibiotika-resistenten Bakterienstämmen. Zum einen ist das mal wieder eine Gesundheitsbedrohung, die all die gehypten Erreger in den Schatten stellt — z.B. sterben anscheinend jährlich 18.000 Amerikaner an MRSA, mehr als an AIDS.

Zur Entstehung des Problems tragen Ärzte bei, die zu leichtfertig Antibiotika verschreiben. Aber vor allem die Massentierhaltung:

A study by the Union of Concerned Scientists found that in the United States, 70 percent of antibiotics are used to feed healthy livestock, with 14 percent more used to treat sick livestock. Only about 16 percent are used to treat humans and their pets, the study found.

Die resistenten Erreger an Tieren stehen in regem Gentausch mit für Menschen gefährlichen Mikroben. Es wäre natürlich möglich, mindestens der präventiven Verwendung von Antibiotika in der Tierhaltung politisch einen Riegel vorzuschieben. Ein entsprechender Vorstoß in Amerika ist aber an den Lobbyisten gescheitert, und nicht mal die Obama-Regierung traut sich ran.

Zum Abschluss kann ich mir ein weiteres Zitat nicht verkneifen, weil es so schön weltuntergangsmäßig klingt:

[…]

A NYTimes article about New York’s Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg supporting candidates of both parties across the country is worthy reading for the insights into two opposing political currents that are facing off right now. And that’s not the two parties — it’s a reconciliatory, bipartisan note versus a radical, partisan idea, incorporated most strongly by the Tea Party movement. And I think it’s outcome (partly to be decided already in the upcoming primaries and elections) will be quite influential for the American political climate of the next decade or so. But apart from recommending that read, what I wanted to share here is a quote from Bloomberg, depicting his (and assumedly many of his wealthy Wall Street friends‘) judgement of Obama’s financial politics:

[…]

In the debates about the association between Islam and terror, moderate Muslims are frequently asked to take a stance against the militant extremists sharing their faith. NYTimes Op-Ed contributor Nicholas D. Kristof has taken this message home, by doing just that — apologizing for the freakish stuff directed at Muslims by his fellow American Christians:

Many Americans have suggested that more moderate Muslims should stand up to extremists, speak out for tolerance, and apologize for sins committed by their brethren.

That’s reasonable advice, and as a moderate myself, I’m going to take it. (Throat clearing.) I hereby apologize to Muslims for the wave of bigotry and simple nuttiness that has lately been directed at you. The venom on the airwaves, equating Muslims with terrorists, should embarrass us more than you. Muslims are one of the last minorities in the United States that it is still possible to demean openly, and I apologize for the slurs.

The article goes on with interesting examples of how hypocritical these demands towards Muslims can be. Which doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be made, but — in good Christian practice — you shouldn’t fail to begin with yourself …