The point being, as I stated, that one party creates the policies and rules allowing and enabling the bribes, and the other party tries to change those policies and rules to make the bribes tougher to do. This fact cannot be ignored in the rush to put down all of our politicians of all parties. And also as I've stated, the rules being what they are, neither party can unilaterally disarm.Originally Posted by Deb C
Last edited by Eric the Green; 04-04-2012 at 03:08 AM.
BRAVO! Today president Obama took on the Republican trickle-down theory head-on. There is nothing more important for anyone in his position or elsewhere now than to tackle and confront head-on this horrible, rotten, false theory and debunk it at every opportunity. That is the only way we can make any progress on anything in this country from this point on. That is THE issue, and I'm glad the president is doing what we need him to do. Again, BRAVO. And I hope he will be able to act as much as politically possible to reverse course and move our nation forward again after 31 years.
This is a long clip, but he gets into the meat right away.
http://youtu.be/49-tKE-Ka2Y
It is clear that one of the biggest obstacles today to returning to sane political policy today is libertarianism.
It cannot be debunked too often.
First of all, libertarians think we are each individuals. OK libertarians, try breathing as an "individual" and see how long you survive. I think you'll be gasping for air from the liberals' "environment" before long. Yet you think it's OK on the grounds of "freedom from control" to allow corporate big money to pollute and destroy the air you breathe as much as they wish, thinking perhaps that these greedy corporate bigwigs give a bleep about the air you breathe instead of keeping their profits from rolling in. Fine, once corporations voluntarily clean up their pollution, including CO2 without denying accepted science, then we can relax the laws as long as they continue to do so. But don't put the damn cart before the damn horse.
Second, you libertarians carry around the notion that any government action is coercion. Fine, let's do it by consensus. That's the green way. Meanwhile, we can try your way, and get rid of all government. Republicans of course will not be with you here, despite their claims; they want lots of government so they can build scads of weapons and send your kids off to wars and put blacks in prison and wage wars on drugs and abortion and homosexuals. But they are with you when it comes to letting big business do whatever the hell it wants, and not require them to pay any taxes. You think voluntary charity will cover all of our needs. What you really want is to keep your money and not help anyone else. Because you know damn well that "voluntary" does not do the job. It didn't before; people that lost their job or their health just starved under your "liberty." So we set up social safety nets to help people, most of which are pay-as-you-go plans anyway. You want to tear them all down on the grounds that this is "control." Well, I hope so; we need to be able to control some things instead of letting things go all to hell. Let's keep the safety nets up until people are not in danger of falling through no fault of their own; then take them down. Sane people know these programs protect themselves as well as others. This cart before horse nonsense has got to stop.
Third, the control you talk about is mild compared to the control you would have us live under, under corporate plutocracy. You think you see control from the tax forms; wait until the Republicans have their way and you are at the mercy of the plutocrats whose only concern is their own money. They will dictate everything you buy, every place you live and work. The most powerful will have all the power. And the Republicans will still keep the government doing everything it should NOT be doing, in spite of what Ron Paul wants; while they stop it from doing everything that it SHOULD be doing. But go ahead, support them anyway, either by commission or omission.
That's enough for now. Go and watch your stupid movies like Thrive and go see Ron Paul. This is not over folks.
President Obama winning re-election seemed about as fore-ordained conclusion as it has been for about any incumbent President since at least Eisenhower in 1956. Rockefeller could have made it much closer for LBJ in 1964 and Muskie could have made it much closer for Nixon in 1972. Very partisan Democrats thought that Walter Mondale would be just the ticket for defeating a President (Reagan) that they hated.
President Obama has never campaigned as a populist because he could never get away with it. Now he offers an option for Democrats who might otherwise go down to sure defeats. Winning the House and holding the Senate are essential to President Obama having an effective second term. It won't be enough to be a check against the absurdity and extremism of Republican majorities in one or both Houses of Congress; such is gridlock that achieves nothing.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
I have often thought the best illustration of trickle-down was the cartoon my ex had in his cubicle. It showed two stacked outhouses, with the bosses in the top one and the workers in the bottom one.
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."
"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.
I note: the two most likely candidates in 2012 are a Republican so moderate by today's standards he's been accused of being a RINO, and a Democrat who has fought for a populist agenda in such a lukewarm fashion he's been accused of being a DINO.
Does this presage a move to the center?
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."
"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.
