document.write('\x3cmeta http-equiv=\x22x-dns-prefetch-control\x22 content=\x22off\x22/\x3e\x3col class=\x22tumblr_posts\x22\x3e\x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_title\x22\x3eWhen Everyone Thinks You\x26rsquo;re Wrong, You Just Might Be Right.\x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22posterous_autopost\x22\x3e\x3cp\x3e\x3cem\x3eSome thoughts on reactions to Obama\x26#8217;s actions in Libya, written for \x3cspan style=\x22font-style: normal;\x22\x3eZahranicna Politika\x3c/span\x3e.\x3c/em\x3e\x3c/p\x3e    \x3cp\x3eIn the days since President Obama decided to support the UN sanctioned no-fly zone in Libya each little cell on the American ideological spectrum has found out its own unique way to trash him. \u00a0And yet, if the sheer variety of disagreement reveals anything, it might be that Obama took the most reasonable and responsible course of action.\x3c/p\x3eTo describe the criticism of Obama\u2019s decision to get involved in Libya as \u201cdiverse\u201d wouldn\u2019t do justice to the colorful palate of dissenting opinions. \u00a0On the left, the criticism typically arose from a combination of distaste for war and meddling in other countries\u2019 affairs. \u00a0On the right, the critics have blasted Obama for either acting too slowly (2008 presidential candidate John McCain), for caring too much about international approval instead of simply doing it alone (potential 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney), for using a no-fly zone instead of simply invading the country and killing Gaddafi (2008 VP candidate and potential 2012 Republican nominee Sarah Palin), or for doing acting at all, since:  \x3cp\x3e  \x3c/p\x3e\x3cdiv\x3e\x3cbr/\x3e\u201c\x3cem\x3e\x26#8230;for one thing, we haven\u2019t identified yet who the opposition even is to Qaddafi. We don\u2019t know if this is led by Hamas, Hezbollah, or possibly al Qaeda of North Africa. Are we really better off, are United States, our interests better off, if let\u2019s say Al-Qaeda of North Africa now runs Libya?\x3c/em\x3e\u201dThat astonishingly ignorant statement comes from Michelle Bachmann - apparently one of the front-runners for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. \u00a0While these kinds of attacks from the right are clearly motivated by politics rather than policy, they are also easy to dismiss on substantive grounds: the \u201ctoo slow\u201d criticism somehow neglects that two months ago, Libya wasn\u2019t even on our radar. \u00a0The charge of being \u201ctoo international\u201d ignores the decade of global anti-American loathing that has resulted from unilateral arrogance in the Middle East. \u00a0The brilliant idea of simply invading Libya and taking out Gaddafi overlooks that the US tried that - in Iraq - and it took 8 years and cost a trillion dollars.\x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3eThe attacks from the left are harder to dismiss on purely substantive grounds - those who are against wars and/or foreign interventions have a laundry list of failed military campaigns to point to as supportive evidence of their case. \u00a0And yet, when these same people point out the irony of Obama\u2019s Nobel Peace Prize they either don\u2019t know or forget that this sort of intervention is a perfect example of the vision that Obama laid out in his acceptance speech in Oslo. \u00a0Perhaps the more valid criticisms of the intervention in Libya could have been raised by folks in any part of the ideological spectrum. \u00a0They include questions like: (a) does the President have the power to wage war without the authorization of Congress (according to Obama the candidate he doesn\u2019t - hence, the outrage), (b) do we need another Iraq, (c) why Libya, and (d) what is the end game?\x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3eWill all the criticism firing from every direction, it was clear that Obama needed to do a better sales job. \u00a0It turns out that when the President is responding to an actual emergency - unlike the manufactured one of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - he does not have the luxury of time to get everyone on board ahead of time like the Bush administration did during the months leading up to the Iraq war in 2003.And so, 10 days after the start of the offensive, Obama did what he does best - he gave a speech on Libya. \u00a0His address was successful in outlining a clear moral and strategic case for the intervention:\x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\u201c\x3cem\x3eIt is true that America cannot use our military wherever repression occurs. And given the costs and risks of intervention, we must always measure our interests against the need for action. But that cannot be an argument for never acting on behalf of what\x26#8217;s right. In this particular country \u2013 Libya; at this particular moment, we were faced with the prospect of violence on a horrific scale. We had a unique ability to stop that violence: an international mandate for action, a broad coalition prepared to join us, the support of Arab countries, and a plea for help from the Libyan people themselves. We also had the ability to stop Gaddafi\x26#8217;s forces in their tracks without putting American troops on the ground.