Josh Barro: Niall Ferguson is an idiot; Michelle Nunn edition...

Brad Delong sends us to Josh Barro who notes that Niall Ferguson does massive damage to our political debate with his nonsense and therefore deserves scorn.

Josh Barro: Niall Ferguson Uses Twitter Science To Prove He Is Better Than Everyone:

In the process of criticizing me, Ferguson writes: "If you are defending someone against a charge of incivility…" I'm going to stop him right there. I'm not defending anybody against a charge of incivility…. The reason Ferguson wants to talk about civility is that he can't talk about not being full of crap. Ferguson… write[s] popular articles that contain misleading and false claims… causes readers to come away with a worse understanding of the economy than they entered with. He is changing the world for the worse. My contention is not that we haven't been uncivil to Ferguson. We definitely have. My contention is that he deserves it.

I argue the same about Michelle Nunn. Who is proving to be either clueless about the economy or willing to lie in order to gain power.   Neither are what we need right now from our political class.

The First Rule of of Running for US Senate--You do not side with the 1%. 

Michelle Nunn, radical ideologue for the 1%, defender of future world. 

 In which Brad Delong shows that Michelle Nunn is clueless on the deficits... 

Managed democracy and the demobilization of the working class

When it comes to the economy Michelle Nunn has no clue what she is talking about (see Dean Baker, and Brad Delong for more)

Eric Loomis of Lawyers Guns and Money recently noted the nonsense coming out of the Nunn campaign:

I understand that Michelle Nunn faces an uphill battle to win the Georgia Senate seat. But I’m absolutely not convinced that parroting right-wing lines about the national debt and the need to cut spending is going to help a Democrat win office anywhere. I know that she might have to make some compromises on the issues that matter to a conservative Georgia electorate–I wouldn’t expect her to take a strong statement on guns. I’d expect her to be pretty hawkish on foreign policy (which I expect anyway because of her father). I wouldn’t expect her to be a national leader of gay marriage (although I would expect at least neutrality). I wouldn’t even really resent her for being an ally of dirty energy. But how does the national debt play with the voters of Georgia? I’m skeptical it really matters to anyone but the 1% who are looking to concentrate resources in their pockets. Unfortunately, Democratic politicians tilting right seem to equate that with also supporting the extremely rich. This is DLC-style posturing at its worst. Makes the big funders happy though.

Sheldon Wolin in his excellent bookDemocracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism tapped in to the reasoning behind the DLC 1% posturing of the Nunn campaign; the goal is managed Democracy:

A major tactic on the way to managed democracy was to encourage what might be called "discouraged democracy." A prime example was the device of requiring extraordinary majorities that became a staple of antitax and -spending forces beginning in the latter part of the twentieth century. Not only did the device increase the power of highly organized minorities, but it served to discourage a majority from using its power to promote social programs intended to meet basic needs and improve the lot of poorer citizens.  Voter apathy is importantly a consequence of low expectations that their government will respond to their needs. Why bother? Perhaps because inequalities are not confined to differences of wealth, status, life prospects, and conditions of existence; such inequalities translate into inequalities of power.  Arguments about taxation are, at bottom, arguments about the distribution of power.

 While low voter turnout might seems a reflection of low civic morale and a dangerous symptom of democratic decline, republicanism would view it in a positive light.  A certain amount of nonvoting is especially welcome if it deters the most desperate, those who are likely to be swayed by "populist" demagoguery.  When Republicans and conservative Democrats work methodically to reduce or eliminate social programs, the result is tantamount to a deliberate strategy of encouraging political apathy among the poor and needy....

During the 1990's politicians of both parties educated the populace in anti government ideas. Democrats and Republicans alike then raced to see who could propose the most drastic cutbacks in social welfare programs.  Government that had prided itself on serving the Many was dismantled in favor of "a leaner government." Predictably this counterrevolution was made easier during the 1980's and 1990's by a spate of ideologically inspired, wildly exaggerated, and racially divisive attacks upon "welfare cheats" and "Cadillac welfare queens."

