Forum Post: THE REPUBLICAN PARTY MUST BE SPLIT.....It Is The Cult of Calculation, Cynicism, and Cronyism
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 14, 2011, 9:19 a.m. EST by puff6962
(4052)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
PLEASE, EVERYONE READ This article, from a retiring lifetime Republican congressional staffer is one of the most insightful, frightening, and useful things I have found in my understanding of the Right.
Note the paragraph discussing the Republicans' very sinister strategy of diminishing the credibility and functioning of government due to the fact that such a strategy benefits their election prospects. Thus, by destroying good government, they are increasing left as the ones in control of a dysfunctional governement. It is simply a chilling dynamic.
Anyway, here's the article:
http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779
All true. Too bad none of our right-wing friends will ever have the courage to read it.
so true!
I read it and my right-wing personality is in agreement with my left-wing personality.....both parties suck.
One will always suck and one is wet clay waiting to be molded.
Mold away.
They need the courage to first admit that they can't read.
I know it isn't easy, but I still think there's value in rising above. My $0.02. Agree with your politics 99%.
I am neither right-winged, nor left winged. Yet, I read it word for word. However, I found it lacking true, verifiable facts, sources, etc. Could you help me? Could you help yourself?
Troll much?
Look, I understand your reply. There are a lot of knee-jerk people on both sides. I am just looking for an intelligent, responsible explanation. The link given didn't have any verifiable sources. Any argument worth making is based in fact. I'd like to see something besides opinion. Would you mind explaining? Any help you could give would be appreciated!
I prefer my herin pickled.
I've tried to be kind...my name is Henrietta Erin. I don't go for obvious reasons (family name on my father's side). Red is for my birthstone, garnet. And since a red herring is something you chase...I've used it on other sites. Thought it was witty. However, I'll look elsewhere for an intelligent conversation. I'm try to learn and you have little to teach me. Shame on you.
Look, I could give a damn about your kindness, but I will take the time to respond.
You choose a handle like redherin, then your first post to me concludes with "Could you help yourself?"
This is straight up troll territory.
Further, I've seen your posts in another thread, where you got in the middle of a debate and claimed the person making the obviously superior arguments wasn't convincing and needed to provide verifiable sources. The other side wasn't providing sources, and also wasn't making sense - that didn't bother you. This seems to be your angle of attack.
W/regards the article in question, it is the editorial of a lifelong Republican operative upon leaving the party. He's clearly got insight and provides a balanced perspective - clearly stating, for example, that he doesn't support Obama and the Democrats. It provides many references to well-known people and events and includes a footnote section with more details, but it's not a scholarly article. It's opinion. You're meant to take it for what its worth and apply your own experience in making a judgment.
Now, maybe you could do me an actual kindness and tell me who's paying you to post here?
I'm very sad for you. Yes, I've posted in another thread. I wish I had time to post more.
No one is making an "obviously superior argument" until they can back it up with sources. If I didn't ask about another side's sources, it was easy to find on Google. Opinion is fine. That's what we're all doing here, but as I'm forming my own opinion, I'd like a little substance to inform my decision.
I can see how you would draw the "troll" conclusion and I apologize for my hasty reply previously.
Happy Holidays!
I am not sure what "sources" you feel you need. The article provides many examples of bills, laws, actions and events recorded within the last 30 years to back up their claims.
one example is as follows:
The Author states "...But most Republican officeholders seem strangely uninterested in the effective repeal of Fourth Amendment protections by the Patriot Act, the weakening of habeas corpus and self-incrimination protections in the public hysteria following 9/11 or the unpalatable fact that the United States has the largest incarcerated population of any country on earth."
If you'd like "sources" start with the Fourth Amendment, then proceed to the Patriot Act. If you'd like to know about the size of prison populations in the world there are many document sources of that information as well.
Once you've read and processed these documents, you'll see that the author's statements are indeed based on recorded facts.
your statement of "I found it lacking true, verifiable facts, sources, etc. Could you help me?..." Is odd considering the entire article is littered with sources, facts, and reference points which you could use to learn more.
I am not trying to be mean here but since you requested help, I would like to suggest you brush up on basic reading comprehension and logical reasoning skills before reading something like the Constitution of the United States.
My Lord, what the man is saying is only what people have long suspected. Numerous authors have document the information he presents.
What is noteworthy, is simply that this man was a fly on the wall and got to observe these abuses for most of his adult career.
What the author does NOT substantiate is his personal opinion that all these acts are part of a grand and overarching strategy within the Republican party.
[Removed]
to redherin re "lacking in verifiable facts"
http://www.truth-out.org/i-know-how-beat-republicans-interview-former-gop-staffer-mike-lofgren/1322857106
here are more of the background and facts from a follow up interview published December 5, 2011
I help myself all the time. In fact, I'm helping myself as I write this.
If you are not right or left-winged, then you are not a bird.
the repelican party is DONE
I agree. It is an opinion, nothing more. The author seeks to convince the reader there is a formal strategy within the Republican party and pulls together many tidbits to show the picture he paints is true. While many of his tidbits are true and easily verified, there's nothing in his article that substantiates his imagination of official Republican strategy... that would take a copy of a memo from the RNC or statements from senior party officials, etc.
remember, half of America is right wing. I think a lot of people forget that. Many of you think you are going to change stuff right away. I'm telling you in Texas for example, folks think a bit different than you folks. In fact, the entire heartland thinks different than you folks. I'm just making it clear. Making it real.
You're right. I was born in TX and have lived here my whole life. 42 years. I've only, over the last five-ten years or so, come to see the devil hiding in the barn. Every talk radio station down here, almost without exception, features some RWNJ host, spitting mythical 'red meat' all day long. I guess my saving grace was not paying a whole lot of attention to politics at all until about ten years ago. The ones who've been eating this up for decades may never see beyond the myths.
Did you read the article?
No, half of America is not "right wing." America, as a nation, has become culturally more moderate and liberal then ever before. In our elections, however, wedge issues, religious beliefs, and adherence to Fox/talk radio propaganda has produced a schizophrenia in our political outcomes.
I scanned it and it sounds like it was written by a left wing loon. No author cited. I wonder why!
Read it.....emotional horse shit! Continue the tantrum! In the interim, I'll be enjoying a Cohiba Cuban.....and a fine 25 y.o scotch.....and an even finer 22 y.o lass to follow.
For what are you compensating?
Tell me about your mother.
Wish I had read this a couple of minutes ago. I wouldn't have wasted my time on replying to you. I was hoping to find an intellectual to engage me.
Q: What's the difference between Elvis and an intellectual Liberal?
A: Elvis has been sighted.
I've been reading this and I can't figure out what you guys were arguing about.
