It might happen enough to almost become a scientific law; how often Democrats are vindicated when the conservative smear machine manufactures scandals. Remember when Mitt ‘Values’ Romney and Fox News took one of President Obama’s speeches about how wealth is created in the USA, pretended words were play-dough and created a whole new speech out of their loathsome imaginations, “You Didn’t Build That”: How Fox News Crafted The GOP’s Convention Theme. The president said,
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.
For most Americans our life experience bears out these obvious observation. Business, wealth, education, personal success and day to day social interactions – are all in the context of the community – writ large in terms of governance. This was amid one of the major themes of the 2012 election cycle – whether people achieve success in the U.S. in a vacuum or in the context of progressive public policy. It was not just the ignorant readers over at sites like Breitbart or Free Republic, that pander to and encourage squirrel brain thinking, we had featured editorials in Rupert Murdoch’s WSJ. Conservative L. Gordon Crovitz decided to rewrite the history of the internet and computer technology. Which one has to concede takes a combination of brazenness and callowness in the internet age. There are so many people that were directly involved in those projects for the government, so many technology historians, so many vigilant tech geeks that any such revisionism was doomed. WSJ mangles history to argue government didn’t launch the Internet
Crovitz is right that Vinton Cerf, along with Bob Kahn, invented the TCP/IP protocol that is the foundation of the modern Internet. But he neglects to mention that Cerf’s early work on the protocol was funded by the US military through its DARPA program.
“Hyperlinks” are not the Internet, and Tim Berners-Lee didn’t invent them. Nor is the World Wide Web the Internet, although the Web has become such a popular Internet application that many people confuse the two. But more to the point, Berners-Lee was working at CERN, a research organization funded by European governments, when he invented the World Wide Web in the early 1990s.
So people do not build businesses on an isolated economic island and every day citizens like you and I contribute to innovation in science and technology via taxes and education. And more vindication via a venture capitalist writing at the LA Times, Venture capital didn’t build it: From railroads, highways to the Internet, it takes government to help drive innovation and economic growth
For more than three decades American venture capitalists have concentrated their activities and earned their returns in a very small number of industrial domains. In booms and in slumps, in bull markets and in bear markets, the information and communications technology and biomedical sectors together have consistently accounted for 80% of venture capital investment.Why has it been in the world of information technology and, secondarily, biomedicine that venture capitalists have been successful? In brief: Only in these sectors did the state invest at sufficient scale in scientific research and in its translation to working technology. In over 40 years as a working venture capitalist, I learned that my colleagues and I and the entrepreneurs whom we backed were all dancing on a platform constructed by the federal government.
[ ]…The scale of research and development funding was substantial. For 25 years through 1978, federal sources accounted for more than 50% of national R&D expenditures and exceeded the R&D expenditures of the other governments in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development combined. From microelectronics and semiconductor devices through computer hardware and software and on to the Internet, development of all of the components of digital information and communications technology reflected state policies for R&D and procurement.
There is a larger lesson here. Over some 250 years, economic growth has been driven by successive processes of trial and error and error and error: upstream exercises in research and invention, and downstream experiments in exploiting the new economic space opened by innovation. Each of these activities necessarily generates much waste along the way, such as dead-end research programs, useless inventions and failed commercial ventures. In between, the innovations that have repeatedly transformed the architecture of the market economy, from canals to the Internet, have required massive investments to construct networks whose value in use could not be imagined at the outset of deployment.
At every stage, the innovation economy depends on sources of funding decoupled from concern for economic return. As economists have long recognized, such funding will not be delivered by competitive markets. Only an active state in pursuit of politically legitimate missions — national development, national security, conquering disease — can play the required role.