The successful counterrevolution was doubly significant.  Whatever the merits of corporate capitalism, it is not a system whose benefits are equally distributed.  It is instead a system that, as a matter of course, produces striking inequalities.  The results are evident in the greater concentration and extremes of wealth, a deeper divide between classes, in terms of health care and of educational and cultural opportunities than at any time in recent history.  The wide disparities serve to expose the counterrevolutionary strategy that motivates the champions of managed democracy.

Counterrevolution means, not a return to the past--the powers fostering it are too dynamic--but a closing off of a demotic direction and the nudging of society toward a different direction where inequalities will be taken for granted, rationalized, perhaps celebrated....

.... The aim of the counterrevolutionary strategy is the permanent institutionalization of a counterdemocratic state.

 In the middle of an economic crisis one might think the Democrats would work to stick a pro-gun populist on the campaign trail in the US Senate race; we instead have a "name" that is AWOL from the campaign trail aside from random op-eds and interviews where she pushes talking points of the 1%.

The Democratic Party insiders are selling a "grand bargain" type to the base of the party as a "done deal".  The 1% has the Democratic primary on lock-down.  Its doing two things--telling working class Republican voters "we think you are rubes who couldn't understand economics if we tried".  Believe me, they may not know a lot of macroeconomics but Red voters in Georgia will see through Nunn for the lies she's touting on the campaign trail (either Nunn is a liar or clueless; if she's just clueless lets get her some better advisers. If she isn't  clueless and is just telling people what she thinks they want to hear to get elected she is therefore a liar.)

Its also continuing a pattern of the Democratic Party selling out the working class of Georgia, so they can get through to the General election a politician that will reinforce the worst cliches about an out of touch Democratic Party elite who don't understand working people--and those red voters will be absolutely correct.

That's why I started a Draft Jason Carter for US Senate petition campaign.  The only thing that will beat Nunn is a name who has the political apparatus able to beat her in the primary.  Working people don't have the time, energy, or money to help one of the other two  no name candidates win the primary--its just not going to happen in this short amount of time.   But can get people to sign a petition in opposition to Nunn's neoliberalism.

We need demotic action; we need Jason Carter to run for US Senate.  Please sign and share.

Michelle Nunn, Unleashing the 1% spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship across Georgia

So earlier this morning I pointed you over to economist Brad Delong beating up on Michelle Nunn's economic positions (In which Brad Delong shows that Michelle Nunn is clueless on the deficits..). 

Now Dean Baker over at the Center for Economic and Policy Reserach has chimed in to beat up on Michelle Nunn's economic positions as well:

The absurdities pushed by Ferguson and like-minded people in positions of power, in direct defiance of massive evidence to the contrary, have ruined millions of lives and cost the world more than $10 trillion in lost outputsince the crisis began. 

First, contrary to what Ferguson claims, the downturn is not primarily a “financial crisis.” The story of the downturn is a simple story of a collapsed housing bubble. The $8 trillion housing bubble was driving demand in the U.S. economy in the last decade until it collapsed in 2007. When the bubble burst we lost more than 4 percentage points of GDP worth of demand due to a plunge in residential construction. We lost roughly the same amount of demand due to a falloff in consumption associated with the disappearance of $8 trillion in housing wealth. (FWIW, none of this was a surprise to folks who follow the economy with their eyes open. I warned of this disaster beginning in 2002, see also here and here.) 

The collapse of the bubble created a hole in annual demand equal to 8 percent of GDP, which would be $1.3 trillion in today’s economy. The central problem facing the U.S., the euro zone, and the U.K. was finding ways to fill this hole. Government stimulus is the most obvious answer. This is where the Ferguson types first began to obstruct efforts to boost the economy. They warned that stimulus would not be an effective way to boost growth and create jobs. We also heard dire tale of exploding interest rates and runaway inflation. 

In fact, the stimulus in the United States went pretty much according to the textbook. It was far too small and too short to get the economy back to full employment (again, this was predictable at the time, see here and here), but it did create around 2-3 million jobs. The problem was that that the economy needed 10-12 million jobs. 

This is all about as simple as it gets. At least in the U.S. case there is very little room for any financial crisis type explanations. Investment as a share of GDP is almost at its pre-crisis level. This is quite impressive given the huge amounts of excess capacity that persist in many sectors. Is there some story where we would expect to see much more investment if our financial system had not gone through a crisis? 