\x3c/em\x3e\u201d The speech also laid out why this intervention is different from Iraq - in terms of an imminent need, a limited scope, defined means and an international mandate. \u00a0Judging from the reactions to the speech in the days that followed, what the President failed to do, was to answer those critics who said that he needs to get authorization from the Congress and those who, correctly, wonder what the end game is in Libya. \u00a0What happens if the intervention results in a stalemate between Gaddafi and the rebels? \u00a0What happens if the rebels ask for arm assistance in their combat with Gaddafi? \u00a0Does the US help them out like they did with Afghans against USSR only to have the same weapons used against them by the Taliban a few decades later? \u00a0There are many questions that remain unanswered and for now Libya remains the\x3ca href=\x22http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ylyl-nkftegtay5fyfkzpq.gif\x22\x3e least popular US military intervention\x3c/a\x3e in the last 30 years.\x3c/div\x3e  \x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cp\x3eOlive and the fireplace \x3ca href=\x22http://instagr.am/p/B0pg5/\x22\x3ehttp://instagr.am/p/B0pg5/\x3c/a\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cp\x3eso.. is it gone? @ggreenwald Eric Holder obviously deserves a good share of the credit for the DOMA decision: \x3ca href=\x22http://is.gd/TPEMu7\x22\x3ehttp://is.gd/TPEMu7\x3c/a\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cp\x3ewhat the word for gay urban foodie RT @bulicks: Chia seeds, vitamin D3, and homemade yogurt will cure strep throat, right? #homoeconomics\x3c/p\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cp\x3eInconvenient Democracy. \x3ca href=\x22http://post.ly/1di0w\x22\x3ehttp://post.ly/1di0w\x3c/a\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_title\x22\x3eInconvenient Democracy.\x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22posterous_autopost\x22\x3e\x3cp\x3e\x3cem\x3eI wrote this column for \x3c/em\x3eZahrani\u010dn\u00e1 politika \x3cem\x3eon the eve of the fall of Mubarak\x26#8217;s regime, so some of it is already out of date. \u00a0However, other parts of it continue to be valid in light of the once-again focused or conflicted reaction of the US administration to unrest in other countries\x26#8230; \u00a0\x3c/em\x3e\x3c/p\x3e  \x3cp\x3e\x3cstrong\x3eInconvenient Democracy\x3c/strong\x3e\x3c/p\x3e  \x3cdiv\x3e\u00a0\x3cbr/\x3eAny reasonable person would expect that a people rising up to take down a dictator would be greeted with universal cheers. \u00a0Democracy is ultimately the best form of government, after all, or so we have been taught since our time in the crib. \u00a0And yet the reaction to the revolution in Egypt has been anything but a cheer. \u00a0Instead what we have seen thus far is at best a lot of concern and at worst completely naked cynicism. \u00a0It serves to remind us just how hollow the American belief in democracy has become long before anyone in Egypt ever thought about protesting in the streets.\u00a0While it remains unclear whether the revolution in Egypt will be successful in overturning Hosni Mubarak\u2019s rule, it is perfectly obvious just how conflicted the US feels about this development. \u00a0First, Obama didn\u2019t think it necessary even so much as mention the protests in Egypt or the revolution in Tunisia during his state of the union speech on January 25th. \u00a0Then, a few days later, his vice president went on TV to say that Mubarak should not step down and refused to call him a dictator. \u00a0It wasn\u2019t until more recently that the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton communicated a message more sympathetic with the protestors; yet, the emphasis was on calling for an \u201corderly transition\u201d.