No compensation....mom is great! I'm a Chicago S Side Irishman who was destined to be a cop and long story short....made it out and did well. Even married a North side Irish girl...who would have thought. If you are searching for a Freudian vantage, move along little boy, unless you can discern Kant from Schopenhauer.....you best not dance in my polemical realm........(further induration...if you require the passive help of goole searching......really, just leave long before I expose your obvious ignorance). Ah, now, where were we? Oh, mom is great and I can't wait to see her and the rest of the family this week............................
That entire response was a quasi-intellectual bluff.
Kant and Schopenhauer? Duty with love.
What I've seen from you here, when you deign to speak, appears to reflect a rejection of duty to your fellow humans, and vitriolic condescension bordering on misanthropy.
Kant. Imagine if everyone behaved like you.
That you characterize the valid grievances of OWS as "tantrum," obviously on the sole basis of ideological disagreement with the protestors, well, it says it all.
Yawn..............so sad........when you have a valid response........bother me...I'm too busy. The tantrums are so boorish....
Oh where did you go my easiest of targets?
Tell your mom that I'll be a little late tonight.
Silly progressive......so sad to see you resort to such a low level polemic ( go ahead, use google to help you out...it's ok...the community college system failed you).
Actually, I graduated from Washington University School of Medicine. You try getting an interview there, Christopher Marlowe.
No need, the University of Chicago and Northwestern have served me well.....Primum non nocere
EVERYONE NEEDS TO SEE HOW CREEPY THIS FUCK IS:
Joyce said 0 minutes ago at Dec. 1, 2011, 10:37 p.m. EST (delete)
Sucks to know intellectually and financially you will NEVER achieve what I have EARNED. Best to you. YAWN..... “Acta est fabula plaudite”! Night boy!
Joyce said 7 minutes ago at Dec. 1, 2011, 10:30 p.m. EST (delete)
D n D....me? How fun.....do you have a 20 sided dice? Lol
puff6962 said 8 minutes ago at Dec. 1, 2011, 10:28 p.m. EST (delete)
Dude, you creep me out. Go back to Dungeons and Dragons or something.
Joyce said 13 minutes ago at Dec. 1, 2011, 10:24 p.m. EST (delete)
Come on silly person (note, gender neutral...to help you out-or, in) So do tell; since we have hit the realm of utopian essence. How can one explain, more pointedly you, that even Henry D. Thoreau took time between tending the bean fields in Walden to have dinner with Ralph W. Emerson - see the irony? And to move a little deeper ( I need to read more) do tell, how the philosophy of I. Kant, specifically related to time/space within an "a priori" fits into all of this. Let's see what you come up with in your passive research thanks to Google......feeling silly yet?
Joyce said 17 minutes ago at Dec. 1, 2011, 10:19 p.m. EST (delete)
Just had an epiphany; does your anger stem from a botched gender re-examination? Hormone therapy too much? Not sure if you are an angry lesbian or not? Wow.......
puff6962 said 22 minutes ago at Dec. 1, 2011, 10:15 p.m. EST (delete)
Your mother must have tried to potty train you too early.
Joyce said 28 minutes ago at Dec. 1, 2011, 10:09 p.m. EST (delete)
No, again, more assumed ignorance on your part...Joyce is a nom de plume for James Joyce...Irish author in case you are still lost....so great that you can be reliant on the passive intellect offered by the internet...one can pass as knowledgeable-at least you tried...hope this all makes you "feel" empowered by issues that are well beyond your control...but not mine......ah...what's that sound I hear? The limp air draining from OWS.......no one cares about the Canadian movement that hates success.........YAWN.....such a bore...........yes....you are amusing at best.............
puff6962 said 40 minutes ago at Dec. 1, 2011, 9:56 p.m. EST (delete)
Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God.
Aeschylus
I have known despair and I have known grace.....and somewhere in between I have learned effectiveness. My messages range from one pole to another, but they are mine. I love to have my ideas challenged and I love to change my thoughts on a subject after reflection.
But, I do not suffer fools. I also think it very likely that I could buy your miserable little trust fund ten times over.
I will leave you with this. "No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity. But I know none, and therefore I am no beast," from Richard III.
Goodbye little girl. Enjoy your superficial life.
Joyce said 56 minutes ago at Dec. 1, 2011, 9:40 p.m. EST (delete)
When you can elevate above verbal masturbation..try....S. Crane sums your inner intentions best in his poem "In The Desert"......
In the desert I saw a creature, naked, bestial, Who, squatting upon the ground, Held his heart in his hands, And ate of it. I said: "Is it good, friend?" "It is bitter- bitter," he answered; " But I like it Because it is bitter, And because it is my heart."
So sad you are such a fool. I often feel for the souless uneducated fabric......such pity.....it's rather nice being in the 1%......is there a foundation in your name where I can write a check?
CREEPIEST SHIT I'VE SEEN IN TEN YEARS!
Profound inferiority/superiority complex has been my analysis for weeks. And probably deeper psychiatric issues as well...
I've treated prisoners who didn't creep me out as much.
By the way...did you include all of your attacks pertaining to my mother here? No, I suppose that was left out, yes?????????? And all the PM's you sent me as well?
I included our entire discourse. I left out the fact that you had a chubby while you were writing your part.
See, there's that cc education at best...well done.
You're beaten Howard, now go rub your mother's feet.
Ha..........sad...you didn't pass the entry cc "Clep" so you were given the basic courses so you could at least feel apart of something......glad you found your place......lol
Night all. "exit stage left"...........
You are a creepy MOFO. The next time I hear of some husband decapitating his wife and sleeping with the headless corpse for a week....in Chicago....I have the feeling we will know your name. God help you.
Could " creepy" be equally defined by a strangers obsession over comments made about my mom? You dimiss what YOU inflamed..........
Sure. I pushed some buttons and your extreme creepiness came gushing out. For Christ's sake, if I knew you were nuts, I would have left you alone. Now, be a good boy, and go to bed. I have serious business to attend to.
"serious business" ? Such humor..............
Qui sunt sapientes primo reticuisset.
Please send your interpretation to me by private message.
Dude, you're sitting in front of your computer in your refractory period between masturbation episodes drinking a diet coke while wishing you had bought the Jesse Jane blowup instead of the generic one.
No.....just confronting your verbal masterbation......you have mommy issues, huh?
"masterbation"
From our paragon of conservative intellectualism.
I know....from the progressive playbook.. ( so boorish) "please note, conservatives claim moral platitudes we could never uphold, so please exploit any quasi gay, anti-Christian/God, or other gray area moral grounds to show that without "g(G)od" we just as righteous." Chapter 6, the progressive playbook on moral issues.
Umm, no, I was pointing out your spelling error - which I wouldn't do if you weren't generally such a superior asshole.
Opps...spelling....ah fuck, yes, you got me...I'm a total ignorant fuck. Wow! I feel soooooooooo inferior on this forum....but...as you point out.......I'm a "superior asshole" and thereby default, should go away. HA!!'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The more they curse, the more you know you hit a nerve.
