For progressives and populists around the country who take an interest in Congressional races there are always a few good challengers we might hope to send to Washington. Incumbents, we assume, can take care of themselves.

But in Northern Ohio, redistricting has thrown two incumbents into one district. It's a heavily Democratic district created purposely to guarantee a number of other districts to Republicans. The incumbents are both Democrats, both white, both 65, and many imagine that they do similar work in Washington. In fact, they could not be more different. One of them does tremendous good for our national politics, working to move our government in a better direction from inside it, just as the rest of us do from the outside. We cannot afford to lose him. We would be obliged to work for his reelection even if his opponent were far above average. The record suggests something else.

Before President Barack Obama’s interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer, aired before the Super Bowl on Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu probably hoped that, if Obama discussed Iran, he would give him the strong backing that Israeli leaders crave, freeing them to lash out at Iran — militarily, if they so choose.

Few could have been more keenly interested than he in what the President would say in an interview beamed to a hundred million American TV viewers. The problem was that Netanyahu could not have been completely sure of what to expect, given the confusing mixed signals coming out of Washington in the past several weeks.

President Obama with advisers in the Oval Office (White House photo by Pete Souza)

Some of those signals had been disquieting to Netanyahu and other Israeli hard-liners — for example, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta saying flat-out on Jan. 8 that Iran is NOT “trying to develop a nuclear weapon” – undercutting the key casus belli for war – and Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey visiting Israel on Jan. 19, reportedly to repeat that in person and warn his hosts against provoking war with Iran.

Concerning Fracking and other matters

Dear Senator Brown: I am writing you about the technology of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (often referred to as “fracking”), a mining method for extracting gas from deep in the earth, first drilling down for a mile or more and then angling the drillbore horizontally into shale gas rock.

This method is much more complex than the older method of vertical drilling. Fracking just one well, with perhaps six or more bore holes, requires millions of gallons of clean water, sand, propellants, and chemicals, many of which are consider proprietary information and not available to the public or even to elected officials.

Last week’s Newsweek magazine contained a truly amazing piece, (“Rich America, Poor America,” Niall Ferguson, 1/23/12). Billed as a “conservative historian’s solution” to the issue of growing inequality in our nation, this piece stands out not because of any true “solution” that is offered here, but for the real peek at how the wealthy actually look at us and the world they live in.

The issue of inequality isn’t seen as a great mystery, most might point to the capitalist class structure of our nation and the ongoing class struggle. There, according to Ferguson, is where you’d be wrong. Not so, he says! The rising inequality has its source in the fact that the “upper class has gotten rich because of the financial returns on brain-power,” and they “produce a disproportionate number of the smartest children.”

If that formulation just slapped you in the face with its open arrogance, Ferguson is just getting started.