The same holds with consumption. Contrary to conventional wisdom, consumption is quite high relative to disposable income. People are spending a smaller share of their income than at the peak of the bubble, but that should not be surprising since they lost $8 trillion in housing wealth. It is not the financial system or pessimism about the economy that is holding back consumption, it is loss of wealth. 

If we can’t reasonably expect much more out of investment or consumption than what we are now seeing, then that just leaves the government and net exports. This is not really a debatable point; it is a matter of accounting identities. That means we have to rely on the government sector to boost the economy. (I am a big proponent of a lower-valued dollar to boost net exports, but this is more of a longer term strategy since our trading partners will take time to adjust.) 

In the years since the original stimulus the Ferguson types have repeatedly raised absurd fears about the U.S. and other countries hitting debt limits and risking soaring interest rates and hyper-inflation. The result of people pushing this line is that efforts to boost the economy have been stunted. This is why the United States remains close to 9 million jobs below its trend path. Peripheral countries in the euro zone, such as Spain and Greece, have been even harder hit with unemployment rates hovering near 25 percent. 

In addition to all the people who are unemployed or underemployed, the weakness of the labor market has made it impossible for most workers to be able to achieve real wage gains. As a result the benefits of the growth we have seen in the United States and other wealthy countries have gone overwhelmingly to the richest 1 percent of the population.
This story is not only devastating for the current generation of workers; it is also having a devastating impact on their children. There are millions of children having impaired childhoods because their unemployed parent(s) cannot properly care for them.(Bizarrely, Ferguson and his ilk are obsessed with deficit projections for 20 and 30 years out, which are entirely due to our broken health care system, as the worst threat facing our children.) 

The horrible plight facing so many people in the United States and Europe is especially infuriating because it is so preventable. We know how to get people back to work – Keynes taught us the answer almost 80 years ago. We just need to spend money. Keynes was shown right in the Great Depression and all the evidence that we have seen to date in the current downturn show that these lessons still hold. (Btw, we can also go the route of reducing work hours, while making up for most of the shortfall in wages. Reductions in work hours is the secret to Germany’s 5.4 percent unemployment.)

While the 1% has the Democratic Primary on lockdown.  Its up to the people of Georgia to either call on a leader to rise to the occasion.  Or else get with other like minded people and do the hard organizing to win the primary back from the Wall Street interests that have destroyed the Democratic Party brand for a generation

In which Brad Delong shows that Michelle Nunn is clueless on the deficits...

The 1% has the Democratic Party US Senate race on lockdown. Michelle Nunn is fighting for our great great grandkids while the house is on fire.  Brad Delong has a good break down of why she is clueless...well sort of,  insert Harvard's  Niall Ferguson as Democratic US Senate candidate Michelle Nunn's stand in this morning.

Here's Brad with more: LABORING IN VAIN TO RAISE THE LEVEL OF THE DEBATE OVER THE DEBT AND THE DEFICIT

he CBO's 2013 Long-Term Budget Outlook states that, looking into the long-run future of 2013-2038, it projects three things:

1. The present value of the current debt plus all spending on entitlements plus appropriations growing at the pace authorized by current law is 21.5% of GDP over that period.
2. The present value of revenues plus the debt that can be allowed as of 2038 in order to avoid any deterioration in the debt-to-GDP ratio is 20.7% of GDP.
3. The difference between them--the difference between projected outlays and projected revenues--is the "fiscal gap": 0.8% of GDP.

NOT BIG: That 0.8% of GDP in the 2013 LTBO is a small number: it tells us that--under the laws currently in force--the U.S. government's spending and taxes are nearly in balance over the next twenty-five years. And as long as we do not have unexpectedly-bad economic news and as long as the Congress and the President follow PAYGO--pays for tax cuts with spending cuts, and pays for spending increases with tax increases--we will stay in rough balance.