Oh, can you tell your mom that I'll be a little late tonight......tell your 22 year old too. It's probably time she said "Oh God" and really meant it.
I think you mixed up your original attempt at a sentence. You're actually enjoying sucking off a 25 year old Cuban and will put a 22 to your head a little later.
You folks are so rude.
"rude"? For differing opinions...I've been called an " ass hole, freak, fascists, punk, prick, repubtard, 1% ass-lover, koch head" ......it goes on.....should I continue? Who's rude? I've never called anyone anything close to what I have been contended with.
The democrat party sucks but I'm afraid of how bad it will be with another GOP presidency.
They'll burn all the science books.
Can't be as bad as this one! Bailouts suck! And they did not work. So what do the Dems want to do? More bailouts!
this one's pretty bad but I'm not afraid of this government like I was with the Bush regime.
All the spending makes me afraid.
Bailouts prevented something far worse than what we're going through now. You've never seen the world's largest economy collapse because it's credit system evaporated. I don't like bailouts either, and I really don't like that they benefited the same assdouche's who got us into this mess, but sometimes you have to take some very bitter medicine.
I belong to no organized political party......I'm a Democrat.
Will Rogers.
The Democrats governed so well because they are almost an ungovernable nation unto themselves.
But, the current Republican party has managed something that the Founding Fathers never anticipated. They have managed to be completely ruled from top down. Their discipline is astonishing. They have allowed the delegation of their governing function to lobbyists and the powerful......and they have found a thousand ways around the mores, rules, and laws that once pushed a consensus in our governing while allowing for a well heeled minority to slow things down.
Take this little pearl. Have you ever heard of the reconciliation process? The Senate filibuster?
Well, normally in the senate, a bunch of old guys with foley catheters can grind things to a halt. The house has no similar mechanism.
So, what you do is pass an ultra-conservative bill in the house and a moderate bill in the senate. The two bills get kicked into the reconciliation process to emerge as one bill (in the past, one of compromise) and--under Republicans--the ultra-conservative bill emerges unchanged.
The kicker is that reconciliation bills cannot be filibustered in the Senate and can be passed with a simple majority. This is an end around on all of the principles that have ruled the Senate for 200 years.....but, that was before the Republic of Reaganistan.
more socialism is not the answer to fascism. I say we just get rid of the fascism which is mostly coming from the republican party but the democrat party has jumped on board as well.
In a game with only two players, you're forced to choose the one who might let you hold the trophy.
or change the game
Three players strengthens the team with the more disciplined player.....I hate to tell you this, but if OWS fielded it's own candidates from it's own party, the Republicans would be spidermanning all over the ceilings.
That's a euphemism for ejaculation, by the way.
actually the democrats do better currently with a 3rd party. Take me and the other libertarians for example: 10% of fiscal conservatives vote for Ron Paul that takes away 10% from who? the repugs. We were warned that if we did not get behind McCain that Obama would win. "Oh, well maybe you should get someone better than McCain then." And we just let it happen because although the dems don't offer much that is libertarian, the repugs offer slavery and death in the form of wall st. and the fascist healthcare system.
Yes, the Democratic wet dream of wet dreams is for the Republican party to fragment into the Evangelicals/Conservative Catholics, the Libertarians, and the Teaboogers.
It will happen if Roe v. Wade is not overturned in the next decade. The Evangelical leaders, in particular, have threatened to withdraw their support for capital gains cuts and etc. if they don't get their manna. The Republican leadership hate these nutcases, but they need the votes.......someday, they will just get tired of dealing with the crazies and the divorce will begin.
The Republican candidates already look, and sound, like televangelists but.....lose a few more elections.....and the party will start to rethink it's primary process (where the evangelicals rule) and it's close ties to christian fascism.
Years ago, I wrote to a prominent Democrat and I suggested a Nixon Southern Strategy for the Democrats. In this plan, the Democratic party would accept restricting abortions to the first trimester in exchange for more extensive family planing and pro-family initiatives. The idea, of course, would be to minimize the possibility of an unplanned pregnancy and, if it occurred, to make some decision before the fetus developed a true nervous system. This middle ground approach would have marginalized the radical elements of the pro-life movement and would have allowed Democrats back into white churches. But, alas, not all of my words are listened to.
So, we are where we are......but, mark my words, the Republican party will, by it's current primary scheme, field more and more religious candidates each election cycle. The crazies will get crazier until the party can no longer stand itself.
you have just pointed out the first thing that you and i really agree on! abortion. lol i think the first trimester is fair game and after that it should be prohibited. preferably in the first 6 weeks but you know. i think roe v wade is about as good as we can get on that topic where there is a ton of grey area.
Yes, at some point, there becomes a constellation of cells that simply cannot be called a "choice." I remain Pro-Choice, but I think that choice occurs before you get Mr. Hanky out and slip him into Miss Hoo-Hoo up until the point at which something inside becomes responsive to pain.
I have discussed this with some vegan members of this board, so forgive me for paraphrasing. But, the world is not divided into the living and non-living, but instead by the aware and non-aware. Plants don't feel pain, so knock yourself out on that salad bar. However, if you've ever seen a feed lot, or watched a bad hunter make a gut shot, you would think twice about ever eating meat again. Animals feel pain and, in that regard, their lives are sacred. In fact, I have no interest in a heaven where my dogs aren't allowed in.
So, yes I eat meat, but it's raised and butchered in a painless fashion.....just a few miles from where we live. Anyway, I'm digressing.
The medical ethics that were employed at the time of RvW centered upon this notion of "vitality." In essence, could the fetus live outside the womb. Why this was important, I do not know. But, back then, you couldn't keep 28 week old fetuses alive.....so this third trimester rule came into being. Now, vitality has been pushed back to within the second trimester and, so, the rationale behind some of the court's ruling has been altered.
Realize, too, that at the time of RvW, things like ultrasounds and super accurate pregnancy tests were not availabe.....so, they couldn't always date the pregnancy. Now, of course, you can find out if you're pregnant within days and your pregnancy can be termed within a couple of weeks at an early date. Again, the logic behind the court's ruling has been corrupted.
And, now I can hear you ask, why hasn't the court revisited the ruling? Well, they're scared for their lives for one thing. This is the biggest can of worms since the Civil War, but it's conflicting sides are not divided by geography and nobody knows what the outcome of the court, or the ramifications of a change, would be.
But, eventually, a challenge will percolate up and the justices will be forced to peer into the looking glass. When they do, remember that compromise I sent to a member of Congress included. Life begins at the awareness of pain. In fact, life if pain. Anybody who tells you otherwise is trying to sell you something (from the Princess Bride).
How did we get on this subject?
idk i usually never talk about abortion because it's such a waste of time. I'll tell you another thing though. All of the internal organs and body parts are fully developed at about 5 weeks. I think that makes a good argument for getting it done before then but I don't like one-size-fits-all rules and this topic sure is a can of worms.
