Who knew? Bush was a covert Leninist all along. By single minded dedication to the apparently stupidest policies he has achieved his covert goal of bringing down global capitalism. The fifth largest bank on Wall Street just got sold for scrap.

The Fed cut bank to bank lending rates again.

And none of it is going to stop the slide.

Did you notice the New York Times didn't even put the Wyoming caucuses on the front page? And who outside the state has been discussing the Mississippi primary? But here's a chance for Obama to change the story away from imaginary telephones to the real crisis of Katrina and global warming.

Gordon Brown's UK government are set for defeat on the (unnecessary) proposal to extend the length of time police can hold 'terror' suspects without trial

Bill O'Reilly's distasteful comment about going on a 'lynching party' against Michelle Obama has been diaried. It's important to note that this fits into an epidemic of lynch references, nooses and other reactions to the Obama effect.

For the first time since the 1970s a British corporation has been nationalized following the collapse of Northern Rock Bank.

The discussion with Charles Schumer yesterday made it clear that the Democratic Party within the legislative branch is not ready to make progressive choices. The differing experience of the Labour party in the United Kingdom and in Australia indicate choices available to US progressives in these circumstances.

In today's New York Times, David Brooks points to the difficulties that an Obama presidency would have if elected. First up will be the question of how to withdraw from Iraq in the face of Republican fury--and partisan Army leaders like General David Petraeus, already being discussed as a 2021 candidate. There's no question that his supposedly objective approach is designed to open attack routes for the McCain-obsessed media.

But this is a debate that we're not having and we should. The war now is being fought in a different manner than the war that "should never have been authorized and never been waged."

It was no surprise that the New York Times endorsed New York's Hillary Clinton for President. What has ensued since her nomination is a politics of layout, pictures and images that have (not so) subtly reinforced the message that there's only one candidate out there. This shows up only in the print edition, rather than the online version most people here probably read

The day after Super Tuesday there were four photographs on the front cover of the Times. One each of McCain and Romney, one of Hillary Clinton posed next to Magic Johnson--a reinforcement of her message that she is the real candidate for African-Americans--and then...a picture of a child holding an Obama sign. Even inside the paper there was only an image of Obama in silhouette.

After the Louisiana primary, and Washington and Nebraska caucuses, the smallest headline available greeted Obama's sweep. The photograph next to it depicted two Middle Eastern dignataries in traditional dress, hinting at the Obama/Muslim slur. Inside the picture was on the obituary page!