Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Who would reelect obama RIGHT now?

Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 3, 2011, 8:12 p.m. EST by REALamerican (241)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Would anybody? And IF you would, give us one reason? Like something he DID, not something he SAID, because all politicians will say whatever it takes to get you to like them!

311 Comments

311 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 7 points by bensdad (8977) 13 years ago

ask the people at GM

or my 21 year old son who is now covered by parental medical insurance

dont vote with your gut - vote with your brain

[-] 7 points by TLydon007 (1278) 13 years ago

"Would anybody? And IF you would, give us one reason? Like something he DID, not something he SAID"

I likely would..

He passed ARRA, which was a stimulus package that not only decreased taxes but did turn the tide of rapidly declining jobs in both the private and public sector.

He passed the Affordable Care Act. Despite what Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity may have told you, this bill is the first response to a healthcare system that was unsustainable. The only objection I have is the mandate, that was originally conceived of by the Heritage Foundation to dilute Bill Clinton's attempt at reforming healthcare. The rest of what you've probably heard can be easily dispelled by any number of non-partisan fact-checking sites.

He helped pass the Dodd-Frank Act. While I think repealing Gramm-Leach-Bliley should have been more important, this bill does strengthen consumer protections that could have prevented or mitigated the financial collapse if they were in place a decade earlier.

In regards to the past 2, any talk about deregulation freeing businesses ignores the fact that there simply can not exist a completely private financial or healthcare system. Especially within a legal system where neither can be held fully accountable for their actions.

While he didn't completely close Guantanamo, he did put a stop to government sanctioned torture. If you don't support that, you may want to choose a different screen name than REALamerican because you are anything but that for supporting torture.

He killed Osama Bin Laden. No matter how you try to spin it, he oversaw an incredibly risky mission to kill Osama Bin Laden. Had it failed, you would likely criticize him for it, but he didn't, and is therefore worthy of praise from anyone that's more patriotic than partisan.

He helped end the Gadhafi regime. While most OWS protesters would condemn him for this, I would have condemned him for not giving aerial support to the Libyan rebels. He also implemented it in a way that doesn't overextend our troops into a 3rd country by going through NATO instead of doing it unilaterally. Maybe I'm too hawkish for a liberal, or maybe I'm a Liberal Internationalist and not a Neoconservative.(look them up)

He repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell. I think openly gay soldiers are no less patriotic than openly heterosexual ones and deserve a right to serve in the military while not getting booed by Republicans at Primary debates.

He repealed the federal ban on funding for Stem Cell Research. This ban was completely asinine and did nothing but hinder science. Almost all labs receive some form of federal funding in the form of equipment, real estate, tax incentives, etc. so this was essentially just a ban on stem cell research altogether.

He reinstituted card check. This actually makes it more possible for unions to be formed and therefore makes being middle-class an achievable goal for everybody.

I sincerely wish he was less of a pragmatist and more of an idealist like FDR and perhaps he could achieve the goals that OWS has frequently expressed. But there wasn't an idealist on the ballot.

Also, before all you Fox News fans reply with the same old nonsense you get from chain-emails and such, remember that I've already heard it, fact-checked it, and know it to be nonsense.

[+] -5 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

I find it hard to give him credit for bin Laden, because no matter who the president was, they would have done the same thing.

I am middle class and I see unions for the evil egotistical self-centered money sucking things that they are. I was glad he repealed dont ask dont tell also, but again not impressed that he did something within his party lines.

Also, I am against all of his obamacare crap, because even HE admits it wasn't what he wanted it to be. And most people that supported the idea of a federal health care system stopped supporting it when they realized that it was so flawed. Even as a conservative, I like the idea of health care for everyone. If it is planned, affordable, and smart. This was far too rushed!

I'm not saying he is a 100% failure. As far as the democratic party goes, he succeeded decently. As far as all of America is concerned, though, I think he pretty much failed on all accounts.

[-] 2 points by TLydon007 (1278) 13 years ago

"This was far too rushed!"

This is actually the most ridiculous conservative news meme I've ever heard in my entire life.

Can you name a single piece of federal legislation that took longer to pass after the date it was introduced or did you just repeat what you heard??

[-] -1 points by REALamerican (241) 12 years ago

Actually, dumbass, I was talking about the specifics. They rushed the details so quickly that they aren't even sure how to do some of it!

[-] 2 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

"They rushed the details"

They rushed the details??

I'm going to ignore the fact that it took you a month to come up with such an impotent response and address it as if it were posted a month ago.

Of all the petty, imaginary complaints about any piece of legislation, I think I will never live to hear anything more pathetic than "They rushed the details".

I'm going to pretend that makes sense and follow up with some questions.

What "details" did "they" "rush"??? Who exactly is "they" that "rushed" ?? When were the "details" "rushed"?? How did "they" go about "rushing"??

You can either answer these questions or start calling me names like "dumbass" to spare your ego from realizing the fact that even you know what you're saying makes no sense.

[-] -1 points by REALamerican (241) 12 years ago

Oh I will readily admit that I do not know much about Obamacare, dumbass. :) I try to avoid things that are unconstitutional, illegal, and destructive to America. However one easy response does come to mind, and that is that they aren't even sure how to pay for it.

[-] 2 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

I think it's pretty obvious that you don't know what it is.

I suggest you just keep following the rest of the sheep and continue believing every chain e-mail from a relative without doing any research yourself. I'm actually happy that all the most ignorant people oppose the Healthcare Reform bill.

[-] -1 points by REALamerican (241) 12 years ago

Wow. You are surprisingly frustrating in your worship of Obama. You can't even have a simple discussion with me dumbass! You don't even provide any sort of argument other than im "ignorant". It doesn't matter if Obamacare is perfect, there is no way to argue that it is unconstitutional.

[-] 2 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

Like I said, keep opposing it. Make sure you keep calling everyone "dumbass" while you do.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 12 years ago

Gah. Your mindless drabble really is getting on my nerves. I'm not "opposing" it. It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. It doesn't matter who supports it or who doesn't. No arguing, no reasoning, just SOLID FACT. why do "you people" always use this term "oppose"? I dont have to oppose it because it cannot exist!

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 12 years ago

More wisdom from the guy that hasn't read any of it.

Keep going.

So far we have:

-they rushed details

-learning what's in the bill is unconstitutional (that's your dumbass excuse for not reading it)

and hopefully you have more to come.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 12 years ago

Forcing people to have healthcare? forcing people to buy and pay for healthcare? any time government and force is used in the same sentence you can bet its not right :)

dumbass

[-] 7 points by Disgruntled1 (107) from Kula, HI 13 years ago

I would rather have him in office than the other guys, if you think the washington issues are bad now wait till the republicans have the helm again, dont forget, Mr Obama had to walk into this mess, GWB had the wheel for 8 years,

[-] 2 points by littrellb (199) from Hillsboro, OR 13 years ago

Yes, I agree. its better to do NOTHING than to do something that might be wrong. Crap i want to talk trash but honestly i despise the GOP candidates just as furiously as I feel about Obama's worthlessness. Lesser of two evils? I dont know, it sucks we have to pick schmucks for a president.