Yup... and that's how the Dems passed Obamacare.
No, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed the Senate by 60 to 39, not 51 to 49. I've got about 15 posts to respond to and this thing keeps asking me to wait a couple of minutes (probably what your wife asks you every night), so can you be more interesting?
There has to be a way of introducing intelligent non-partisan debate in Congress but I am at a total loss here... they lack the ability to even neutralize the sticking points.
The Republican party has a grand strategy to produce a national fiscal crisis and to use the chaos to gut social security, medicare, and medicaid.
It's like when Don Corleone realized that it was Barzini all along. We've been focusing on Tattaglia, but he's just a pimp.
All of the Republican rhetoric has simply been a fog to hide their greater ambitions.....turning back the New Deal.
They want to return America to what it once was.....a floating mass of glacial ice.
Apparently it's not just them:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/obama-running-on-republican-policy-aimed-to-disman/
Obama isn't Gary Busey enough to be like a current Republican Presidential contender.
If he were smart, Obama would adopt a strategy where, in the middle of acting all calm and collected, he started speaking gibberish......sort of like the episode of Seinfeld when Kramer got dinged on the head by Crazy Joe Davola and he kept saying "jo jo himbine" out of nowhere.
That way, he would at least seem a little less predictable. Also, the Republicans might begin to worry that he might declare war on Germany or something and give the guy a little slack.
I call it the Joe Davola strategy, and I think it's his best shot at getting re-elected.
I'm not here to debate partisan politics with you...
@ puff : Gr8 find, link and post.
Though from across the water the vast majority of US politics comes across as variations on the theme Of Right-Wing, from Rabid to Vapid.
The nuances and essential differences between Republocrat & Demoblican are only discernible at the margins as both parties only offer a 'faux choice', as there is only really ONE CORPORATE BANKER OWNED PRO-WAR PARTY, with two factions engaged in a dance in order to maintain some vestigial illusion of 'Democracy', whereas what we increasingly have in all 'Western Democracies' but in particular The U$A, are variations on the theme of demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy.
Nevertheless, thanx for your post.
par ardua ad astra ...
Since 1991, there has not been a single Republican member of Congress who has voted for a tax increase in any form.
The Republican party is not a party, it is an army for the wealthy and for corporate interests. Nazi's couldn't enforce that kind of adherence.
Yes.
I've seen this article before. You can see the same on the forum. How many do not vote threads are there? How many threads are there about how people are losing interest and it is all over or it is useless to fight? Oh, and those attempting to incite violence?
Destabilize the economy is an important feature. If you look back at all movements and, especially, those since 1960s (but you can go back further) you will find something significant. People who lived in deep poverty were not protesting for the most part. You cannot fight if you are living hand to mouth.
Every protester should read this article. Every voter should read this article.
Can it be that the systematic invalidating and denigrating of our government over the past 30 years could have been part of a political calculation?
The more you bash the government, the lower it's favorable rating, the lower this number, the more the populace votes Republican. This cycles and you get a less and less functional government.....a self fulfilling prophecy.
A less and less functional government ... is a good thing.
Like the GA ...
Like Mexico.
Hi Puff, Thank you for post and link. Best Regards, Nevada
You too, buddy.
the repelican party is DONE
Cue scary Halloween music.....dun...dun.nu...dun...dun.nu
Puff: [screaming hysterically] It's the boogeyman! The boogeyman's outside!
Libertarians: Oh Puff, stop it! You're scaring Jaded Citizen. There's nobody out there, now if you don't stop this I'm going to have to turn the TV off and send you to bed.
Puff: Nobody believes me!
Jaded Citizen: I believe you, Puff.
That is a great article. I said a lot of similar things in an email I sent to repelicans in the run up to the budget debate. I must have emailed it to over a hundred people - a real pain in the ass when you are trying to keep your email list small to avoid capture by spam filters.
It didn't do a lot of good though. They couldn't end the Bushite tax cut then, and they won't do it now.
Upon the Question of Default of Our National Debt
It's written with a bit of humor - which is odd since I don't have one.
Sure you do. I bookmarked the blog and will return. Keep up the good work.
Per http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-09/house-republicans-back-tax-revenue-in-supercommittee-plan.html , "Nov. 2 (Bloomberg) -- Forty House Republicans joined with 60 Democrats to urge the super-committee seeking a $1.5 trillion debt deal to include higher tax revenue and aim for a much larger package of $4 trillion." It appears there are at least 100 members of Congress interested in actually doing something in the interest of the Nation rather than their own reelection.
Again, let's see how many of them actually vote for a tax increase. I will give you a clue....it will be either none or the bare minimum to get the bill passed. These votes will come from members with a lock on their district. They will be promised no significant primary challenges and all other sorts of things. This same dynamic happened with the Medicare D bill and there was outright bribery going on on the floor of the house. This is what corruption, cronyism, and an iron hand looks like.
God, I'm watching this special on Monarch butterflies....simply fascinating.
From http://www.legistorm.com/person/Michael_S_Lofgren/7777.html we see the author, Michael S. Lofgren, was a $150,000 per year budget analyst. From http://www.gao.gov/archive/1995/gg95078.pdf we see he will receive approximately $100,000 per year of retirement income. I expect a book soon.
From http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/the-quiet-staffer-who-went-nuclear-on-the-gop-20110911 we find "The 58-year-old worked on the House Budget Committee from 1995 to 2005; from 2005 until his retirement this May, he was the chief analyst for military spending on the Senate Budget Committee. Lofgren began his career in 1983 on the staff of Rep. John Kasich, R-Ohio, who later became chairman of the House Budget Committee and is now governor of Ohio. He also worked under former Rep. Jim Nussle, once chairman of the House Budget Committee, and former Sen. Judd Gregg, once chairman of the Senate Budget Committee."
It appears from his employment record that Mr Lofgren is a moderate Republican, so I'm not surprised he is as dismayed as I am regarding the expansion of the extreme right wing that recently came to prominence in the Republican party (Michelle Bachman, RonPaul, all those freshmen, etc) that now has a stranglehold on the party's moderates.
Though I agree in general with many of the factoids he provides in his editorial piece, it IS the opinion of a comparatively low level budget analyst, not an insider Republican strategist.
The statement, "Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner" unpins Mr. Lofgren's entire piece, but it is only a paraphrased summary of what another staffer had to say. His opinion is based on another man's opinion.
I personally resonate with the opening paragraphs summarizing Mr Lofgren's disdain for both parties. In my opinion, much of the mess we're in comes from the promises both parties make to the public in order to get elected. For Democrats, the promises often include benefits offerred without discussion of how they'll be paid for. For Republican's it's often tax cuts without discussion of what programs to cut.