\x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\u00a0However appalling, the hesitant behaviour of the US officials makes sense. \u00a0A quick look at the list of recipient of US foreign aid reveals that Egypt is the second largest recipient (after Israel and also not counting spending in Iraq and Afghanistan). \u00a0Egypt - and Mubarak\u2019s regime - received on average about $2 billion per year since Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979. \u00a0Clearly they are a key US ally; though the partnership doesn\u2019t seem to extend too far beyond our military interests: \u00a0it\u2019s kind of telling that the vast majority of that aid is specifically for military assistance which Egypt uses to purchase products from US defense contractors. \u00a0Humanitarian effort this is clearly not.And yet, I can\u2019t help but point out the irony of President Obama on the one hand encouraging Egyptians \u201cto speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed\u201d in his speech in Cairo in June 2009, and on the other hand failing to convey a more supportive tone once Egyptians attempted to do just that. \u00a0After the first few days of demonstrations, there were reports from Egypt of people dismayed at the tepid response from the US: apparently they didn\u2019t realize that a speech by President Obama, as uplifting as it may be, is just that - a speech. \u00a0\x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3eEgyptians are, in a sense, getting to know the real Obama, the one that disillusioned liberals in the US have long lost any hope in: \u00a0a president, who ran on openness and once in power chose to invoke the state secrecy privilege to squash any attempts at prosecution of the Bush torture regime and instead decided to focus energy on finding creative ways to criminalize those who leak and publish classified information. \u00a0The extent to which the American mainstream is supportive of this kind of cynicism is apparent in the way the public has embraced the \u201cconcerns\u201d about Egypt. \u00a0According to a poll conducted by Rasmussen, 59% of Americans say if the unrest in Egypt spreads to other countries, it will be bad for the United States and only 5% people think that the current government falling would be good for America. \u00a0Most starkly, 70% of people think America should leave the situation alone. \u00a0One has to wonder where were these concerns hiding on the eve of the American invasion of Iraq, when close to \u2154 of Americans supported the war, according to a March 2003 ABC poll. \u00a0\x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3eGiven the history of the middle east, these concerns are not entirely unwarranted, of course. \u00a0There is plenty of precedent for an autocrat stepping only to be replaced by an even worse alternative, think Iran, the Shah and Ayatollah Khomeini. \u00a0And there are plenty of examples where democracy has led to undesirable outcomes, such as the election of Hamas in Gaza. \u00a0Better the devil you know than the devil you don\u2019t, is the saying that has become popular to describe the situation. \u00a0And yet I fail to see the upside in supporting status quo in Egypt. \u00a0How can the US ever be taken seriously again if the grand summary of its foreign policy in the middle east over the last 10 years ends up being \u201cdemocracy, only when we want it\u201d? \u00a0As I see it, the administration has missed the chance to be on the right side of history when history was being made: \u00a0recognize that a regime change is inevitable sooner or later, and by endorsing it fully, hope for a continuing cooperation from Egypt in the future. \u00a0The question is whether the haphazard and belated support - one that the US is likely to offer eventually - will be enough.\x3c/div\x3e  \x3cp\x3e\u00a0\x3c/p\x3e\x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_title\x22\x3eHealth Reform Might Be Unconstitutional Because Democrats Compromised.\x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22posterous_autopost\x22\x3e\x3cdiv\x3eSo, a judge in Virginia ruled the individual mandate in the new health reform law unconstitutional. \u00a0Big deal? \u00a0\x3c/div\x3e\x3cdiv\x3eIf you are in favor of providing universal coverage to everyone, the individual mandate is key. \u00a0Yes, there are ways to circumvent it (for example, provide a tax credit to those who purchase health insurance; or charge a penalty to anyone who opts out and then signs up), but as the reform law is currently constructed, the mandate is essential. \u00a0Without it, insurers can hardly be expected to provide coverage to everyone regardless of preexisting conditions, and they will surely file their own lawsuits if the mandate is ripped out. \u00a0Soon we\x26#8217;ll be back where we started.\x3c/div\x3e \x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x3cdiv\x3eStill, two other judges ruled that the mandate is just fine. \u00a0So why would one man\x26#8217;s opinion matter? \u00a0Well, the revealing fact is that of the judges who opined on this thus far, those who ruled in favor of the mandate were nominated by a Democrat and the one who rules against it was a Republican appointee. \u00a0In short: the constitutionality of the mandate seems to be partisan - imagine that! \u00a0Now, with multiple diverging opinion, the case is guaranteed to go up to the Supreme Court, where a panel of 5 conservatives and 4 liberals is fairly likely to strike it down (OR I\x26#8217;m just a cynic and the judges are totally non-partisan).