[-] 1 points by Disgruntled1 (107) from Kula, HI 13 years ago

Thats the thing, we dont really have good choices, not to mention who knows what is going to happen in the house and senate races, no matter what the whole machine is broken and now not working together on anything, honestly the partisan bickering is ridiculous, i think no matter what there needs to be a total shakeup in the house and senate, an anti incumbent move as it were, just vote them out even if the alternative is an unknown

[-] 1 points by littrellb (199) from Hillsboro, OR 13 years ago

I would agree with that. Any alternative would have to be supported by the people and would know that they will be outta there if they dont listen to us.

[-] 1 points by Disgruntled1 (107) from Kula, HI 13 years ago

That would be a good start!

[-] 2 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

lol. I love how people STILL blame bush. Obama owned the house and the senate, and things got worse. so if democrats have bad ideas, then the opposite is probably what we need at this point.

[-] 4 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

We have a total continuation of all the Bush policies... And now Obama is responsible!

[-] 1 points by jjpatrick (195) 13 years ago

TOP 6 REASONS WHY OBAMA DESERVES YOUR VOTE:

  1. Independent Human Rights investigation of Obama and NATO crimes against humanity in Libya. Obama gave orders to bomb without congressional approval: http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/10/11/sarkozy-cameron-obama-al-thani-and-the-suffering-of-the-children-of-sirte/

  2. Fact check: Romney vs Obama: who lies more? -- quite similar. http://www.factcheck.org/barack-obama/ http://www.factcheck.org/tag/mitt-romney/

  3. Top 20 recipients of Wall Street Funds: http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U Historically, which party receives more from Wall Street? http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U

  4. An interesting perspective by Noam Chomsky: --Noam Chomsky on the State-Corporate Complex: http://chomsky.info/talks/20110407.htm

  5. Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQhEBCWMe44

  6. Noam Chomsky on why Obama is worse than Bush: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mA4HYTO790 and Obama's imperilstic policies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiwAFIgGCkQ

Now you know. Do you still choose to turn a blind eye? and choose between a false dichotomy?

[-] 1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

We have a continuation of the Bush doctrine...and all Bushs policies. If you are on the left I suggest checking out Glenn Greenwald, Constitutional attorney and Civil Liberties advocate. He is definetely the voice of reason and intellect on the left. And Obama is getting the full legal analysis on his columns at Salon.com

[-] 0 points by thoreau42 (595) 13 years ago

Voting for "the lesser of two evils" is the surefire way to end up with evil. If everyone voted for an actual decent candidate, and refused to buy into the politicking, maybe this country would stop spinning it's wheels. But so long as we have people as feeble minded as yourself, that'll never happen.

[-] 2 points by Disgruntled1 (107) from Kula, HI 13 years ago

Thank you, so intuitive, sooo i ask, where are these candidates? Last time i checked we dont have any so ill stick with my feeble minded decision and keep a respectable man in office, besides, its more about congess and the senate than the figurehead at the top.

[-] 2 points by thoreau42 (595) 13 years ago

Who's the respectable man in office? Not sure who you're talking about.

[-] 0 points by Disgruntled1 (107) from Kula, HI 13 years ago

Well, more respectable than the challengers IMO But then again im sure many dont think so

[-] 0 points by thoreau42 (595) 13 years ago

If we can agree that power corrupts, then we'd be able to agree that we would never want one man to have that kind of power. Not sure what's respectable about corruption.

[-] 0 points by ToddDunning (89) from Aliso Viejo, CA 13 years ago

Actually things were great under Bush until the 2006 Congress.

[-] -2 points by MikeyD (581) from Alameda, CA 13 years ago

Right on man, I'm with you! Not to go Godwin, but I would vote for Adolf fucking Hitler before I voted for a Republican. I could give a crap if Obama extended the Patriot act, or is cracking down on legalized marijuana growers in California, or if he expanded military operations in the middle east, or kept Gitmo open, or expanded the military tribunals, or targeted US citizens for execution.

He is better than any Republican!

[-] 1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Ah there you go....the Patriot Act...Its a ONE party system! Fascist system that is!

[-] 5 points by stevilism (130) 13 years ago

I think that he is waiting to win a second term...and then we will probably see the Obama we thought we were going to get in the first term. Jimmy Carter "swung for the fences" in his first term and did not get re-elected. He will most definitely win re-election in 2012...since the GOP has a bunch of "bat shit crazy" candidates. We will see what happens on January 1st 2013...(or around when he gives the State of the Union address)...we will surely hear his agenda for his second term.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Facts don't matter to OWS. -- http://overthecoals.blogspot.com/

Facts don't matter to OWS. They are in a deep trance. They are sitting in the park with hallucinations. Their behavior is bizarre, not because they are stupid, they have no grip of reality, they are disturbed from injustice. Injustice makes OWS appear to be rational people. They are uninformed about politics, economics, government, banks, money, and sports. OWS is weird. Colbert brought that to light.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

God you people are dumb.

Try this free speech.

Do you think I'm a plant?

http://overthecoals.blogspot.com/ -- read more

The Pentagon was hit by a missile on 9/11

American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the western side of the Pentagon at 09:37 EDT. All 64 people on board the aircraft, including the 5 hijackers, were killed, as were 125 people in the building. Dozens of people witnessed the crash and news sources began reporting on the incident within minutes. The impact severely damaged an area of the Pentagon and ignited a large fire. A portion of the Pentagon collapsed; firefighters spent days trying to fully extinguish the blaze.

Of course an investigation would have taken pictures of the remains of the plane. There would have been jet engines, hundreds of seats, the landing gear, pieces of luggage and bodies of the victims if the official story was true. The law suit by April Gallop who worked at the same spot of the explosion and claimed there was no sign of any plane was dismissed by Judge Denny Chin. Chin was then promoted from the SDNY district court to the 2nd Circuit. On appeal 2nd Circuit judge John M. Walker, Jr. sat on the panel. Walker is the cousin of President George Bush in a case filed against Cheney, Rumsfeld, and General Meyers.

Judge Chin's reason was that April Gallop is delusional. If the Boeing jet had truly crashed into the Pentagon, the pictures of the debris would have validated Chin's reason to dismiss the suit. Allowing the trial would have revealed April was delusional by producing the photos of the plane's parts.

Obviously there were no plane parts because there are no photos. Flight 77 was taken some place and all 64 people were murdered. These are facts they are not opinions.

[-] 2 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Oh please. Stop the conspiracy theory bullshit. I know you mean well, but you need to get another hobby.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

You hate specifics. You say nothing and you don't mean well. Colbert exposed OWS to be mental cases. I thought it was a trance, but I was wrong. I don't make fun of sick people with my accurate diagnosis.

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Okay, guy. Calm down.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Where's one specific? I'm calm and very experienced.

I write to expose corruption. You didn't notice. You are ignorant.

You insult my intelligence because you're rude and arrogant like the 2 nitwits on Colbert. http://overthecoals.blogspot.com/

An OWS critic asked if I knew how many conspirators in 9/11.

All the commandos who rigged the explosives, Bush, Condi, Rumsfeld, Silverstein, the entire 911 Commission who were exposed by Philip Shenon when he published THE COMMISSION. Its a huge number which I can't possibly know.

Arrest the above group and put them in a super max with an ultimatum to speak about each individual involved or they will be there until they die. I'd get very close to the exact number. To rig thousands of explosives throughout all the columns they blew would take a large group at least 2 weeks and maybe 6 weeks. All the pieces that were blown up were photographed. Very sophisticated detonation by highly trained commandos. Only idiots would believe any building will collapse straight down by a random plane crash.