As a fiscal conservative, I would like to see Government spending cut as low as possible while retaining the services and benefits we as a nation decide we need. I would then like to see a simplified tax structure that remains progressive but never allows more than 30% of the population to pay no taxes whatsoever and does not require we hire accountants to do our taxes to ensure we didn't "miss something."
No more Federal programs without ALSO talking about the corresponding tax increases that will be required. No more tax cuts without ALSO talking about what services will be eliminated.
No more deficit spending. Is that too much to ask ?
"Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner" unpins Mr. Lofgren's entire piece, but it is only a paraphrased summary of what another staffer had to say. His opinion is based on another man's opinion.
So what. If I heard Herman Goering repeat that Hitler had suggested the "final solution," should I dismiss it because I learned of it second hand?
Mr. Lofgren seems to have waited until his pension was firmly in place and Washington could become an afterthought before he bared his soul. Perhaps it would have been more admirable to write this piece ten years ago, but I'm just glad he did write it.
If you would like to read an interesting book that somewhat concisely reiterates the dynamics of the modern Republican party, read Jonathan Chaits, "The Big Con." Hell, you can buy it on Amazon for a penny. But, it is a very good book.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0618685405/ref=tmm_hrd_used_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=used
You can believe what you want, but I for one simply don't buy into the idea that there is a broad strategy within the Republican party to diminish the reputation of Congress.
By the way, this isn't Goering saying that Hitler suggested the final solution. It's a private saying he heard it mentioned by a corporal. The guy was a budget analyst. He didn't work anywhere close to those setting Republican strategy.
No doubt Mr Lofgren waited until retirement to offer such a damning opinion of the people he worked for and whose causes he helped advance. I suppose he had no employment opportunities with the Democrats over those 28 years.
I don't read "hit pieces" on the Democrats or Republicans. As far as I'm concerned, they both suck. We need to break down the two party system and get the freakin' money out. See http://occupywallst.org/forum/we-the-people-in-order-to-a-proposal/
Hit pieces are not extensively footnoted.
If you do not believe that Republicans would follow such a strategy, then how do you explain the fact that we raised the debt ceiling seven times under George Bush....without a peep.....but, despite our credit rating being in peril.....the Republicans were entirely recalcitrant. The Super-committee suffered a similar fate.
My Lord, do you monitor how often Republican members of Congress make the statement that, "CONGRESS IS BROKEN," versus Democrats?
It may be a good idea to wipe your head off after you pull it out of your ass.
Footnoted with additional opinions expanding on his core opinions. I usually respect your posts, and I'm more than a little surprised that you seem incapable of critical reading in this case.
There are simply no facts offered to substantiate the man's opinion that there's a grand conspiracy within the Republican party to destroy the image of Congress. Like most conspiracy theories, the author points to several "dots" that are in many cases factual, but the image he draws by commenting the dots in his preferred fashion is completely unsubstantiated by any fact.
Keep it up and I'm going to have to remove you from my list of rational posters for whom I retain respect even when I disagree (not that you care).
Didn't mean to offend.
I gave that book, "The Big Con" to my mother in law.....a Fox news acolyte.....knowing that she would think that I am some hippie radical by the time she got through the first ten pages.
However, I also told her to read it and to disprove any of the information or conclusions of the author. Of course, this led her down an odyssey of research and, the final result, she began to realize that Fox news is a hit piece.
Conspiracy theories are different than strategies. I would have never thought that I would live in an America where one party would sacrifice our AAA credit rating for the sake of politics......but here we are. The grand bargain that could have been struck was derailed by the mention of revenue increases as part of the deal.
Here's a conspiracy for you to research.....
When was the last time a SINGLE Republican member of the House or Senate voted for anything that represented a revenue increase?
I think the last time I heard Republicans supporting revenue increases was November 2, 2011.
Per http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-09/house-republicans-back-tax-revenue-in-supercommittee-plan.html , "Forty House Republicans joined with 60 Democrats to urge the super-committee seeking a $1.5 trillion debt deal to include higher tax revenue and aim for a much larger package of $4 trillion."
There appear to be at least 100 members of Congress interested in actually doing something productive.
P.S. I get all my news from PBS NewsHour ;o)
No, the last time a Republican member of Congress voted in the affirmative for a tax increase was during the Presidency of George Bush......
George Herbert Walker Bush.
1991.
Conspiracy? Disciplined strategy? The Nazis couldn't hold their coalition together that long.
You don't accept 40 Republicans writing their leadership urging them to accept revenue increases as evidence that not ALL Republicans are part of your conspiracy?
Also consider reading the CBO analysis of Paul Ryan's plan at http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/CBO01-27-Ryan-Roadmap-Letter.pdf . Interesting.
I'm sorry, but is begging their leadership for a political cover so that they might actually do the unthinkable not strange to you? The fact that they are writing their leadership rather than assisting in legislation with members of the other side is telling. And, there has been this kind of moderate lassitude in the past and EVERY time it has been squashed by the Republican leadership and Grover Norquist. Every time.
You look but you do not see. You listen but you do not hear. You have your beliefs, and you try to fit the world to them.
Sadly, that seems a pretty accurate portrayal of the Republican party as it has devolved in the past thirty years -- a much different party than it was before Reagan. The article is exactly right about how Republican leadership creates myths about taxes (such as the myth that the top 1% in income pay more than their fair share). Even if you present the facts to Republicans that they only pay 45% of all income taxes, it doesn't matter because many of them automatically tune out the next truth that they top 1% makes 55% of all the income; so, it SHOULD be paying 55% of all income taxes if the system were not hugely rigged in favor of the rich. They don't care because they have their own dreams that they, too, will one day be rich, and they don't want anyone taking any part of that away from them, even if it means for the present they have to pay a higher share of their income in taxes than the rich. It gives them something to yearn toward I guess.
--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/bushwhacked-by-the-bush-tax-cuts-for-the-rich/
It is a great article. I enjoyed reading it - I should go back and reread. It was more than simply entertaining from my perspective.
He says almost exactly what I said here: -- Upon the Question of Default of Our National Debt July 6th, 2011 http://zendogblog.net/blog/
But he does so with a great deal more clarity and insight.
Yes. He was on television for a couple of interviews and that was the last I've heard of the guy. It is interesting that he didn't go the money route and write a book. From the interviews, he looked like some guy making a death bed confession. His words are a glimpse into a grand strategy to create a severe fiscal crisis and for the Right to finally wage war upon the New Deal.
I would do everything that I can to maintain both the appearance and the reality of our commitment to non-violence as a movement. We must cut off the hand of the once percent from the reigns of power.
Why now? This turkey should have whistle blown while he was on the job.
Yes. I thought about that. But the same could be said about every Republican who has come out against his party. They tend to become pariahs within their former social circles and lose all of their employment options.
Perhaps, we should treat them as whistleblowers and give them new identities.