\x3c/div\x3e \x3cdiv\x3eAnyhow, the issue I wanted to address is not what the future holds, but rather how we got here. \u00a0The individual mandate is allegedly unconstitutional because the federal government cannot force people to purchase a commercial product. \u00a0Think about that for a moment: \u00a0the \x3cb\x3efederal\x3c/b\x3e\u00a0government cannot force people to purchase a \x3cb\x3ecommercial\x3c/b\x3e\u00a0product. \u00a0In other words, the current challenges to the mandate would have no teeth if it weren\x26#8217;t for the fact that the current design of the law relies on people buying coverage from insurers. \u00a0The irony is that the genesis of that construct lies not with the Democrats - who generally favor governmental provision of health benefits (the public option, remember?) - but rather with the Republicans who prefer any government benefit to be administered by corporations (Medicare Part D thanks to Bush, social security, if Bush had his way, the military contractors, etc, etc). \u00a0\x3c/div\x3e \x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x3cdiv\x3eSo in other words, had the Democrats had their way on the design of health reform, there would be no grounds for a constitutional challenge. \u00a0Of course that was not the preferable path, since back then we needed everything to be BIPARTISAN. \u00a0And what did they get in return for this compromise? \u00a0A single Republican vote? \u00a0No, not a single one. \u00a0Instead they now have this compromise coming back to bite them in their ass. \u00a0\x3c/div\x3e \x3cdiv\x3eI find it hard to believe that the Republicans were smart enough to plan this ahead of time - eliminate any governmental option to provide coverage to get a chance at repealing the law in court. \u00a0I think the facts just conveniently lined up that way. \u00a0But I think it is instructive to point out - especially as we are talking about the tax cut \x26#8220;deal\x26#8221; between Republicans and Obama - that these kinds of compromises tend to have unintended consequences down the road. \u00a0So, as some Democrats are slapping themselves on the back about what a good deal they got (\x26#8220;\x3ca href=\x22http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/business/economy/08leonhardt.html?_r=1\x22\x3eback-door stimulus\x3c/a\x3e\x26#8221;), I\x26#8217;m just thinking: \u00a0you just wait.\x3c/div\x3e \x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x3cdiv\x3e\u00a0\x3c/div\x3e\x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_title\x22\x3eAn email from Columbia\x26#8217;s SIPA to their students proves that we now live in China.\x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cp\x3e\x3cdiv class=\x22posterous_autopost\x22\x3e\u201cWe received a call today from a SIPA alumnus who is working at the State Department. He asked us to pass along the following information to anyone who will be applying for jobs in the federal government, since all would require a background investigation and in some instances a security clearance. \u00a0 The documents released during the past few months through WikiLeaks are still considered classified documents. \u00a0He recommends that you DO NOT post links to these documents not make comments on social media sites such as Facebook or through Twitter. \u00a0Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government.\u201d \u00a0Via \x3ca href=\x22http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/3/headlines#5\x22\x3eDemocracy Now\x3c/a\x3e.\x3c/div\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_title\x22\x3eWikiUgh, or how annoying some reactions to WikiLeaks are.\x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22posterous_autopost\x22\x3eThink what you want about WikiLeaks, there isn\x26#8217;t much to like about Julian Assange\x26#8217;s \x26#8220;style.\x26#8221; \u00a0He kind of sounds like an egomaniacal prick. \u00a0And yet I was disappointed that people - ones I usually find to be rational and above this kind of thing - can\x26#8217;t somehow get over his persona in their assessment of the latest dump of data or what WikiLeaks does, generally.\x3cdiv\x3eLast night, \x3ca href=\x22http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-november-30-2010-susan-casey\x22\x3eJon Stewart\x3c/a\x3e couldn\x26#8217;t help himself and make fun of Assange. \u00a0This was right before he postulated that \x26#8220;If there\x26#8217;s total transparency, we won\x26#8217;t really see anything.\x26#8221; \u00a0How deep.\x3ca href=\x22/\x22\x3e\x3c/a\x3e\x3c/div\x3e \x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x3cdiv\x3eThen Ezra Klein chimed in: \x26#8220;\x3ci\x3eI\x26#8217;m not sure this guy\x26#8217;s incentives \x26#8212; which by now include impact and publicity \x26#8212; are really trustworthy.