Read my post about the NYT conspired not to publish incredible facts by Shenon, their reporter assigned to the Commission. Invite me to the park for a presentation with pictures of the evidence.

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 12 years ago

With every word you write you prove more and more what a complete fool you are. I'm sure you have already wasted 10 years of your sad, twisted life on this issue and probably many other insane theories. 1000 physicists and engineers cannot convince your closed little mind that you are wrong because "you just know you're right cuz you heard it on the internet". There is no bigger group of assholes than the "truthers".

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

he wont win re election. Im sure of it

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

LOL...Numbers are up. Don't be so sure.

[-] 0 points by dantes44 (431) from Alexandria, VA 13 years ago

Unemployment numbers maybe. He's gone in 2013.

[-] 0 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Unemployment is down this morning, Foxbot. Catch up.

[-] 1 points by dantes44 (431) from Alexandria, VA 13 years ago

Yay. A whole tenth of a percent. Meanwhile, the number relying on foodstamps jumped up 8 percent.

As for unemployment, wait until after the holidays when all the temp help are cut loose. National nightmare will be over in 2013. Thankfully.

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 12 years ago

The numbers are down because they don't count people that ran out their unemployment insurance, MSLSDbot. Wake up.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

i am absolutely sure. not when he is now going to be under investigation for several scandals. just him trying to force a general to lie was MORE than enough for me to completely lose faith.

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

LOL...Well, of course you are. Just keep sailing down "denile".

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

sigh. look at him! He may be in court before re election!

[-] 1 points by chuckhanger (19) 13 years ago

They didn't subpeona Obama.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

Yes they did? Would you like to read the news article? lol

[-] 0 points by dantes44 (431) from Alexandria, VA 13 years ago

They're going to subpoena his BlackBerry and scan it for any emails related to Solyndra.

[-] 1 points by chuckhanger (19) 13 years ago

Either way, he wasn't the one who started the loan guarantee program. But beyond this argument lies a deeper issue. The only reason anyone knows the word Solyndra is because of the news. This is loan guarantee is simply business as usual. Money outweighs human life in this country and we all know this. So where was all this negative energy when Bush was in office? And why is it now directed towards a man who has done nowhere near the damage the Bush administration did? This is just another issue that really doesn't matter in the grand scheme. He has my vote in 2012.

[-] 0 points by dantes44 (431) from Alexandria, VA 13 years ago

Bush turned down the application for the Solyndra loan.

you don't think the messiah did any damage/ Can you please account for half (giving you a fair shake) of the 3/4ths of a trillion dollars. Here, this is what he spent to get us to 9.0 percent unemployment. 8,.000,000,000.00

Have you seen any improvement? just call me a racist, I know you're itching to.

[-] 1 points by stevilism (130) 13 years ago

You will have to elaborate on that "scandal"

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

Solyndra? You DO know the white house was given a subpoena over that.

[-] 1 points by stevilism (130) 13 years ago

Ohhh...yeah, but who cares. It's a money related scandal...if it's a scandal at all.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

You don't care that he wasted potentially billions in our tax money...? Shouldnt that be pretty high on OWS worries...?

[-] 1 points by stevilism (130) 13 years ago

You are confusing wasting with stealing....not the same.

[-] 0 points by bereal (235) 12 years ago

Solyndra was one of many. They all had one thing in common, they all bundled campaign money for Obama's election. He paid them back times a million with OUR money. That IS stealing.

[-] 1 points by chuckhanger (19) 13 years ago

Wow, this guy watches the news. And repeats it. You DO know that subpeona is just another political stunt. But for our enlightenment, what does that mean, REALamerican? What happens when the White House receives a subpeona?

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

LOL...Another non-issue. But you rubes keep trying if it floats your boat.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

non issue? my president doing bad things is the BIGGEST issue

[-] 1 points by chuckhanger (19) 13 years ago

All presidents do bad things. Please, do us a favor. Get a gun. Load it. Chamber a round. Put the barrel in your mouth. Make sure the safety is off. Pull the trigger. This will help your anger issue.

[-] 0 points by dantes44 (431) from Alexandria, VA 13 years ago

Fast and Furious.

[-] 4 points by Redmist (212) from Yazd, Yazd 13 years ago

I am going to vote for him, He has raised the value of gold far beyond what I ever expected. Nothing helps gold like an idiot, I will seriously vote for him.

[-] -1 points by GeorgeMichaelBluth (402) from Arlington, VA 13 years ago

Geez I didn't think of it like that, Obama and helicopter Ben have made me wealthy too. Four more years, four more years!

[-] 4 points by gestopomilly (497) 13 years ago

exactly, and we sure dont want any of the ones on the campaign trial at this time so what to do? at least he does talk about "job creation" and not "saving the job creators" that we all know is malarkey coming from the likes of perry romney bachman or cain so it is hard to decide

[-] 0 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

You're in a deep trance.

Try this free speech.

Do you think I'm a plant?

http://overthecoals.blogspot.com/ -- read more

The Pentagon was hit by a missile on 9/11

American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the western side of the Pentagon at 09:37 EDT. All 64 people on board the aircraft, including the 5 hijackers, were killed, as were 125 people in the building. Dozens of people witnessed the crash and news sources began reporting on the incident within minutes. The impact severely damaged an area of the Pentagon and ignited a large fire. A portion of the Pentagon collapsed; firefighters spent days trying to fully extinguish the blaze.

Of course an investigation would have taken pictures of the remains of the plane. There would have been jet engines, hundreds of seats, the landing gear, pieces of luggage and bodies of the victims if the official story was true. The law suit by April Gallop who worked at the same spot of the explosion and claimed there was no sign of any plane was dismissed by Judge Denny Chin. Chin was then promoted from the SDNY district court to the 2nd Circuit. On appeal 2nd Circuit judge John M. Walker, Jr. sat on the panel. Walker is the cousin of President George Bush in a case filed against Cheney, Rumsfeld, and General Meyers.

Judge Chin's reason was that April Gallop is delusional. If the Boeing jet had truly crashed into the Pentagon, the pictures of the debris would have validated Chin's reason to dismiss the suit. Allowing the trial would have revealed April was delusional by producing the photos of the plane's parts.

Obviously there were no plane parts because there are no photos. Flight 77 was taken some place and all 64 people were murdered. These are facts they are not opinions.

[-] 1 points by americanboy (48) 13 years ago

OK!

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

I would vote for anyone over obama. I would vote for hillary freaking clinton over obama.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

God, we're screwed.

[-] 0 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Then you are no Liberal.

[-] 2 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

I'm definitely no liberal. Liberals are dumb whiners sitting in the park expecting utopia.

[-] -2 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Why don't you crawl back to Fox, where all your shit-for-brains knuckle dragging friends perch all day.

[-] 2 points by jay1975 (428) 13 years ago

I thought you said the hate is only coming from the right.

[-] -2 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Your positions are indefensible. You deserve no respect and will receive none.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

You just reversed the FOX witch hunt tactics. I'm done with you forever.

Where's one specific? I'm calm and very experienced.

I write to expose corruption. You didn't notice. You are ignorant.