Please, more hyperbole would frame the intelligent dialogue further............but wait, tantrum-based Canadian movements garner more middle America support.......opps.
Can you clarify that a little...or a lot?
I'll betcha none of the information in this link will get any air time on Fox News!!
There's no "information" in the piece. It's an editorial.
Hi Puff, Good post. Good link.
The Republicans and Democrats are a tag team, taking their turns body-slamming the American people.
Our only hope is to educate ourselves to know how to recognize true leadership.
So you see - they are the same vindictive, sick, sadistic, greedy little fucks I've been saying they are all along . . .
Imagine that.
Who are they?
Was that directed my way? Welch, Leahy, Sanders, and before him, Jeffords, of the most famed Jefford's Jump of 2002.
Great men, excellent politicians, individuals who are not afraid to speak the truth nor to stand up for the average American.
And the democrats are better. Wow. Just wow.
The democrats from Vermont certainly are. I don't know about the rest of them.
Not that I'm dem - I'm independent. And I'm not here to tell you how to vote. I am here to provide information on the conduct of war - psychological war - upon those who would subjugate us, with the removal of collective bargaining rights, with the constriction of our economic options, access to health care, legal services [based on economics]
etc.
I am here to wage war upon those who claim "there is no global warming", those specifically who make such claims knowing they are false, and yet use every tool at their disposal to make it appear otherwise, and do so for the sake of profit.
yes, I think the dems are better - I'm not here to sell you that concept. I am hopeful that together we can get past such differences in an effort to absolutely destroy those who tell huge lies with the goal of profit - and do so at our very great expense.
Your expense - and mine.
Oh. And there is no getting past the differences. If you really think that there is a dimes worth of difference between those two parties then you are my enemy. And the enemy of freedom.
Since you put it that way -
I support your right to believe that. I support your right to say that. I support your freedom, personally, even though you are completely wrong.
Not only are you wrong, you are limiting yourself, and by extension, you would limit OWS, by your own lack of vision and your lack of willingness to accept me, at my word, based on the fruit of my own two lips - which are themselves deeds that stand on their own, and speak.
Regarding the differences between parties, I could go on at length. Collective bargaining rights are one specific issue that clearly illustrates a stark difference between them.
If you don't see that, then you probably didn't hear about that issue as it arose in Ohio, and began to spread from there throughout repelican states.
I don't care about your political naivete. What I do care about is that you recognize the necessity of change. I will accept you on that basis.
The only question is, will you accept me on that basis as well?
My words, which are the fruit of my lips, and so are deeds:
.
-- On Civil Disobedience and Direct Action . . . . November 12, 2008
http://occupywallst.org/forum/on-civil-disobedience-and-direct-action/
.
-- It has been said we should take up arms . . . . November 12, 2011
http://occupywallst.org/forum/it-has-been-said-we-should-take-up-arms/
.
-- Direct Action - Proposal before the committee: A Demonstration of Tongues . . . . Nov. 13, 2011
http://www.occupywallst.org/forum/direct-action-proposal-before-the-committee-a-demo/
.
-- Trending on Twitter - Corporations Have No Tongues . . . . Nov. 13, 2011
http://occupywallst.org/forum/-_-trending-on-twitter-corporations-have-no-tongue/
.
-- Targeted Interdiction - What is it? . . . . Nov. 14, 2011
http://occupywallst.org/forum/targeted-interdiction-what-is-it/
.
. -- Targeted Interdiction and Subversion of Institutions - WTF? . . . . Nov. 15, 2011
http://occupywallst.org/forum/-targeted-interdiction-and-subversion-of-instituti/
.
.
d
http://zendogblog.net
Your masters had control for two years. And I think that Obama will be reelected. So those times must be paradise to you. Vermont? Ah yes, the state that refuses to truly punish convicted pedophiles. Great democrats there.
Pedophiles should be taken out and shot, plain and simple. Just my opinion.
And no, those times were not 'paradise' legislatively speaking.
To consider them my 'masters' is to underestimate the measure of what I propose. I propose that we capitalize on the investment of instability that money managers have created. The dems generally tend to be a bit more timid than the right.
For example: Some people, both within and without the OWS movement are demanding a concrete platform. For the time being I am much more content with a broad based set of 'demands.' We have the political system captive in a sense. A certain lack of articulation regarding our purpose, our intent, will keep them seeking that thing that will pacify us.
The louder we become, the more desperate our opponents will become, and the more eager they will be to toss each other overboard in an effort to keep their ship afloat.
Like it or not - that will tend to make members of both parties a bit nervous.
Some of what I propose has the capacity to drive certain political operatives completely of the national stage in shame and disgrace. Not by my doing, but by peer pressure. If we create the right kinds of pressure on the money managers, that pressure will translate somewhere else. It's physics.
The possibilities of this movement are endless - bounded only by our imagination and our willingness to be all inclusive and to act with deliberation.
I think I'm beginning to see what you are talking about. Perhaps there can be common ground between adversaries.
Adversaries? Are we adversaries?
Oh yes. The enemy of my enemy(in my opinion republicrats and the Federal government in general) is my friend etc.... You are Left, and all that entails, and I am Right. Even if we brought down the present system we would fight over the next form of this nation.
If you are conservative, then you believe . . . that collective bargaining rights of the American worker are a thing to be abolished? This would then permit systematic workplace injustice in the name of productivity, without recourse to redress . . .
You believe that deregulation of the financial industry is the solution to rampant greed and the economic collapse that has produced . . .
??
No to both. So does that make me a liberal? And are you saying that unions are perfect? I happen to be a member of a union. Yes, sorry folks. But I'm no UC Berkfilth graduate. I managed to break the brainwashing. Anyway, deregulation or regulation has nothing to do with the financial world. The rich will get richer regardless of how much government threatens them. And that is because the government makes money off of them. Even your worshipful democrats.
I'm not an economist - but it is clear the banking industry is insistent on deregulation. They insisted that the fees they recently attempted to institute were not a response to regulation as much as an economic necessity mandated by the imposition of regulation.
The public backlash made them decide that maybe they didn't have to implement them after all.
Who was the author? Tis but a compendium of the usual left wing complaints that Republicans aren't Democrats and therefore are, wrong, insane, evil, etc. Very ordinary lefty stuff really.
http://www.truth-out.org/i-know-how-beat-republicans-interview-former-gop-staffer-mike-lofgren/1322857106
He's a lifetime Republican.
First Power, Then Change.
PLEASE, everyone read this article. It explains what will happen in the current budget fight, why it will happen, and possible how to avert a catastrophe.....
I'll give you a hint.....don't vote Republican.
