I've seen that before and while I believe her points are worthy of further clarification and discussion, the author's 'brief explication' amounts to partisan speculation and general negativity. No attempt to intelligently deconstruct or argue, just simple rhetoric for like-minded readers.
I agree with your assessment but still would argue that she doesn't come off as a champion of the free market.
Agreed. I simply feel there is nearly always a lot more to a person's ideology than is typically reported. It gets so old seeing the same set of stock liberal or conservative labels slapped on a person becuse of political affiliation. So much intellectual laziness on all sides.
But you've demonstrated she doesn't suffer from the knee-jerk negativity that Gore, Clinton, Kerry, etc. did.
She's also quite intelligent and does not appear to be insane, so she has that going for her as well.
Expect anything less from Breitbart? That would be like going to Daily Kos and expecting to find praise for "GOP politician X".
Jon Stewart pointedly notes the flaw in the Democrats' failed 'chickenshit gambit' http://theweek.com/article/index/27...aw-in-the-democrats-failed-chickenshit-gambit
Nothing changes and now political news will be driven toward the presidential election. Huge waste of time, I didn't even bother to vote.
I could care less about the federal level. The money will drive legislation. The only place a vote counts for change is at the local level.
I do agree that fixing the huge issues is going to have to start first at the local and state levels.