You insult my intelligence because you're rude and arrogant like the 2 nitwits on Colbert. http://overthecoals.blogspot.com/

An OWS critic asked if I knew how many conspirators in 9/11.

All the commandos who rigged the explosives, Bush, Condi, Rumsfeld, Silverstein, the entire 911 Commission who were exposed by Philip Shenon when he published THE COMMISSION. Its a huge number which I can't possibly know.

Arrest the above group and put them in a super max with an ultimatum to speak about each individual involved or they will be there until they die. I'd get very close to the exact number. To rig thousands of explosives throughout all the columns they blew would take a large group at least 2 weeks and maybe 6 weeks. All the pieces that were blown up were photographed. Very sophisticated detonation by highly trained commandos. Only idiots would believe any building will collapse straight down by a random plane crash.

Read my post about the NYT conspired not to publish incredible facts by Shenon, their reporter assigned to the Commission. Invite me to the park for a presentation with pictures of the evidence.

[-] 1 points by americanboy (48) 13 years ago

Right!

[-] 0 points by Richardgates (133) 13 years ago

Holy crap Batman! You've gone nuts.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Americans won't think for themselves.

read more -- http://overthecoals.blogspot.com/

Americans either want an expert to think for them, many experts know nothing. You still need to choose an expert but their is no thought in doing that. Experts are never going to explain to their victims that they are only 10th best, they are all the best, or Americans want a quote from some big shot. Do they really listen to the quote because that quote is far superior?

Didn't the expert economists who testify before congress or advise the president, destroy the American economy. If it wasn't the experts who designed the strategy that has sunk America, did it all just happen by accident or destiny? I watch sports all the time. The experts are wrong about sports too, most of the time. In the stock market they cover themselves by claiming their advice is long term. There is no definition of long term.

I have been searching for an attorney to sue PIMCO. The class action securities practice is all done on a contingency. From the very beginning of my search I expected to find knowledgeable attorneys who could examine the evidence I presented to them and realize there was no doubt. That hasn't happened yet. They all run to an expert to tell them what to do.

I am very disciplined about using absolute facts with deductive reasoning to arrive at correct conclusions. I've done this since I took a logic course in 1960. I keep it real simple. That doesn't work because 99.999% of Americans are in a trance that is far stronger than I ever imagined. If the trance goes unbroken, nothing will work. People get pissed about the trance. They would rather be called a pervert or anything than admit they are in a trance.

I'll leave it to you to solve that problem. I don't know how to do it.

[-] 0 points by Richardgates (133) 13 years ago

Can you 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.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Congressional budget process is crazy

read more -- http://overthecoals.blogspot.com/

OWS should be attacking the moronic, irresponsible budget process that is going to skyrocket interest rate and wipe out the dollar. This is virtual insanity that is topped off by the pompous arrogance of a raving maniac. When interest rates skyrocket which is inevitable it will destroy the 100%, not the 99%.

[-] 0 points by Richardgates (133) 13 years ago

Nuttier than squirrel shit.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

duh?

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Can you read?

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

uh yes? for the most part.... lol!

[-] 0 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

But can you think? Doubtful. Conservatives are, shall we say, short on critical thinking skills.

[-] 0 points by Richardgates (133) 13 years ago

You have a kind chin!

[-] 0 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

lmao. you're a funny little troll.

[-] 2 points by sonicself (2) 12 years ago

We need to follow LA and other states to end Corporate Personhood and to end ruling that corporations are “persons” with First Amendment rights and cannot be prevented from spending unlimited funds on political campaigns. It is a time to ban corporate elections and give back voice to the people!

[-] 2 points by qazxsw123 (238) 13 years ago

"Obama's persistently high unemployment rate stems from 1 million government-worker cuts since May 2010, including 220,000 education employees. If government employment had remained steady since 2009, unemployment would be 8.7%." usatoday

I find this ironic that OBM might lose the election because of today's bad employment numbers due to the federal sector. A year ago, when fed go'vt workers needed his support to keep their jobs and benefits (e.g., two-year pay freeze, no promotion, higher insurance premiums, replace one for two retired workers, etc.); when, as a one percent, he did not even offered to forego his 400K annual salary, but slashed the COLA increase across the board (no matter if you make $20K or $100K a year, if you're single or a family of 4), he is now facing an electorate that will either 1) judge him harshly on those bad job numbers or 2) express their resentment as fed employees/likely voters and just stay home come Election Day, undertandingly not wanting to be taken for granted.

[-] 2 points by betuadollar (-313) 13 years ago

Well I'm an anarchist by nature so I would.

[-] 1 points by packetStorm (128) 13 years ago

lulz

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 12 years ago

I would only because the opposition makes me want to vomit.

[-] 1 points by LilyJayne4 (1) from Providence, RI 12 years ago

Barack Obama does not represent my interests or that of the Occupy Movement. However, unfortunately, the other candidates represent our interests even less. So yes, I am sad to say, come election day I will be voting for Pres. Obama, so that the White House will not become occupied with some knucklehead who equates the Occupy Movement with Nazism.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 12 years ago

Bush=Clinton=Bush II=Obama=Romney.

Doesnt matter, same shit.

[-] 1 points by AlanBrooks (19) 13 years ago

You run silly old men such as Dole and McCain, and think we are going to vote for them-- Jesus!

[-] 1 points by AlanBrooks (19) 13 years ago

Obama is better than McCain- for SURE.

[-] 1 points by UPonLocal (309) 13 years ago

I will if he runs as a Direct Democracy President

Who wants to Nominate him?

http://uponlocal.com/up-on-local-media/node/add/candidate

[-] 1 points by stevo (314) 13 years ago

Just you idiots I'm figuring

[-] 1 points by buik (380) from Towson, MD 13 years ago

i would like to see cain elected. that guy is hilarious.

[-] 1 points by seeker (242) 13 years ago

He IS guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity and a corporate puppet. This should be about impeaching the criminal NOT re electing.

[-] 1 points by ddiggs690 (277) 13 years ago

I am not 100% sold that my vote really counts; just look at how people vote on issues. With that said, when I vote this election, I am voting outside of the main candidates. I have to look at who is getting funding and from where. Third party candidates are not getting a lot from big corporations and even Ron Lawl gets his contributions from elsewhere. If someone isn't getting money from big players than they are not in their back pocket yet, so those are the type of people I will consider. So to answer your question, no, I am not voting Obama.

[-] 1 points by jjpatrick (195) 13 years ago

If you vote for Obama, then any OWS credibility is lost. The only honest ones out there: Democrats: DK Indpendent: RN Republicans: Buddy, RP I'm sure there's more who will stand up to the establishment, but in as Noam Chomsky said, 'Obama's worse than even Bush.'

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 13 years ago

Thinking about this is a distraction. Our main issue should be building the movement. The movement so far is not big enough to affect the outcome of an election, let alone put forward its own candidates, but it very clearly can influence the nature of public discourse and the thinking and behavior of both 1% parties and their candidates and representatives (including Obana).

[-] 1 points by enough (587) 13 years ago

President Obama had Corzine on his short list to replace Timothy "Turbo Tax" Geithner as Treasury Secretary. That tells you all you need to know about Obama's judgment and his choice of advisers. So if you love Wall Street, vote for Obama.