This sums it up pretty well:
"Over the last four decades, the Republican Party has transformed from a loyal opposition into an insurrectionary party that flouts the law when it is in the majority and threatens disorder when it is the minority. It is the party of Watergate and Iran-Contra, but also of the government shutdown in 1995 and the impeachment trial of 1999. If there is an earlier American precedent for today's Republican Party, it is the antebellum Southern Democrats of John Calhoun who threatened to nullify, or disregard, federal legislation they objected to and who later led the fight to secede from the union over slavery."
Yes. Nullification has been replaced in lingo by "returning (blank) to the states." Ubiquitously, these items are anti-democratic or are part of a divide and conquer strategy of the Right.
Read about ALEC (Koch Brothers project) and you will get the idea.
If they can't squash labor across the nation in one swoop, they will do it one state at a time so that factories will move to "right to work" states where labor can be stripped down to 3/5ths cost and conditions suck.
State's rights, nullification, "returning (blank) to the states," and "right to work" actions will all lead to the paradise described in the United States of RonPaulistan.
Good post. Your got the idea. Their just helping us out of our money so they can show more profits and they can have the money for their yachts, second homes, third homes, and what not.
All of these ploys simply leads to a "race to the bottom" on whatever item is being peeled away from the federal or national umbrella.
Well it's just a huge relief that the Democratic Party NEVER, ever, participates in such behavior. Well...Mike didn't exactly say that did he? He pretty much talks about Democrats being putzes too...Like in his op-ed in the LATimes in June where he stated:
"President Obama's fiscal policies are a mess. Whatever one thinks of the need for stimulus in a severe recession, it is obvious that running trillion-dollar deficits for years on end is unsustainable. Moreover, his proposals are dishonest. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that his proposed 2012 budget underestimates spending while overestimating revenues."
But hey, he stuck it out for 28+years didn't he? And we all get to pay his pension for it as well. Smart boy-play both sides, get more $$$.
I don't understand what you are responding to.
the repelican party is DONE
[Removed]
Being a part of the republican party (precinct comittee person) in Las Vegas and CO I can tell you that it is way corrupt. Luckily us RP supporters are getting mad power and maybe the nomination.
Good luck in Hell. Say hello to Saddam and Ronald Reagan when you get there.
If you think the Democrats are any different your a true SUCKER!
Democrats are in the peewee league compared to these professionals.
Nonsense, they are both corrupt to the core and have been for some time. You are choosing willful ignorance to the reality we see before us, perhaps in defense of your support for Obama. Obama, Romney, Bush, Gingrich = the same old imperialist/Big Government that is destroying our way of life.
Ya, and Hitler was just a little bit worse than Hindenburg. The world exists in grays and I would suggest that you become a little bit better at judging the shades.
Nonsense, OWS is a bunch of Obama supporters who are too stupid to admit they were wrong. It is a tool to influence uneducated, easily manipulated people into supporting simple solutions such as marxism (which is easy to understand, yet truly dangerous)
I don't support Obama, but I do support the idea of good government, a social safety net, a meritocratic society, and a pathway for all citizens to better themselves.
Is that Communist? No, it is the America of 1950's.
I am the conservative and you are the corporate-communist. You probably have a tattoo of Stalin on your chest. Little pinkie, put your trash where it belongs.
I'm conservative, but I stand for individual rights. Vote Ron P a u l or vote for the same old garbage.
[Removed]
there is no difference between the 2 parties, if u don't realize this u have already lost the battle. The only possible end would be to vote for a candidate that has done nothing but explain how he believes in following the rule of law laid out in the Constitution. Until we start re-applying the actual law to the practices of government there will be no escape from the Facism that has existed under both Bush and Obama. Only one candidate will bring the troops home. Only one candidate will stop the bailouts. Only one candidate will prosecute the banksters. His name is Ron.,.Paul.,.
Gaze upon your future, underlabor spawn:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/welcome-to-the-united-states-of-republica/#comment-416160
Obama has invaded countries and is a war criminal just like George bush.
vote Pon.Raul!
Yes, then war on the poor and middle class can really begin.....all in the name of freedom.
Go unstick your pages of Atlas Shrugged.
The idea that one party is corrupt and genuinely opposed to the other which is not corrupt is beyond naive. Remember Hummergate and Monica. That is the "scandal" that saved both the Clintons and the Bushes. The real scandal was the fact that the Bushes and the Clintons were co-conspirators in the biggest drug-running operation of the era. This stuff is real!
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MENA/crimes_of_mena.html
"This is the article which had been scheduled to appear in the Washington Post. After having cleared the legal department for all possible questions of inaccurate statements, the article was scheduled for publication when just as the presses were set to roll, Washington Post Managing Editor Bob Kaiser (Like George Bush, a member of the infamous "Skull & Bones Fraternity), killed the article without explanation. According to the sidebar which appeared with the Penthouse Magazine version of this story, Bob Kaiser refused to even meet with Sally Denton and Roger Morris, hiding in his office while his secretary made excuses. "
Any wonder that Bonesman Kerry headed up the Senate "investigation" into Iran Contra, run by Bonesman Bush?
We're both part of the same hypocrisy, senator, but never think it applies to my family.
What? You been sipping the eggnog early?
That's from the Godfather II.
There are no snow whites in our world of grays. It behooves us, however, to make choices that lead us away from the dark.
What I've learned is that the corruption and criminality in high places is much more extreme than I once believed. We are talking about organized crime with all of the murders, extortion, blackmail, drug running, etc., going on under the protection of the National Security Act of 1947.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYOVQezWaCY
It takes time to wrap ones mind around this, but once it becomes clear, complacency is not an option.
Read a more tempered, well footnoted, description of the corruption of our economics and government in, "The Big Con," by Jonathan Chait.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0618685405/ref=dp_olp_new?ie=UTF8&condition=new
Excellent book - well worth the time!
I spent years cross-checking the claims of criminal conduct by our top officials in places such as Mena Arkansas. The site where I posted most of my research as been taken down, so it's far more difficult to provide immediate references.
I have the database in raw form, but I have not been able to import it into any DBMS.
Ruppert's presentation on 9/11 ties the CIA, Wall Street, drug running, and 9/11 fairly well http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQR2z4YCzDw I've checked his work. I don't necessarily accept the facts of peak oil, but it's a topic worthy of discussion.
There is enough items in the known world to worry about without delving into the conspiracies.
I guess I don't get it. If you think this whole cluster-fvck our economy has become is just a coincidence, you don't have a clue. This is by design!
There is enough items in the known world to worry about without delving into the conspiracies.
I'm still lost. Are you telling me that money laundering doesn't happen with the collusion of top banksters? If it does happen that's a conspiracy! At least give me this: was Iran Contra a conspiracy? Did the Church Commission find that JFK was probably the victim of a conspiracy?
There is enough items in the known world to worry about without delving into the conspiracies.
Conspiracies? WTF do you mean by "conspiracies"? Did Jack Johnson conspire to commit? If four airplanes went of course and met with violent demise in the same hour or so, is that evidence of a conspiracy? Does the official account name "Al Qaeda" as conspirators? Is insider trading a conspiracy?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n8qzuvvoEU
There is enough items in the known world to worry about without delving into the conspiracies.