Now the CBO goes on to say that it does not expect Congress and the President to maintain that balance. A year ago, after all, current law required the expiration of all of the 2001 tax-rate cuts. It expects Congress and the President to do things to widen the deficit in the future. That is why it presents its Alternative Fiscal Scenario, in which it assumes that (a) Congress and the President will never implement the reduction in Medicare payments to doctors that Newt Gingrich put into the budget in the late 1990s and that has been postponed since; (b) Congress and the President will undo the sequestration cuts, and (c ) Congress and the President will continue to extend indefinitely "certain expiring tax provisions" that are currently classified as temporary. We do face serious long-run deficit problems. But they are not because of anything in current law--they are because of what the CBO fears future Congresses and Presidents will do to unbalance America's fiscal future.

Niall Ferguson is simply wrong when he writes "the question is not if the United States will default but when and on which of its rapidly spiraling liabilities". And Niall Ferguson is simply wrong when he claims that that is what the CBO 2013 LTBO says: the CBO 2013 LTBO says that America's fiscal gap over the next 25 years under current law is small, but there is reason to fear that legislative changes will unbalance the budget.

(7) True, the federal deficit has fallen to about 4% of GDP this year from its 10% peak in 2009. The bad news is that, even as discretionary expenditure has been slashed, spending on entitlements has continued to rise—and will rise inexorably in the coming years, driving the deficit back up above 6% by 2038.

WHISKEY-TANGO-FOXTROT?!: Here I have a hard time figuring out what the argument is supposed to be. Ferguson forecasts a budget deficit averaging 5% of GDP over the next 25 years. That means that a national debt about the size of annual GDP would grow in nominal terms by 5% every year. But U.S. nominal GDP grows at an average pace of 5% per year as well. Ferguson is thus forecasting a roughly-constant debt-to-GDP ratio--one that will take a generation to rise from its current 75% of GDP to 100% of GDP. How is that a crisis? It isn't. And virtually nobody on Wall Street sees it as a crisis: the term structure of interest rates tells us that interest rates are expected to stay very low for at least a generation to come.

We have two options in Georgia Draft a name that can win.

Or get busy organizing aginst the 1%.

I'm going to go load trucks now....

US Senate race in Georgia. Some reactions and reflections from a day in campaign mode.

One of the most fascinating aspects of politics is the multiple layers of communication and subtle insights that one takes in and assesses when one is a participant rather than merely a spectator that simply votes ever two to four years.

The base of support that has coalesced around Nunn appears to be of two sorts 1) those who don't seem to recognize, or care to recognize, the neoliberal economic leanings; 2) those who are following signals from the party that the Field was cleared for her to run.  Over the past day and a half via blog posts, phone calls, and emails to activists I'm been trying to undermine and widdle away at the Nunn supporters to see which direction they turn depending on the critique you provide of her candidacy.

The opposition to Nunn appears to have coalesced around Dr. Rad.  My efforts over the past 24 hours or so was to see if I could unlock some of the support from Nunn and shift them in to the opposition to Nunn camp with a draft Jason Cater effort to push him earlier than he appears to desire into a higher office.   The end result from one day of action both online and via phone appears to be 14 supporters of and the 50-60 some odd conversations I had offline throughout the past day remaining either in the Nunn  or Rad camp. The core of Carter's supporters that are in the Nunn camp appear to remain in the Nunn camp regardless because they prefer him to run for Governor (as do in fact the bulk of Dr. Rad supporters I've spoken with to today).

Basically there are the "Nunn is horrible", let her lose, Carter supporters, and the "Carter is better for Governors race" Dr Rad supporters.  One of my basic goals over the past 24 hours was accomplished via my ability to see and hear the responses of people to figure out which direction they turn with a new rank order selection to navigate.  The only goal to identify other activists willing to act to build up support to draft Carter appears weak to nil--all the activists are too busy as it is to take on such a task.

Intuitively a grassroots effort to recruit Carter has more "easy votes" to acquire via name recognition once the effort got off the ground.  The question is first, would Carter even run if one was able to pull in the 10,000 or so names one would need to draw some major attention to the petition, but secondly getting "off the ground" might require more effort than volunteers I'm able to locate.  Along those lines I gave a few people some recruitment requests which got mild to moderate commitments and vague time lines.  The response seems lukewarm to building the type of network of volunteers willing to work over the next  month or so needed to build up the signatures needed to draw Carter in the race.