[-] 1 points by GBA (18) from Montclair, NJ 13 years ago

Not me

[-] 1 points by Howtodoit (1232) 13 years ago

I guess we all know now that, as with most of the GOP and Democrates, O is just a wall street puppet; I hear Goldman-Sachs gave him like 19 mil in 2008. Is that also why most of his Finance Committee members are from Goldman-Sachs? So since he's not going to do it, I want my vote back for CHANGE! Now, while we have the World's Attention, it's time for us to CHANGE it! And I feel the best way is to go back to the Wall Street Regulations we had in place in 1999! After all, it worked fine for 66 years! Before...

We can do it: http://occupywallst.org/forum/its-time-for-a-million-people-march-to-capitol-hil/

[-] 1 points by daverao (124) 13 years ago

Not me

[-] 1 points by bettersystem (170) 13 years ago

Force Change, Boycott Capitalism

We know what the problem is, let us fix it and move forward together.

When you look at a republican or democrat, congress or FDA official, Judges and Justice Department, you see criminals.

Our corruption dates back decades to when those, who in trying to preserve slavery, had to find new ways to preserve it and so created a scientific and advanced form of slavery.

Only two components were required -- the illusion of freedom & choice and the taking away of the freedom to live off the land.

How else would you get a person to submit themselves to mind numbing or degrading work unless you oppress them into it.

Our current system is rooted in corruption and every attempt in preserving it involves manipulating human thought and turning people against one another.

In America the population has been transformed into two major voting groups but they only have one choice.

They had been distracted up until now with television and American culture which prospered through the oppression of other nations.

Americans allowed themselves to be fooled into using their military and economic dominance to seize resources of other nations and create expanding markets for American profiteers.

Now that technology, competition and conscience have evolved Americans are realizing that our current system of government is damaging and unsustainable.

Our government officials have allowed private profits and personal benefits to influence decisions that affect the health and well-being of people all over the planet, not just in America... how much longer will we allow them to rule over us??

Occupy Washington and demand that all government officials resign their posts.

We will setup new online elections with a verification system that will allow us to see our votes after we cast them, put our new officials in office and work toward rebuilding our country and our world.

Pass this message along to any and everyone, we already occupy the world, unite.

Occupy Washington, Boycott Capitalism, Force Change

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 13 years ago

I'd like to see OWS get behind Jill Stein, but I'm also realistic enough to understand that is unlikely in the extreme

[-] 1 points by OccupyCapitolHill (197) 13 years ago

I would vote him out on Tuesday if he were on the ballot. Shame I have to wait another 369 days plus the time frame in-between Election and Inauguration Days to see the end of his White House tenure.

[-] 1 points by tomcat68 (298) 13 years ago

well, give him credit for being the best liar in american history :). that's something.

oh, and when his failures became so obvious even liberal dems started to recognize them? he turned the blame on what? not him self nooooo on the American way of life. (typical for a muslim radical or comunist). you people now blame a street, your currency, a trading system that has made your nation the greatest on earth. yes. I think barack osama is genious.

or... 53% of the people in this nation are complete idiots.

umnn, my guess is the later

[-] 1 points by OWSForObama (151) 13 years ago

I would!

[-] 1 points by SirPoeticJustice (628) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Obama is a pawn. white house is a prison. Secret service are prison guards.

[-] 1 points by Joyce (375) 13 years ago

Not me.

[-] 1 points by humanprogress (55) 13 years ago

personally, i disagree with having authorities but should the occupy movement fail to install a new system, the resource-based economy without money and power, and the election proceeds, I will vote for obama again.

[-] 1 points by AColom (3) 13 years ago

Forget Obama, he only has small solutions for the economy's debt! He needs to look at the bigger picture, he talk of budgeting by reforming our tax code, eliminating income taxes for any retiree making less than $50,000 a year. He claims the worst of the recession is over! Are you kidding me!! The annual budget deficit has reached gargantuan proportions at this rate America WILL COLLAPSE. Children born in the country are not only rewarded with citizenship, they also have the honor of having a share in the national debt, roughly $47,000 per person!! We need to elect Ron P(aul): "We have to take the pressure of the fed to create money. You know, we spend, and then we tax, and we borrow and we still don’t have enough money. So we have this ridiculous monetary system where we go to the Federal Reserve and say buy this treasury bills, and they buy the treasury bills with money out of the clear blue, out of the thin air, and this is causing the inflation. To me, this is the most critical thing, and if we don't, we're gonna have a financial crisis, and a dollar collapse." VOTE RON P!!

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 13 years ago

Whoever gets elected he may take on the form of Fascist Dictator. We already have Fascism now we just need the dictator..Obama will do.

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

I dunno, I was against him but what he's saying now seems a lot diff.... oh wait. You fool me once, shame on you. You fool me twice... well, you shouldn't fool me twice.. i mean..

[-] 1 points by me2 (534) 13 years ago

I will "throw my vote away" on the third party candidate of my choice. I will probably never vote for a democrat or a republican again.

[-] 1 points by redgar (55) 13 years ago

The only wasted vote is the one where you do not vote your conscience.

[-] 1 points by me2 (534) 13 years ago

Damn straight I agree 100%!

[-] 1 points by SpaghettiMonster (90) 13 years ago

Hell yeah I would.

I mean, who else is there? I see two rationale voices on the right, Cain and Paul, candidates who refrain from mentioning their faith every time they see an opportunity to do so! Cain doesn't strike me as a man who would need to check with his pocket Bible before making command decisions. With R. Paul, I'm not really all that sure - he's from the era of god-fearing folk, but he seems reasonable. Regardless, neither of them seem to have promise to me.

That coupled with the fact that I despise the Christian fundamentalist right, there's only one other direction to go! Straight to hell!... er, I mean to the libs.

[-] 1 points by outwrangle (39) 13 years ago

I would like to point out that Ron Lawl voted against the measure to reefirm "In God We Trust" as our nation's motto. He's Christian, but he doesn't let his faith cloud his small government ideals.

[-] 1 points by SpaghettiMonster (90) 13 years ago

I didn't know that, that actually says quite a bit. I don't mind him being a Christian, or anyone else for that matter... just leave it at home. I'm tired of hearing this is a "Christian Nation" when it's nothing of the sort, it's a secular nation!

I'll have to do some more thorough research on Paul - unfortunately I'm not sure he'll make it through the primaries anyhow. But I'll keep an eye on him, thanks for the info.

[-] 1 points by AColom (3) 13 years ago

who cares about their faith! we need someone that's going to take action! What has Obama done to fix the economic crisis?! Nothing! R.Paul wants to eliminate the FR... money out of thin air! The FR is causing inflation! America will collapse if we don't get this debt under control.

[-] 1 points by gt2seeit2 (19) from Dallas, TX 13 years ago

yesterday i would say i would, but today after seeing him go to greece? {because they want to vote on how they want to handle their own government?}

[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 13 years ago

He has my vote. Though I hope he loosens up a bit next term. At first I thought it was good that he wanted to play nice with the republicans. Now I think he needs to tell them to go to hell.

[-] 1 points by reddy2 (256) 13 years ago

NO.

Anyone that votes for this Wall St puppet is a HYPOCRITE.