This is a good recent example of the kind of yet to be determined market value he is talking about – Excessive Protein Synthesis Linked to Autistic-Like Behaviors, Neuroscientists Find. This is not a cure for autism or a drug to treat autism. Medical treatments and drugs have economic returns. It is fundamental research that opens the door for some kind of gene or drug therapy from which venture capitalists and private enterprise might profit from some day. Battleground America. One nation, under the gun and
3 Officers Wounded After Suspect Opens Fire At Gloucester Township Police Station. How could this happen. The NRA has assured everyone that crazed gunmen will not attack people who are armed.
This is a very good read on how the NRA used judicial activism to twist the meaning of the 2nd Amendment, So You Think You Know the Second Amendment?. These two articles are linked to in that post, Battleground America. One nation, under the gun and this pdf on Constitutional Originalism and the 2nd Amendment
Wacky Senator John McCain(R-AZ) has the political consistency of a roulette wheel,
Having succeeded in his smear campaign against UN Ambassador Susan Rice, John McCain has launched a second pre-emptive strike against another would-be Obama cabinet member, former Nebraska Republican Senator Chuck Hagel. But this time McCain’s petty payback against a GOP colleague who supported Barack Obama for President in 2008 may run into tougher sledding. After all, thousands of Hagel’s fellow veterans signed petition in his support last week, followed up by a Washington Post op-ed signed by a bipartisan group of former national security advisers including Brent Scowcroft. And as it turns out, back in 2006 John McCain endorsed as his ideal Middle East peace envoy another prominent Republican who opposed the Iraq surge, encouraged negotiations with Iran and riled some hardline supporters of Israel. That “smartest guy I know” was the man many neoconservatives call James “F**k the Jews” Baker.
I’m not a big Hagel fan. There are two dozen Democrats more than qualified to run the Pentagon. I suspect he was picked in the Obama tradition of reaching out to conservatives. Yet I understand the frustration of the White House. No matter who they pick for whatever post, the radical Right smear merchants gear for another round of character assassination.
And a brief as possible update on the austerity bomb, Cliff movement? Probably not. Congress is headed back to D.C. After the Boehner (R-OH) fiasco don’t expect much. There is no reason for Democrats to cave – cross fingers and hope the White House sees that in terms of long range economic health of the country and the Obama legacy. Robert Reich is correct, Why Republicans Don’t Care What the Nation Thinks About Moral Consequences and the Fiscal Cliff
“Even if Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell cooperates by not mounting a filibuster and allows the Senate to pass a bill extending the Bush tax cuts to the first $250,000 of everyone’s income, Boehner may not bring it to the House floor.
On a Thursday conference call with House Republicans he assured conservatives he was “not interested” in allowing such a vote if most House Republicans would reject the bill, according to a source on the call.
Democrats are confident that even if the nation technically goes over the cliff January 1, Boehner will bring such a bill to the floor soon after January 3 — once House Republicans have re-elected him Speaker – and it will get passed.
But this assumes Boehner and the GOP will be any more swayed by public opinion than they are now.
Public opinion is already running strongly in favor of President Obama and the Democrats, and against the GOP. In the latest CNN/ORC poll, 48 percent say they’ll blame Republicans if no deal is reached while 37 percent blame Obama. Confidence in congressional Republicans is hovering at about 30 percent; Obama is enjoying the confidence of 46 percent. And over half of all Americans think the GOP is too extreme.
Yet Republicans haven’t budged. The fact is, they may not care a hoot about the opinions of most Americans.
That’s because the national party is in disarray. Boehner isn’t worried about a challenge to his leadership; no challenger has emerged. The real issue is neither he nor anyone else is in charge of the GOP. Romney’s loss, along with the erosion of their majority in the House and Democratic gains in the Senate, has left a vacuum at the top.
House Republicans don’t run nationally. They run only in their own districts — which, because of gerrymandering, are growing even more purely Republican.”
Not news, everyone knows that the demented most malevolent elements of conservatism have taken over the Republican Partay. Between gerrymandering and rigging elections they think they can stay in power. It will be interesting to see how voters respond to a party that only marches to the beat of the Ted Nugents and Rush Limbaughs in 2014.