In summation... well nothing really.  I was just kind of typing out some thoughts from today's efforts.  Democracy in action...yay!   : )

Its time to be bold Progressives. Its time for Jason Carter to run for US Senate.

The general consensus from people I talk to is that Nunn is horrible but who else we got?

@JimNichols @MichelleNunnGA Okay, name another Dem who can win.
— Dudette (@Dudette9t9) October 10, 2013

 Everyone wants a name.  But what we need is action if we are going to save this Political party from its own failure to act.

In a Letter from a Birmingham Jail Martin Luther King Jr wrote,

"But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If today's church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust."

In terms of Political Parties thats the Democratic Party in a nutshell.  The judgement of God is upon us.  People are turning away from us in droves because we keep throwing up candidates like Michelle Nunn who are going to cut Social Security; when what we need are bold Progressives.  Progressives like Wendy Davis in Texas.  If Texas can do it this election cycle so can we!  Lets join them in the fight.  We can't keep waiting.

I noted in my essay over at The Nation magazine something I want to respond to @Dudette9t9 with:

The past three decades of market liberalism’s predominance has had a devastating impact on civil society. The transition and return to a more feudal arrangement that Hayek and others of a libertarian ilk have aspired to over the past seventy years is nearing completion. The strains of market liberalism—a utopian project from its very origins, as was noted long ago by Karl Polanyi—have eroded the fabric of civil society. We face a moment in history that calls for us to reflect and revisit fundamental social questions unaddressed by adherents of this ideology, an ideology which commodifies everything into market arrangements to be priced.

From the dramatic rise of food insecurity to the rapid decline of well-paid jobs, from the massive incarceration rate to the student debt crisis, economic and cultural tensions of our times are reaching a point of fracture. The passionate pursuit of deregulation, liberalization and privatization from both sides of the aisles of government and across the boardrooms of corporate America did not just create a cadre of Occupy activists but a much deeper malaise and discontent across our nation that transcends age, race, class and political affiliation.

Not only have we as a society lost many of the principles of popular participation in decision-making that are fundamental to democracy; many of our citizens are completely unaware even of what has been lost. Over the past five years as I worked to finish my degree I would get up every day at 2 am to join many of the working poor in my area to load up big brown UPS trucks. For a large portion of my co-workers, civil society and the social bonds that keep society functioning have completely disappeared—as have the hopes, dreams and aspirations of better days. Far worse, their own capacities to recognize this state of affairs and do anything about it are in disrepair. When a person lacks knowledge of the basic functioning of the political process, when one lacks the economic stability required to engage and take part in building a vibrant political movement, then not only are political questions passed over, but questions of political solutions are totally eradicated from one’s vocabulary.

If Democrats don't act--this election cycle--we will be passing up an opportunity.  Everyone keeps nodding their head in agreement to my critiques of Nunn but keeps asking for a name and the name that keeps coming to mind is Jason Carter.  He has the name recognition.  He has the charisma and energy.  And it just so happens that his Grandfather's era was just about the time the Democratic party went off the rails on a detour of Neoliberalism that I spoke of in the Nation Magazine.  It all lines up.  Yet its going to require us to ask him to serve.

I'm headed to work, as the trucks won't load themselves.  But when I get home today I'm going to be creating a new Democracy for America petition calling on Jason Carter to run for US Senate.  Michelle Nunn may campaign on austerity--but I can guarantee you Jason Carter won't.  Michelle Nunn may sell out to the 1% but I can guarantee you Jason Carter won't.  Michelle Nunn may try and cut our Social Security but Jason Carter won't.

I asked Where have all the Yes We Can Democrats gone?  I got a cynical response of "oh yeah, and who would lead us to victory?  Jason Carter would, and he would run if we called him to the task.  He was born for this fight.  The philosopher Soren Kierkegaard said once that "to dare is to lose one's footing momentarily. Not to dare is to lose oneself."

Democrats have to act, this year, right now.  Its time for us to call Jason Carter to serve.  If you agree with me join me in calling for his leadership.