[-] 1 points by MJMorrow (419) 13 years ago

Sure...but....erm....Obama has to get me a career, first. giggle]

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

He hasn't apologized for the "accidental" deaths of children in Libya due to NATO bombing

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Has that Texas Tard apologized for the countless people who died unnecessarily and for NOTHING in Iraq? What?? No, I didn't think so.

[-] 2 points by outwrangle (39) 13 years ago

No, he hasn't. Therefore, Obama is no better than Bush.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

no, imagine the precedence that could be set

[-] 0 points by jay1975 (428) 13 years ago

Or the deaths of a Border Patrol agent or ATF attache killed by his Fast and Furious scam.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

I don't support the borders

[-] 0 points by jay1975 (428) 13 years ago

So that means letting guns get into the hands of the cartels is ok or that their murders are ok with you?

[-] 1 points by outwrangle (39) 13 years ago

The US is intentionally allowing guns to cross the boarder anyway.

I don't see why you think it would be any different.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

those US made guns are already sold to the cartel

[-] 1 points by Skippy2 (485) 13 years ago

Realamerican......look up definition for "Sarcasm" and then re-read my post

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

its hard to see sarcasm when you cannot hear someones tone of voice


[-] 1 points by SwiftJohn (79) 13 years ago
[-] 2 points by SwiftJohn (79) 13 years ago

Interesting list. Part of the issue is that the author's successes are not things I agree with. I would argue that TARP has been a failure because it has not altered the systemic issues that led to the crisis and thus really only helps the existing players keep playing at our expense. And despite the cuts in salaries the bonuses, the real source of compensation, have not changed.

HAMP similarly has been, in my view, a failure as it does nothing to protect homeowners other than suggest that the banks be nice. HAMP has not even been successful at preventing the basic fraud of Robo-Signing.

Similarly I see Dodd-Frank as being more hairball than success story. One that has not, contrary to the essay's claims, prevented banks from making risky investments with our money. As I noted here: http://occupywallst.org/forum/immunity-for-banks/ Bank of America is still doing that.

Most importantly in terms of civil liberties he has been a bust. He has authorized the extension of the Patriot act, overseen frankly insane levels of punishment for whistleblowers and the executive branch is currently mulling a modification to the Freedom of Information Act rules that would allow them to lie about documents.

In my view, and my view alone, I see no reason to vote for him. I see the successes listed and some I agree with but I don't buy the whole package.

[-] 1 points by protest (43) 13 years ago

Who will you vote for?

[-] 1 points by SwiftJohn (79) 13 years ago

Not sure yet. What I am looking for is someone to vote for. Someone who will keep the promises I care about. Right now I see Obama as having tried to do some things but for many of the things I care about most he has done the opposite of what he promised or what I wanted. The R's by contrast have declared their intentions to do things I don't want so I guess it would be time for a 3rd party.

Functionally I believe that many of the problems we have are attributable to the stranglehold the two parties have on our politics at every level so I may vote for a 3rd party only to pave the way for a challenge to the two main parties.

[-] 1 points by Skippy2 (485) 13 years ago

Since his relectiom campaign is directly tied to Bank of America....Yes I would vote for him....free mortgages for everybody yipeee

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

thats a horrible attitude. and false why do people think infinite money can just come from no where and make everyone happy? how about you think about ALL of america, and not just yourself.

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Look, all you Liberals had better get off your Guantanamos, and vote for the President. I don't care how you think he's disappointed you, you have no idea what the other side is like. I spend a chunk of my day on the opinion section of FoxNation...And I'll tell you this, they hate the President with a pathological hatred that's hard to fathom. And as far as OWS goes...well...they think what happened at Kent State was a good thing and would like to see something like it again. Under NO circumstances must conservatives take the White House or the Senate. And it would be wonderful if they lost the House. Maybe we could get actually get something passed that would create jobs. If anyone thinks I'm exaggerating please go to Fox News. You don't have to log on to see the comments. It will make your blood run cold. Please, vote for Obama.

[-] 1 points by OWSisawaste (133) 13 years ago

Obama has done nothing foor this country but add to the debt and make our country look bad.......he should never be reelected

[-] 1 points by bettersystem (170) 13 years ago

Force Change, Boycott Capitalism

We know what the problem is, let us fix it and move forward together.

When you look at a republican or democrat, congress or FDA official, Judges and Justice Department, you see criminals.

Our corruption dates back decades to when those, who in trying to preserve slavery, had to find new ways to preserve it and so created a scientific and advanced form of slavery.

Only two components were required -- the illusion of freedom & choice and the taking away of the freedom to live off the land.

How else would you get a person to submit themselves to mind numbing or degrading work unless you oppress them into it.

Our current system is rooted in corruption and every attempt in preserving it involves manipulating human thought and turning people against one another.

In America the population has been transformed into two major voting groups but they only have one choice.

They had been distracted up until now with television and American culture which prospered through the oppression of other nations.

Americans allowed themselves to be fooled into using their military and economic dominance to seize resources of other nations and create expanding markets for American profiteers.

Now that technology, competition and conscience have evolved Americans are realizing that our current system of government is damaging and unsustainable.

Our government officials have allowed private profits and personal benefits to influence decisions that affect the health and well-being of people all over the planet, not just in America... how much longer will we allow them to rule over us??

Occupy Washington and demand that all government officials resign their posts.

We will setup new online elections with a verification system that will allow us to see our votes after we cast them, put our new officials in office and work toward rebuilding our country and our world.

Pass this message along to any and everyone, we already occupy the world, unite.

Occupy Washington, Boycott Capitalism, Force Change

[-] 1 points by bdeviled11 (4) 13 years ago

Couldn't the same thing be said about the Huffington Post?

[-] 1 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 13 years ago

The Huffingtonpost comment section is full of Fox trolls, too.

The way you guys come here to sow your little sunshine seeds, they do it on Huffpo, too.

I guess "liberals" don't have time to do that.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8708) 13 years ago

I agree wholeheartedly! The one thing I fear the most is that OWS will split the "liberal" vote in the next election, just as Vietnam did forty years ago, paving the way for the subsequent nightmare we've lived through. Anything but another Republican administration!

[-] 1 points by nickhowdy (1104) 13 years ago

I've been there, it's the fun house mirror of humanity where every looks like the pig people from this twilight zone episode: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHp9q3QTmVQ and they all see themselves as beautiful people.

[-] 1 points by BrainC (400) from Austin, TX 13 years ago

I can imagine the hatred. Just mention GW Bush and listen to the comments.

It happens on both sides.

[-] 0 points by ToddDunning (89) from Aliso Viejo, CA 13 years ago

Lindy, jobs aren't created when 'something gets passed'. They are created when one person helps another with services or products.

[-] 0 points by owschico (295) 13 years ago

obama should be impeached but you are under a spell that keeps you from realizing you are hypnotized.

[-] 2 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

I'm under a spell?? Check yourself. I see a chronic case of Obama Derangement Syndrome afoot.

[-] 0 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

Lindy, so you know, look at the letter case, i have my own troll. i apologize for his/her behavior.

[-] 0 points by Richardgates (133) 13 years ago

Another brainwashed tool. Unbelievable. How does this happen?

[-] -1 points by ToddDunning (89) from Aliso Viejo, CA 13 years ago

We hate communism. Obama is just a symptom of the Left, an empty slate for you to imagine him as whatever you want.