More like a one-party corporate-security state. Here's the analysis from the political compass:
This is a US election that defies logic and brings the nation closer towards a one-party state, masquerading as a two-party state.The Democratic incumbent has surrounded himself with conservative advisors and key figures — many from previous administrations, and an unprecedented number from the Trilateral Commission. He also appointed a former Monsanto executive as Senior Advisor to the FDA. He has extended Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, presided over a spiralling rich-poor gap and sacrificed further American jobs with recent free trade deals.Trade union rights have also eroded under his watch. He has expanded Bush defence spending, droned civilians, failed to close Guantanamo, supported the NDAA which effectively legalises martial law, allowed drilling and adopted a soft-touch position towards the banks that is to the right of European Conservative leaders. We list these because many of Obama’s detractors absurdly portray him as either a radical liberal or a socialist, while his apologists, equally absurdly, continue to view him as a well-intentioned progressive, tragically thwarted by overwhelming pressures.
Those words, "temperate and moderate", are words either of political cowardice, or of cunning, or seduction. A thing, moderately good, is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper, is always a virtue; but moderation in principle, is a species of vice.
'82 - Once & always independent
Your exposing some of the hard truths might get you tagged as a radical.
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a
Those political compass guys, though they make a good questionnaire, are very very hard on our poor American politicians. They have a point, but they sorta exaggerate, donya think??
Even the greenest of the green politicians are shown as only very slightly or moderately green, while people like me hang out way out there, just as green as I think I am.
Not absurd at all; quite an accurate description.a well-intentioned progressive, tragically thwarted by overwhelming pressures.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 04-05-2012 at 02:26 AM.
Oh, MY! Look where the center has drifted to!More like a one-party corporate-security state. Here's the analysis from the political compass:
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."
"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.
Do they have a thing where they put famous dictators on the thing. I have a suspicion I'd like to check out.
~Chas'88
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
They do have one of EU governments circa 2008...
Notice where Greece is...
Hell, they even have composers:
~Chas'88
Last edited by Chas'88; 04-05-2012 at 06:30 PM.
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
Wow, that's a neat trick to put the socialist Wagner as most conservative!
Of course, I know he is blamed for inspiring Hitler....
The composers list being a bit more balanced, brings out the point of why they put people where they do. Those in power tend to be unable to enact their ideals, and drift toward the corrupting power of power. Musicians don't have to answer to an election or a powerful lobbyist for a rich corporation.
Unless people actually take the test, though, we don't really know what their views are. We can only judge politicians and governments by their actions, which tend to fail to live up to their views.
President Obama is on the Right for adopting the Bush I/Clinton foreign policy as opposed to the reckless policy of his predecessor. We should have expected him to whack Osama bin Laden if the opportunity arose.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
Wagner was a Jew-baiting racist infamous for a tract whose title is best described as "Jewishness in Music". If only he could have heard Gustav Mahler!
The Nazis did not draw their inspiration from such German and Austrian composers as Bach, Handel, Haydn, Mozart, Schubert, Schumann, Liszt (really an ethnic German), or Brahms. They loved Beethoven, especially his Glorious Ninth (the symphony) for all the wrong reasons.
Toward the end of his life, Puccini may have seen fascism as a new way of political leadership better than anything before -- before it proved worse than just about anything that had preceded it after Puccini died. Elgar tried to promote German-English understanding as a way of preventing a second World War... and he died before Nazi Germany became so objectionable. Hitler wasn't much of a killer before 1938.The composers list being a bit more balanced, brings out the point of why they put people where they do. Those in power tend to be unable to enact their ideals, and drift toward the corrupting power of power. Musicians don't have to answer to an election or a powerful lobbyist for a rich corporation.
I took the test and found that I would be classified as an anarcho-syndicalist, which is not a pragmatic way of holding onto a political career in a 3T or 4T.Unless people actually take the test, though, we don't really know what their views are. We can only judge politicians and governments by their actions, which tend to fail to live up to their views.
Journalists would be very interesting, with most of the high-profile characters on FoX Propaganda Channel ending up very far on the Right and on the authoritarian fringe. "Fascist News Channel", anyone?
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
I would say, only if Obama wins. Romney will be helpless before a Republican majority in Congress and the Senate wouldn't be much of an obstacle.
David Kaiser '47
My blog: History Unfolding
My book: The Road to Dallas: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy
I kind of think that Romney would govern from the middle if he becomes president. Look how he governed in Mass? A very blue state. But it mostly will depend on the general mood of the country. Romney will just want to get re-elected. So he will govern whichever direction the wind may be blowing. He keeps trying to move further to the right so he can win the primary, but it will be interesting to see if he starts becoming more moderate during the general election. We shall see. And I'd put money down that we will have a chance to find out because I'm pretty certain he will win the nomination in the primary.
I doubt it. I agree with David that a Romney presidency would play out as him being drug rightward by the Congress. On the other hand, I think something similar is likely to be true for a second Obama term as well (drug leftward by congressional Democrats).
The last supper?
Sadly I may have to agree with you here.
And that would not have been my inclination if I had been able to respond before yesterday but last night's dinner was an experience for me.
