Today in Politics

Greetings,

After a week of economics classes I decided to write on the politics of the day for a change. The first story is that John McCain gambled and decided putting an attractive woman with a shallow resume on the ticket is the key to win this election. His choice of Alaska governor Sarah Palin makes very little sense because it makes him unable to attack Obama on experience(which has so far been his only effective campaign weapon) and she does not have a competitive state to help McCain.

On the plus side for Palin, she is very attractive and will be good contrast to the older Biden when the debate occurs. She also seems to be ideologically consistent, so she will excite what remains of the Republican base. Compare the two candidates and think of which one will come across better on TV. One looks like Dr. Melphi from the Sopranos, the other looks like a game show host. On serious matters, this election has two inverted campaigns, with one party having a neophyte presidential nominee and a very experienced VP candidate (Obama/Biden) while Palin's addition makes McCain's campaign an inverse. Let the real campaign begin.

Thoughts on the state of the economy

The economic brilliance of the Bush administration is finally shining upon the land. We have a half a trillion dollar deficit, inflation at twenty year highs, and money flowing out of the country. This comes as wages have been stagnant for decades and people can hardly afford basic goods. Just in the last month the charge for electricity rose 20%. How can any country absorb such inflation with wages being so paltry?

I have come out of my box and seen my shadow, six more weeks of economics blogging

Dear Mr. Economics,

I'm going to bank on your sincere invitation to leave a comment even if your guests happened to dislike some of your posts.

For one thing, I really find the professor's (what's his name?) attitude disgusting! But the way it was handled is not honorable either. What is the intention for exposing him?

I mean he's personal opinion should have been shared ('coz clearly he has this strong need to share it with a "friend") in a private e-mail... or just a personal conversation between a "trusted' friend or a therapist.

I believe he was not as prudent to use the university's property to convey some really personal/delicate/sensitive matters...

My question is why do we need to air it- broadcast his folly...
Now, we appoint ourselves to "police' and micromanage the thoughts of people... personal thoughts of people...

Is the intention for airing to protect young women (young co-eds) from people like him? What was his crime exactly? Was it watching these ladies dress and act provocatively (perhaps that's not the intention of those women -- but really?!? what were they thinking dressing immodestly?) Was it because he like to watch porn?

I repeat I find the professor's attitude repulsive and disgusting but at the same time I find the women equally repulsive and disgusting for the way they conduct themselves.

Today you can NOT even tell these girls to dress appropriately without being called a prude or be charged with being a sexist.

The prof. has some personal issues and should either see a priest, and minister or a therapist.

Someone (but who?) should be educating the women once again how to behave like a lady but the men should treat a lady like a lady even if she does NOT act like a lady!

In other words, there is no excuse for any gentlemen to treat a women with disrespect based SOLELY on her exterior demeanor! But on the same token the women should be responsible and take accountability on the way they handle themselves in order to be respected or treated with respect!

This goes back to the disastrous effects of FEMINISM...

Feminism fosters barbarity and whimpiness/laziness in men it never did inspire chivalry in them and that is the bottom line... sorry if I digressed...

Your last sentence on this particular entry was -- and I quote "enjoy it here..." - well, some folks may enjoy it... and find it amusing; I find it sad - nonetheless, it did provoke me to write my reflection and share them with you and your guests...

Thanks,

That comment over my rebroadcast of the earlier professor story stirred up some strong opinions. In my rebuttal I must point out three things which make the story newsworthy: 1)the professor was having loud noises come out of his computer while a student was nearby, 2) regardless of how women dress, the guy is paid to teach Ricardian Equivalence and Pareto Efficiency, not fantasize about shopping at Goodwill, and 3) this story has generated a ton of press for this school.

On the first point, it shows clearly a lack of judgement and no desire to keep his job. If you were in the private sector and pulled the same thing you would be on your way out the door faster than you can say "sexual harassment."

On the second point, his paycheck is based on his ability to teach a class while on the school's(taxpayers') dime. Whatever he wants to do in his personal life is his own business, but when public email is used to broadcast the risque details of one's fantasy's, that becomes everyone's business because of the negative publicity that such things becoming public bring. As far as the whole question of whether society causes such behavior through the sexualization of women's clothing, I would argue that the premise presented is that women are to blame for the prof's lecherous thoughts. If so, then how does one rectify the situation. Realistically nothign can be done to change the popular culture which fosters such clothing, so the only recourse is through the legal process.

Finally, this story has gone global, so to speak. I saw it on such sites as Fark.com, which means that millions of people have seen it. That alone is reason to post it, since nothing too much ever seems to get in the news about my school.