[-] -2 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

oh yeah, cause you dont see ANY of that from democrats or liberals. All that is is the uneducated. They cannot form a real argument so they hate. Unfortunately, the uneducated group is growing on BOTH sides at a staggering rate

[-] 1 points by SpaghettiMonster (90) 13 years ago

I disagree. I'm about as close to having a hatred of religion as it gets - it's not religion itself that infuriates me, it's the people. People discuss this stuff as if it's real, using it to justify injustices, make right what is wrong, and all around just be irrational. I despise that type of behavior, and I'm very capable or forming an argument. But arguments are irrelevant in a land of make believe, my only course of action is ridicule.

[-] 1 points by littrellb (199) from Hillsboro, OR 13 years ago

Then you will always fail. Where did ridicule get anyone. You think your world is any worse than the world that Ghandi lived in? Imagine if he had lost all hope and resorted to ridicule. You think the world would be the same if he had just mocked those that he disagreed with? NO, no body would remember his name. You may be educated but you are certainly not wise. So all of your education is in vain.

[-] 1 points by SpaghettiMonster (90) 13 years ago

You're correct. But to be honest, I mean ridicule in the sense that I simply won't talk with those who propose ridiculous things. What would a modern geographer say to an ardent flat-earther who refuses to accept the world is round. I can no more relate to those who believe the earth is 6000 years than our hypothetical geographer could the flat-earther. I haven't given up, even if my cynical nature sometimes makes it out to seem that way.

So, instead of ridicule... What, ignore them? I certainly can't reconcile the the differences - how could I when people can conjure things with the mere wave of a finger and recitation of ancient passages. No, I haven't given up... But I certainly don't reward religions with the undeserved respect they think they're entitled to. No, they need to stand up to examination and ridicule just like anything else - can you say that about Islam? I think most will remember the mohammad comic that sparked all the violence throughout the Muslim world, and it was all about nothing.

[-] 1 points by littrellb (199) from Hillsboro, OR 13 years ago

Ok, some coming from an opposite world view I think we can agree on things. I grew up in a strong Christian family, my grandfather was a pastor. I have lived in a Christian home my whole life. And let me say this, I hate religion too. Religion burns people at the stake. Religion fights wars over who is right and wrong. Religion judges people for their mistakes. Religion is a worthless creation of generally oppressive men. However at the same time, would i still consider myself a Christian? well its hard to say, I would consider myself a Christ follower and this is why. He defended prostitutes from men that wanted to stone them to death. He stood up for the poor and he helpless. He taught humility and self control, taught people to love eachother. He said that the only true an faultless religion is taking care of the widows and the orphans. Now no matter what you believe or dont believe you cant deny that these are good things even if they are written in an ancient book. And yes there have been many others through out history that have taught things like this.

So yes, hate religion. Ignore those that judge people because they have a different belief system. Ignore those that stand behind their religion and do terrible thing in the name of a god that would actually condemn their actions. But don't stoop to their levels. Love is a miraculous thing. Self control makes you powerful. Humility makes you strong.

And i dont write this to at all say that im right and you are wrong, but rather that we can have a different opinions and beliefs and yet agree on important things.

[-] 1 points by ryancozzens (32) 13 years ago

Its more shame than ridicule. Those who are sucked into religion have a tendency to live in their own communities an be blind to the fact that a large number of us don't care what there holy text says. My goal in that situation is to create an argument that forces them to realize that a closed minded religion based world view is not democratic.

[-] 1 points by SpaghettiMonster (90) 13 years ago

An admirable goal, and I wish you luck. The process will eventually happen naturally - ya know, Alchemy to Chemistry, Astrology to Astronomy and, eventually, Religion to Philosophy. But in the meantime, the death-throws will continue to produce the type of fervent fundamentalism we're seeing in the US currently.

[-] 0 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Not like with conservatives. I'm telling you the truth. Go there and see for yourselves.

[-] -1 points by jay1975 (428) 13 years ago

You need to read the comments at the DailyKos sometime if you want to see lefty hate. Both "sides" are disgusting.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 13 years ago

I ain't thats for sure. I live in California and it will go blue, so whats the point? Mabye if I lived in a swing state and the republican nominee was really terrifying you could possibly convince me to vote for him again. I'll probably vote for a third party candidate.

[-] 0 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

All the Republicans are terrifying. America went to sleep in 2010 and woke up with a Midwest fill of Nazis. Let's rectify that.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 13 years ago

I don't think a Romny presidency would be much different than Obama. After all Obama stole that healthcare plan from Romny. They're foreign policy more than likely be about the same. I don't care if there is a viable third party candidate or not. I will vote for the candidate that best represents my views instead of the lesser of two evils.

[-] 1 points by jay1975 (428) 13 years ago

More hate. Hypocrite much?

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Sitting in the park getting dirty won't rectify anything.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

i think we should all write in mickey mouse. i think he could beat Obama no problem.

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

You are such a Foxbot.

[-] 1 points by ramous (765) from Wabash, IN 13 years ago

Not me. Im horrified. i voted for him the first time because he's a smart man so he knows what he is doing when he's selling out the country to big corporate donors. So I have no choice but to realize that my blessed minority president for change was really a liar. Here's one Hispanic voting for anybody BUT Obama next time around.

[-] 2 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

You don't even know what's on the other side. Please do yourself a favor and find out.

[-] 1 points by protest (43) 13 years ago

I hoped for more myself, but he has accomplished something and I definitely don't want the other options:

http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

He's an idiot. Name one thing that proves he's smart.

[-] 0 points by figero (661) 13 years ago

define smart

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Facts don't matter to OWS. They are in a deep trance. They are sitting in the park with hallucinations.

[-] 1 points by outwrangle (39) 13 years ago

He was a college lecturer. You usually have to be smart to do that.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Usually. Try specifics.

This is why OWS will fail. Too bad OWS refuses to let me help them.

They are arrogant and can't reason.

[-] 1 points by outwrangle (39) 13 years ago

Please, save us from our ignorance! You handsome studly genius you...

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Sitting in the park whining doesn't take intelligence, does it. When you have a medical problem do you go to a doctor? Do you know it all?

I hear arrogant fools on this forum screwing up their own protest.

[-] 1 points by outwrangle (39) 13 years ago

Yes, you are a wonderful genius that must rain his massive intelect upon us!

I can feel your brain juices trickling down all over my face!

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

I tell the truth. Too bad you don't want the truth. That is what destroys any chance for justice. The stupid remark you just made. -- http://overthecoals.blogspot.com/

Tiger called a black asshole by his caddy

Why is that a big deal? How is that racist? Steve Williams, Tiger's famous caddy addressed a caddy dinner before a tournament and claimed, "I apologize for comments I made last night at the Annual Caddy Awards dinner in Shanghai. Players and caddies look forward to this evening all year and the spirit is always joking and fun. I now realize how my comments could be construed as racist. However I assure you that was not my intent. I sincerely apologize to Tiger and anyone else I have offended," but the damage has been done.

America is filled with assholes. There are massive amounts of stupidity. ignorance, irrationality, lying is prevalent. The liars are protected with "flip-flop". This is baby talk by American citizens who attack anybody who call's a liar, a liar. That's not permitted in America because it violates the sacred "political correct" propaganda that has put the entire country of America into a depression and down spiral that has thrown millions of families into the street as a direct result of simple bank and securities fraud.