I know that you can't generalize to a larger group of people based on one experience without drifting into stereotypes but life is for learning.
Anyway, as I live in rural SC almost all of my neighbors are red stater types. And, like most rural people, most of them are on very insecure ground economically.
But of course that's not true for everyone around here and one person that I've known since 2008 when retired to this area from Manhattan. And yes, I mean the one in New York not the college town in Knasas. Anyway, this person had a background in electrical engeneering before going into a fairly second successful carrer in music. This is a person who traveled the globe and has met many different types of people. Such a background is not common around here and that's one of the reasons why we became friends after being introduced by a workplace collegue of mine.
At any rate, it has become common for us to have dinner together from time to time and last night was such a time. I already knew that this person was conservative. After all, it's unlikely that a liberal retiree would choose to live around here, but I had always thought of him as a conventianal Republican type. Not anymore. In the course of our conversation he revieled to me that he was not only hoping that a war with Iran would begin but that it would lead to a total economic dislocation within the US and he wanted all of this hardship to happen simply because Obama would be blamed for it all.
The only response that I could give him was the old chestnut to be careful what you wish for as all things ona global scale have unintended blowback.
To sum up the dinner ended fairly gracefully afterward, but I don't know if I want to associate, much less break bread, with this person anymore.
His soul is dark.
I'm going to try not to apply this experience to others that I know around here but I feel even more outnumbered on a certain level now than I did just 24 hours ago.
In short, I now believe that if a civil war type 4T came to western SC that he would quickly turn in me and whatever other liberals have befriended him.
And I would have never have thougth this about him before yesterday.:
It wasn't always like this. There used to be a time when "blue state" Republicans actively sought out the union vote.
The polarization of our politics into ideological camps has made it impossible for a Republican to campaign as pro labor which of course means that there's no possibility that union money will go to a GOP candidate.
Perhaps Obama will be pulled to the left, but the center has shifted so far that 'left' will only mean not as far to the right. Mitt, on the other hand, has a much bigger challenge.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.
This strikes as so familiar to 2004 in that GWBII was re-elected because it was assumed that Kerry didn't offer enough of an alternative to what was already in place. We all know now that Obama, at least in his first term, did not turn out to be the revolutionary visionary on which he based his campaign mantra. "Yes We Can" didn't last long at all. All we can hope for is that those who voted for him for this reason in 2008 will hold his feet to the fire during term two. The populace is in a disagreeable mood, so both sides have to step warily, IMO.
It's like that old song; "Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, and I'm here stuck in the middle." Or something like that.
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a
The situation largely is that Obama was dragged to the right by the congress, and a president Romney would be totally unable to resist. Obama could have fought harder for things like cap and trade and the public option, and avoided going over to the national security state. But no-one knows if that would have worked; whether he could have taken the congress, the public and the powers-that-be with him is certainly doubtful. He is somewhat charismatic, but not greatly so, and he's somewhat consistent, but also wavering at times. All of it I predicted, of course.
Ugh, just reading that make me feel sick! I really dislike people with that kind of destructive vindictiveness.Sadly I may have to agree with you here.
And that would not have been my inclination if I had been able to respond before yesterday but last night's dinner was an experience for me.
I know that you can't generalize to a larger group of people based on one experience without drifting into stereotypes but life is for learning.
Anyway, as I live in rural SC almost all of my neighbors are red stater types. And, like most rural people, most of them are on very insecure ground economically.
But of course that's not true for everyone around here and one person that I've known since 2008 when retired to this area from Manhattan. And yes, I mean the one in New York not the college town in Knasas. Anyway, this person had a background in electrical engeneering before going into a fairly second successful carrer in music. This is a person who traveled the globe and has met many different types of people. Such a background is not common around here and that's one of the reasons why we became friends after being introduced by a workplace collegue of mine.
At any rate, it has become common for us to have dinner together from time to time and last night was such a time. I already knew that this person was conservative. After all, it's unlikely that a liberal retiree would choose to live around here, but I had always thought of him as a conventianal Republican type. Not anymore. In the course of our conversation he revieled to me that he was not only hoping that a war with Iran would begin but that it would lead to a total economic dislocation within the US and he wanted all of this hardship to happen simply because Obama would be blamed for it all.
The only response that I could give him was the old chestnut to be careful what you wish for as all things ona global scale have unintended blowback.
To sum up the dinner ended fairly gracefully afterward, but I don't know if I want to associate, much less break bread, with this person anymore.
His soul is dark.
I'm going to try not to apply this experience to others that I know around here but I feel even more outnumbered on a certain level now than I did just 24 hours ago.
In short, I now believe that if a civil war type 4T came to western SC that he would quickly turn in me and whatever other liberals have befriended him.
And I would have never have thougth this about him before yesterday.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