\x3c/i\x3e\x26#8221;\x3c/div\x3e\x3cdiv\x3eReally guys, ad hominem attacks? \u00a0\x3c/div\x3e \x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x3cdiv\x3eHow strange that we didn\x26#8217;t see any of those reactions (definitely not from the liberals), when the leaks were exposing horrific information about the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. \u00a0I suppose that was barely noteworthy? \u00a0Or maybe that was stuff that validated their opinions? \u00a0But now that WikiLeaks published a whole bunch of mundane info from the State Department (thought not all of it was totally dull - and I am not talking about the gossipy crap about various foreign leaders, I mean stuff like \x3ca href=\x22http://harpers.org/archive/2010/11/hbc-90007831\x22\x3ethis\x3c/a\x3e, which seems to be getting totally lost in the shuffle - not unsurprisingly), we are all up in arms about the propriety of what Assange is doing? \u00a0Really?\x3c/div\x3e \x3cdiv\x3eThe more bizarre line of reasoning that I first saw emerge in a Brooks column\u00a0\x3ca href=\x22http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/opinion/30brooks.html?partner=rssnyt\x26amp;emc=rss\x22\x3ehere\x3c/a\x3e, is that this disclosure will damage the global conversation or even the ability of US diplomats to do their work. \u00a0I don\x26#8217;t find that entirely convincing, but it\x26#8217;s not totally without merit: \u00a0I suppose having your raw thoughts about someone plastered all over the internet probably doesn\x26#8217;t help your relations. \u00a0 I can see that.\x3c/div\x3e \x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x3cdiv\x3eBut then \x3ca href=\x22http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/11/whats_next_for_wikileaks_--_an.html\x22\x3eyesterday\x3c/a\x3e, looking at the prospect of a data dump from a major US bank, Ezra Klein took that argument even further, and argued that this kind of disclosure will stymie information sharing of all kind:\x3c/div\x3e \x3cdiv\x3e\x26#8220;\x3ci\x3eIf he\x26#8217;s really effective, the likely outcome won\x26#8217;t be that people know more, but that they know less, as major institutions \x26#8212; both public and private \x26#8212; will stop sharing their information so widely internally and stop writing so much of it down. That means decision-makers will know less, bureaucrats and managers will know less, reporters will know less, historians will know less, and so on.\x3c/i\x3e\x26#8221;\x3c/div\x3e \x3cp\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x3cdiv\x3eI suppose so if it wasn\x26#8217;t for the fact that short of verbally communicating everything - which is impossible - \x3cb\x3ethere is no way to avoid digital communication and record-keeping in this day and age\x3c/b\x3e. \u00a0First, it is simply impractical, and second, people are dumb and will always put self-incriminating shit in writing. \u00a0As an example, a\u00a0full decade after the original Wall Street email scandal (analysts pushing tech stock and calling them a piece of crap in private emails), we had the exact same thing happen with mortgage securities (trader\x26#8217;s salling products they called crap to clients to whom they have full disclosure and fiduciary duties). \u00a0\x3c/div\x3e \x3cdiv\x3eBesides, at the other extreme, is the implication that we should never publish incriminating records and prosecute accordingly for the fear that we may inspire corporate insiders to sensor their written communications? \u00a0More importantly, why exactly would they feel the need to sensor themselves if they aren\x26#8217;t doing anything sinister? \u00a0Or are we now concerned about protecting criminals? \u00a0\x3c/div\x3e\x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a        \x0a            \x3cli class=\x22tumblr_post tumblr_text_post\x22\x3e\x0a                \x0a                    \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_title\x22\x3eThe Jon Stewart Philosophy?\x3c/div\x3e\x0a                \x0a                \x0a                \x3cdiv class=\x22tumblr_body\x22\x3e\x0a                    \x3cp\x3e\x3cdiv class=\x22posterous_autopost\x22\x3eFrom the man who gave us \x26#8220;\x3ca href=\x22http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/30/AR2010103001573.html\x22\x3eIf we amplify everything, we hear nothing\x3c/a\x3e\x26#8221;, comes a \x3ca href=\x22http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-november-30-2010-susan-casey\x22\x3enew\x3c/a\x3e pearl of wisdom: \x26#8220;If there\x26#8217;s total transparency, we won\x26#8217;t really see anything.\x26#8221; \u00a0I think I see a pattern?\x3c/div\x3e\x3c/p\x3e\x0a                \x3c/div\x3e\x0a            \x3c/li\x3e\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a\x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a        \x0a\x0a                        \x0a    \x0a\x3c/ol\x3e');