He isn't setting the parameters for one airline, he is setting the parameters to set up a efficient competitive market via regulation. As previous posters have argued there seems to be significant evidence that air travel is not currently an efficient competitive market.

"Democrats are openly hostile to business" This sounds very unlikely. Both parties seem to embrace a prosperity through economic activity type of agenda. They differ to some extent when it comes to social safety net, environment and spending on infrastructure but these are details that all occur in the same overall framework.

To be fair, those are nearly opposite so one of them is likely to be right, as far as money influences the outcome.

No, that is madness.

I can't believe that any government does things 100% good or 100% bad. You would actually need to look at each issue on its merits and make a decision based on evidence.

I'm not sure you can just write him off as flawed without doing some economic analysis. If you can sell to more people you can charge a lower price (assuming consumer price is approximatly development cost / expected sales). If people are prepared to buy games on a whim and in some cases not even bother to play them then you are selling a lot of copies. I also think that you don't need to spend crazy money to have a good game. Realistic graphics is just one dot point on your list of reasons to buy.

Technically Obamacare IS Rommneycare, a Republican alternative to a single payer system (single payer is a much better system BTW). When the Democrats proposed it the Republicans simply lurched further to the right and declared it terrible.

Consuming a smaller amount of fossil fuels to prevent the use of a larger amount of fossil fuels is not hypocritical. I would call it good maths.

Aren't kdm and gdm alternatives that do the same thing?