Bob Lord

Posted by Bob Lord

Last night, I posted on the gibberish from Nobel Prize winner Robert Shiller on inequality. Essentially, Shiller believes inequality is the most important problem we face, but he thinks we should wait for it to get worse before taking action. 

Contrast that to Joe Stiglitz, also a Nobel Prize winner. In a NY Times op-ed, Inequality Is A Choice, Stiglitz is clear on how we arrived at where we are today:

American inequality began its upswing 30 years ago, along with tax decreases for the rich and the easing of regulations on the financial sector. That’s no coincidence. It has worsened as we have under-invested in our infrastructure, education and health care systems, and social safety nets. Rising inequality reinforces itself by corroding our political system and our democratic governance.

He outlines the devastating impact of inequality:

Posted by Bob Lord Robert Shiller won the Nobel Prize in economics, so he's supposedly no slouch.  And in a way he gets it on inequality. According to Huffington Post, he believes rising inequality is the most important (economic) problem we face today.  His thought on how to address inequality, however, is tough to square … Read more

Posted by Bob Lord I just finished Glenn Greenwald’s With Liberty and Justice For Some. I was a bit late to the party on this one – the book has been out for a few years. But it seemed like a timely read anyhow, given Greenwald's current notoriety. And well worth it. After reading his … Read more

Posted by Bob Lord

I've said before that Steve Lemons is the best journalist in Arizona. His Feathered Bastard post today, Bill Montgomery's Actions Argue in Favor of Ethical Rule He Opposes, helps make my case. 

This seems simple enough. There's a proposed amendment to the ethical rule that requires prosecutors to turn over exculpatory evidence. The amended rule, Lemons reports,

would require prosecutors to reveal to defense counsel or a court any "new, credible, and material" evidence that creates a "reasonable likelihood" a convicted defendant did not commit the crime in question.

Under the suggested guidelines, a prosecutor must "make reasonable efforts" to look into the matter or have the "appropriate law enforcement agency" investigate the new evidence. And if there is "clear and convincing" evidence of a convicted person's innocence, the prosecutor must work to "set aside the conviction."

Seems that any ethical prosecutor would have no problem with this amendment. After all, nobody wants to keep wrongly convicted defendants locked up.

Well, nobody except Bill Montgomery. Montgomery is adamantly opposed to the amendment.

Posted by Bob Lord Here's a funny (and true) story about what Chris Hedges refers to as the illiterate majority. My son recently graduated from U of A and took a job in Dallas. Last week, he was getting a haircut and the stylist asked him if he had been to the State Fair (or … Read more