A few ways to reach Senator Carter:
Send a note through his Senate campaign website:
http://www.carterforstatesenate.com/page/contact
Make a post on his Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/Carter4GA


Leave a note asking him to run.  Tell him you will support him. Its time for the Democratic wing of the Georgia Democratic Party to act.   Its time for Jason Carter to run for US Senate.

What happened to the "Yes we Can" Democrats?

I've been getting an ear full from "Party people" about my attacks on Ms. 1%.  Tough luck.

In the middle of this nonsense from the Tea Party she sends out an email that says this "neither side of the debate is facing the very real imperative to address our growing national debt". Nunn is either clueless on policy or a liar trying to "agree" with Tea Party Republicans to add a few more votes.

I campaigned in red America in 2010, they don't want their Social Security cut; and they are fed up with politicians feeding them poll tested word games trying to manipulate them. If Nunn isn't shilling for Pete Petersons crew then she needs to get some better campaign folks as it looks exactly like a stalking horse for a neoliberal grand bargain type.

Some of us are fighting to expand Social Security not cut it. We don't need more "liberals" pushing austerity as a solution. We've had enough of that over the past 3 decades. Democrats have lost their way in red America and until we get back to basics and rebuild a coalition of working people fighting the 1% we will never turn this state blue.

One of the "earfulls" came from a Georgia union Political Director. I won't name which union but when even some of our unions don't have class consciousness anymore; don't have any fight for working people and have more alligences to the inside game of power and money we will never be able to improve things for working people.

Its better to lose on the right policy than win by feeding in to the disinformation campaign of the Koch brothers about "debt". The Nunn campaign will only be a drag on down ballot races because she will bombard TV screens across Georgia with fix the debt nonsense--further feeding the Ted Cruz wing nuts who are holding our Government hostage.

Nunn is already campaigning on austerity--in the middle of a jobs crisis!!! Its wrong for Georgia when a Republican says it and its wrong for Georgia when a Democrat says it. Its just wrong policy no matter how you spin it.

Feeding the Tea Paty debt nonsense is bad for Georgia. I know, because I delt with the Tea Party town hall sillyness on the campaign trail in 2010. Good people who had no clue about fiscal or monetary policy but were scared and angry. We have to reach out to them and engage them--on the issues, with facts.

But I look around me and all I see are "party people" trying to pretend Nunn, who should have run as a moderate business Republican, is someone we should shut up and smile about. I'm not going to shut up and smile for the wrong polcies for working Georgians.

I can't help but notice that most of the Nunn train is a bunch of politico's looking for jobs and political appointments that come along with a big money campaign and a Democratic Senator.

Sorry, I'd rather lose on good policy and fight to organize so that 2016, 2018, see gains that can't be taken away with talking points and swings in poll numbers.

What happened to the Yes we can Democrats? Has 5 years of Tea Party Tantrums made them all so cynical they've given up on the possible? One of the more cyncial message I got ended with "While you're increasing Social Security, go ahead and end world hunger and stop global warming." It was from a good friend whom I've worked closely with and have a great deal of respect for. But it seems people think we have to cut and run as soon as the only "name" in the room steps up. Where has the cyncism come from? Let us inspire ourselves to be better and push forward. Sometimes you leap without knowing where you land.

Yes we can win on Prgoressive values in Georgia. Just listen... and remember....

The Death of the Liberal Class Election 2014

The actions and positions of the Michelle Nunn campaign so far this election speaks to this...



The written word is my only tool to fight back.

Or maybe even a little demotic action.

Tyler Durden to Michelle Nunn: You are either with the hostage takers; or you are with us.

THIS IS SATIRE: NO FACTS WERE HARMED IN THE WRITING OF THIS POST.

For those who haven't heard.  Tyler Durden and members of Project Mayhem have gotten involved in the US Senate race here in Georgia.

The origins of the dispute began with a tweet...

Nunn $raising email on shutdown: "neither side of the debate is facing the very real imperative to address our growing national debt" #gapol
— Daniel Malloy (@ajconwashington) September 27, 2013

Tyler Durden responded in fashion.  Nunn's willingness to try to harness talking points from the 1% and blame both the hostage takers and the hostages spoke to either questionable judgement, bad grasp of policy, or even worse, economically captured behavior of a bought and sold politician.  From the beginning it has been unclear which it is.

