The Jungle by Upton Sinclair

Just finished it for the second time. Does anyone know of something similar? Preferably set after 1880 but not required.

Save this for when you are having a bad day

Don't look now but

the cons next "Benghazi" is the fact that national parks were closed because funding was cut. Buncha hypocrites! Edit: Could you image what the cons would say if they had left the parks open and someone went in and spray painted them or otherwise defaced them?

Link to watch the disgusting charade: http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Governe

Just to be clear.

Con thinking: Woman who after working hard for 40 years and whose job was sent overseas so the bottom line could grow by 2% can't pay her bills = Deadbeat
Multimillionaires elected to office who refuse to pay the countries bills = Patriot.

Republican thinking is a mental illness.

There is no Tea Party!

Time to call this BS out. EVERY single one of them is a Republican and the MSM and all of us need to make them own it. It just gives the cons cover to pretend they are being pulled into the lunatic fringe right by stating that there is a another party. They made this mess let them own every bit of it.

The 1 percent’s Ivy League loophole

CT SEN. MURPHY STATEMENT ON VOTE AGAINST AUTHORIZATION OF MILITARY FORCE IN SYRIA

Thursday, September 5, 2013

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) released the following statement after voting against a resolution in the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee to authorize the use of military force in Syria. The resolution passed the committee by a vote of 10-7.

The president’s decision to come to Congress was the right one, and I appreciate the great thought and consideration that the Administration has given to our nation's response to the crisis in Syria. I also applaud Chairman Menendez and Ranking Member Corker for leading a quick but inclusive deliberation on the resolution.
Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons against the people of Syria is a human rights atrocity and a blatant violation of international law. It’s impossible to see the horrific images of death and suffering in Syria and not feel compelled to act in some way. But there is not always an American solution to every international crisis. For me, today's vote was a close call, but in the end, I voted no because I believe that the downside risks of military action, both for U.S. interests and the Syrian people, outweigh the potential benefits.
In the short-term, there is little chance that targeted air strikes will destroy Syria’s chemical weapons stockpiles, and may simply prompt another deadly reaction from Assad as well as the countries that finance his murderous regime. In a highly volatile civil war, the time-limited insertion of U.S. military power has the potential to further destabilize the nation and propel its descent into chaos.
In the long-term, I worry that today's authorization, which combines authorization for a military strike with support for the lethal arming of the opposition, will involve us in the Syrian conflict in a way that will be difficult to untangle. We are naïve to believe that our support for the opposition, or opposition to Assad, will end in a matter of months. Taking sides in this conflict will likely commit our country to an open-ended engagement, at an untold cost to both our reputation in the world and to American taxpayers.

In the absence of military intervention, I believe that the Administration and Congress should remain focused on increasing humanitarian aid to the millions of innocent Syrians suffering at the hands of Assad, as well as on concerted diplomatic, political, and economic pressure on the regime.

The Daily show Syria skit from their own site.

We've got to get involved in Syria NOW.

We can let them kill each other, we need to kill some too. Life just isn't fair.
Don't worry about how to pay for it either. We can always cut back on those takers aka social security recipients.

In case.

The Newsroom (HBO) on drones.

Fair warning I'm a bleeding heart liberal.

I like the show and think they do a very good job for the most part.
However the framing of the drone argument misses the largest reason why it is so wrong in my opinion.
Even if we did get the bad guy is it acceptable to kill 5 or 10 innocent people in the process?
If you got the FBI's 10 most wanted and killed their (U.S.) neighbors while doing it everyone would be outraged, but somehow brown people
on the other side of the world don't count. You can't lead the free world if you treat the rest of the world as if their lives matter less than our own.