[Removed]
Only one thing wrong with your analysis.
You say "good government" That is one of the biggest oxymoron s I have ever heard.
I am sure no republican, but I think that the Democrats and Republicans are both crapping on the country right now so as to keep their election slogans going strong.
Do you think that the government does nothing right?
Good government does exist in theory. The theory even exists in written form. It was almost the basis of our constitution.
Good government consists of the following ethical principles:
1.) That all human beings are created with equal rights, that among these rights are life, (and because of the specific requirements of the nature of that life) liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
2.) That government exists to protect these rights.
Government is, by definition, the organized use of force and coercion. A government which banned the initiation of the use of force and used it only in retaliation to its initiation would be a 'Good government'.
Was rural electrification good government? Was the Panama Canal good government? Was the Civil Right's bills good government? Was saving GM and Chrysler good government?
'Rural Electrification' is not something which should be handled by a government based on the principles I listed above. It should be handled by those who own the means of producing electricity and those who wish to have access to it.
From what little research I've done on the history of the Panama Canal (wikipedia), I'm not sure exactly what you're asking.
What the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (I'm assuming this is what you're talking about) sought out to accomplish (desegregation) was good. Its methods were not. What desegregation was supposed to accomplish can only be achieved by a philosophical change. While the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has brought about immediate economic effects, there is still a huge amount of racial prejudice in the minds of the people of this country and no act of government, as such, will change that. For that to change, there must be philosophical change. Everyone must fully realize that all human beings are created with equal rights. This does not mean that a business must serve one particular person or another, but it does mean that those business owners who recognize that one man's money is just as good as another's will succeed while those who choose to serve people or not based on racial criteria will find their clientele severely limited.
Saving GM and Chrysler was straight-up bad. They were poorly run businesses and they should have failed. It would have increased the market share going to the well run manufacturers, providing them with (economic) room to expand. The immediate loss of jobs to the factory workers would have been offset by this new expansion. Our government allowed its 'friends' to escape the confines of reality at our expense. It is for this reason (and many others) that I think they should be divested of their power over commerce.
Rural electrification was not initiated because it made no sense to the producers of electricity. They could make more money elsewhere. So, no rural farms would have electricity then......and only a minority would today. Hurray for Libertarianism!
The Panama Canal would never have been built and our Pacific Fleet would have been cut off in 1941-1942. The Japanese would have simply picked off our supply ships as they rounded the tip of South America. The greatest engineering feat of the 20th century would never have occurred with private enterprise alone. Hurray for Libertarianism!
Civil Rights.....Hell, we'd still have slavery. Hurray for you little nutcases!
Saving GM and Chrysler was probably the best stimulus to an economy, at the time it needed it most, in history. The closest parallel would Leonidas investing in forming a troop of 300 at the Battle of Thermopylae.
Hurray, rejoice in our absurdity!
If it made no sense to the producers of electricity, then it should not have been done. Rural farmers do not have a 'right' to electricity (unless they produce it themselves).
You're saying that we would still have slavery in a system of government based on the following two principles?
"1.) That all human beings are created with equal rights, that among these rights are life, (and because of the specific requirements of the nature of that life) liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
2.) That government exists to protect these rights."
Sure, loaning that money to GM and Chrysler was an investment. An investment in failing companies. I don't know what you mean by 'stimulus to the economy'. If you do even a little bit of research on what GM and Chrysler have done in order to 'pay back' these loans, you'll find that they haven't and probably don't plan to. That money which was loaned to GM and Chrysler comes from us. The government doesn't have any of it's own money; it's revenue stream is taxation. I don't know how it is that you consider increasing debt to be stimulus.
I'm sorry, I've just read too many ravings from you guys.
Let me give you a pearl that you can always carry with you:
"What works in practice cannot be wrong in theory."
If you truly figure the meaning of that sentence the you will have a productive life.
On the other hand, if you continue to exist that your theory is correct, despite all contradictory evidence, then you will likely remain, and die, a fool.
I always find it disappointing when a discussion about reality degenerates into veiled insults.
The pearl is a gift, the prediction is also a gift.
it's a good thing the democrats aren't crony. oh wait...
Democrats are like little kids playing with "ladyfingers" compared to these assdouches.
Odd. the Nazis were socialists.
Do you pride yourself in falling for Nazi propaganda? Anti-egalitarian, anti-communist, anti-union, right-wing socialists. Right.
They were not. They called themselves National Socialists, but their economic policies were rather Keynesian.
Fascist microeconomics are absolutely nothing like Keynesian macroeconomics.
Here is my site of reference:
politicalcompass.org
Judge it as you please. The source says that Hitler's policies were Keynesian; I might be confusing that with the Nazi party's economics.
Interesting source.
A search for Nazi Keynes provides hundreds of ideological (right libertarian/Austrian economics) sites trying to make the connection (smear). Have never heard any linkage drawn by respected historians or economists.
Fascist economics are about integration of state and industry, where they become one and the same (distinguished from communism in that with fascism (corporatism) corporations remain ostensibly private and huge profits are pocketed). That is microeconomic intervention to the extreme. Keynes is about macroeconomics.- aggregate demand. The only intervention he recommended were fiscal and monetary policy to compensate for slumps that lead to extended periods of unemployment.
Not in the usual sense. They were many things, but they would most resemble national corporatists intertwined with a radical ideology and a scapegoat.
The closest modern rendition of these ideals would be the neoconservatives.
Absolutely amazing! You Marxist filth actually think that the democratic party is any better? Are you really that stupid?
Karl, it's your bedtime.
Old hippie fuck I need your help. Need help making a t-shirt. We need to draw a picture of Zooccotti Park with a cage around it. Here are some ideas: Draw a hippie climbing the cage like a monkey and throwing shit. Draw a hippie rolling in mud and shit like a pig. Draw a hippies fucking like dogs. Draw a picture of a hippie eating peanuts like a big fucking elephant. Draw a hippie as a lazy fucking Ape doing nothing. We are for Obama!
Wow way to be a Dick....Dick. You may have noticed that everyone protesting is not as you so eloquently put it a "dirty hippy". At least they have the balls to put their beliefs on display, unlike other who play their fiddle while the whole fucking place goes up in flames...right Dick
I am 48 and I have paid far more in taxes than you will earn in your lifetime. Think about that sport. I would not feel comfortable hanging out in the park singing kumbaya, but someone who wears a Dayang each day can still see the logic of a progressive tax system.
You live in a world filled with villains, forces that are holding you back. Some liberal conspiracy is keeping this nation....and you.....from achieving their potential.
I hate to tell you this, but there is no conspiracy. You're just stupid. Sorry, for while the truth may set you free, first it's going to piss you off.