Tyler and all the members of Project Mayhem believe the mechanism for selecting competent leaders is broken.  One of the problems is quite simply the death of the Liberal Class and a willingness to cut Social Security; rather than fighting to expand it as we should be doing is a perfect example of this death.

The members of Project Mayhem believe the Nunn campaign is symptomatic of the pathologies that have led to the death of the liberal class and Tyler and company have prioritized finding out important facts before election day so that voters of Georgia have the important facts in front of them.

To these ends Tyler and members of Project Mayhem escalated the fight this past weekend and I can acknowledge that I in fact do have documents acquired from Tyler Durden and members of Project Mayhem stolen from the Nunn campaign headquarterse as well as memo's from a Pete Peterson hideout proving that Michelle Nunn in fact plans to release a plan to support cuts to Social Security after she gets out of the Primary as a way to win support from Republicans.

Because of the willingness of the Nunn campaign to side with the hostage takers during the #GOPshutdown Tyler and Members of Project Mayhem have taken their own hostages from the Nunn campagin--a number of important facts about her position on Social Security.

Tyler Durden and members of Project mayhem do not wish to harm anyone or anything; facts do have their place in the world and no one wants to seem them, or anyone, hurt--the staff of the Nunn campaign and candidate herself are probably lovely well meaning people--but this is bigger than just one person; millions of lives are at stake.  If Nunn is unwilling to release the facts about her position on cuts to Social Security and if she supports efforts to expand or cut the beloved program then Durden and company are willing to hold hostage facts from her campaign Tyler Durden is willing to kill off the hostages he has taken from her campaign (facts not people).

Which is it Michelle Nunn---do we "Fix the debt"

or Expand and Strengthen Social Security?

Wouldn't it be rad to beat the 1% on election day?

Michelle Nunn, radical ideologue for the 1%, defender of future world.

At a time when we have a jobs crisis on our hands, Michelle Nunn, candidate for US Senate in Georgia is writing Op-ed's talking about "future world."

Krugman the other day mentioned these folks fixated on the debt are utterly clueless and Nunn is proving this every step of the way here in Georgia.  Its as if politics is a vacation, sort of like DisneyWorld.  The argument that Nunn truly cares about your great great grandkids!; awe shucks that is  lovely, and...eh hmmm...  detached from reality.

To run a US Senate campaign on talking points for the 1% and deep committed concern for fantasy world of years from now--in the middle of an economic crisis-- is not very in touch with the real world concerns of citizens in the state of Georgia, or for that matter basic economics.

Nunn is proving herself to be a radical ideologue, or else is the spokesperson for radical ideologues, who want to slash Social Security and undermine Government support for programs and policies that protect and empower the 99%.

At a time when we are losing close to $1 trillion a year in lost economic output, when we are seeing millions of people who have had their lives ruined due to unemployment or underemployment, we should be seeing Politicians demanding immediate action now not writing milquetoast op-eds about future world.  You don't protect the future by burning down the house and killing off a few of the kids.  Only someone stuck in a bubble could be selling such garbage.

Only an ideologue could be in the middle of a US Senate campaign talking about the need to protect the great great grand kids of future-land while the kitchen is on fire and very real people in ones state are in very dire circumstances.

That's why I started a petition to see if we can find out if Nunn is clueless about policy, and the very real struggles right now in the US economy; or if she just thinks we are.  Please sign, share with friends, and lets find out if Nunn means to give the car keys to the 1% or just doesn't know any better.

Michelle Nunn is hoping you don't hear her.  But listen close enough, with a basic grasp of the economic facts on the ground and you'll be able to notice that she is promising those aspiring young entrepreneurs hoping to build new businesses, those students graduating with massive debt looking for quality jobs, and the parents dreaming big dreams for their kids-- people whose quality of life, opportunity, and future prosperity will depend on what we do right now in the middle of this crisis-- that sadly there are not enough life rafts available and "some of you guys will probably just drown" because we must make tough decisions.    The 1% got bailed out.  Michelle Nunn is on the campaign trail committed to selling you out and handing the keys to the people who crashed the economy.

After all, future world is at stake!!