Bribes are taken in the open. The massive protest by the OWS is about bribes. You would think that people who are so angry about bribes, would be eager to use the word bribes, but that is absolutely not the case. Instead they are in a literal trance of "political correctness" and use the cover-up for bribery which is -- corporate money, donations, contributions, campaign finance.

I have been to the park six times and I have mentioned this absurdity, but the trance is so deep they go right on to not use the word "bribe". They are too arrogant to immediately recognize that I am pointing out a huge flaw in their entire protest. I'm interested in honesty and justice. Honesty and justice has no place in America. Rick Perry's conservative audience in the Republican debates both laugh and applauded the fact that Perry bragged about the 342 executions he allowed because he claims there are no flaws. Not one innocent person was executed for crimes they didn't commit.

America is the world's capital for witch hunts. That is to say that American justice is not as bad as North Korea. American people fall right into line with irrational, weird, bizarre, deceitful behavior. It is the total American culture. There is a night and day propaganda brainwashing operation that completely allows the privileged to rape (in the case of Strauss-Kahn), and the biggest one of all time is 9/11. The American people uniformly, adamantly refuse to examine the facts that prove the 9/11 attack was by George Bush.

No people who are free to think for themselves would willingly want to cover up Bush for his 9/11 attack. Let's bicker about calling Tiger a black asshole. That will keep people in their hypocrisy, fantasy land. Lot's of fairy tales for all Americans who love being in nursery school. That's the state of the American culture that is made into jokes by Jon Stewart, the super brilliant Colbert, the SNL shows, and Letterman. They find outrageously stupid remarks by all the people running for president to be funny. They are told to make jokes but they are precisely what happened on video tape.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Since it wasn't a plane, specifically flight 77, then what else could it be except a missile?

Can't you grasp how you're defeating your own argument. Give me one other possibility, excluding a missile.

OWS responses to facts have been irrational -- read more -- http://overthecoals.blogspot.com/

9/11 is the pinnacle of crime by Bush and the government. OWS liberals respond the same as irrational right wing people, indicating the ridiculous propaganda lies by the government puts them all in the same trance. One of the liberals refused to answer with a simple yes or no that there will be an election in November 2012. After many attempts to get an answer he finally said yes, there will be an election in 2012..

The argument in the previous post was expected to receive overwhelming acceptance from the OWS liberals who hate the inequities by the Bush conservatives, but they proved me wrong again. These people reject any sensible approach to solve their complaints. They want to sit in the park and whine, results don't matter to them.

There is no American intelligentsia. The entire country is mired by ridiculous nonsense. At least America still has sports and other brilliant forms of entertainment. It would be pleasant to ignore politics and economics.

[-] 0 points by figero (661) 13 years ago

he's so brilliant he signed an unconstitutional healthcare mandate into law. That's sheer genius coming from a constitutional scholar lol!

[-] 1 points by MountainmanGlen (47) 13 years ago

I never voted for him to begin with. Not like he had much experience to start with and it shows.

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

He's a liar, was a liar, and always will be a liar. You dopes will vote for him again.

[-] 1 points by TheFred (43) from Clinton, IL 13 years ago

Yeah, the first thing he was going to do was bring the troops home. Hmm, where are they?

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Another paranoid conservative....

[-] 1 points by stevemiller (1062) 13 years ago

Anybody who doesn't agree with you is a conservative. The conservatives call you liberals socialists.

Same dumb shit.

[-] 1 points by JonFromSLC (-107) from West Valley City, UT 13 years ago

No.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by jjpatrick (195) 13 years ago

TOP 6 REASONS WHY OBAMA DESERVES YOUR VOTE:

  1. Independent Human Rights investigation of Obama and NATO crimes against humanity in Libya. Obama gave orders to bomb without congressional approval: http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/10/11/sarkozy-cameron-obama-al-thani-and-the-suffering-of-the-children-of-sirte/

  2. Fact check: Romney vs Obama: who lies more? -- quite similar. http://www.factcheck.org/barack-obama/ http://www.factcheck.org/tag/mitt-romney/

  3. Top 20 recipients of Wall Street Funds: http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U Historically, which party receives more from Wall Street? http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U

  4. An interesting perspective by Noam Chomsky: --Noam Chomsky on the State-Corporate Complex: http://chomsky.info/talks/20110407.htm

  5. Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQhEBCWMe44

  6. Noam Chomsky on why Obama is worse than Bush: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mA4HYTO790 and Obama's imperilstic policies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiwAFIgGCkQ

Now you know. Do you still choose to turn a blind eye? and choose between a false dichotomy and settle with the status quo?

[-] 0 points by jjpatrick (195) 13 years ago

TOP 6 REASONS WHY OBAMA DESERVES YOUR VOTE:

  1. Independent Human Rights investigation of Obama and NATO crimes against humanity in Libya. Obama gave orders to bomb without congressional approval: http://humanrightsinvestigations.org/2011/10/11/sarkozy-cameron-obama-al-thani-and-the-suffering-of-the-children-of-sirte/

  2. Fact check: Romney vs Obama: who lies more? -- quite similar. http://www.factcheck.org/barack-obama/ http://www.factcheck.org/tag/mitt-romney/

  3. Top 20 recipients of Wall Street Funds: http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=M&sortorder=U Historically, which party receives more from Wall Street? http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=F07&cycle=All&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U

  4. An interesting perspective by Noam Chomsky: --Noam Chomsky on the State-Corporate Complex: http://chomsky.info/talks/20110407.htm

  5. Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQhEBCWMe44

  6. Noam Chomsky on why Obama is worse than Bush: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mA4HYTO790 and Obama's imperilstic policies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiwAFIgGCkQ

[-] 0 points by VladimirMayakovsky (796) 13 years ago

I think we need change. No more Obama. Elect someone for the right. A banker may be.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by OccupyWallStreetButtons (16) 13 years ago

OCCUPY WALL STREET Pinback Buttons! - only 99 cents

A portion of proceeds will go toward the local movement in the form of food and water. If you have a few extra bucks, drop off a box of apples or anything you can to the folks outside in your community!

Free Shipping Offer! http://buttonbasket.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=25

[-] 0 points by MikeyD (581) from Alameda, CA 13 years ago

Anyone who doesn't vote for Obama is a racist!

[-] 1 points by AColom (3) 13 years ago

ignorant...

[-] 0 points by jay1975 (428) 13 years ago

Hell yeah, all them righties are racists. The only reason they support a jigaboo like Cain is to deflect how blatantly racist they are. ;)

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

So WILL anyone be voting? Because if you do not vote for obama, that pretty much only leaves conservatives...

[-] 1 points by sunshower (80) 13 years ago

unless OWS becomes that 3rd party

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 13 years ago

What is wrong with Conservatives? There are just as many crazy liberals as crazy conservatives. Most Americans are somewhere in the middle so they tend to choose the least radical of the two.

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

No....The difference is like night and day. This isn't your Grandfather's conservative party. They have unwound into a small hard core of the most vicious, misogynistic, Islamophobic, homophobic, racist, small minded people I have ever seen. They must not take the White House or the Senate.

[-] 2 points by Mooks (1985) 13 years ago

Yes, obviously all conservatives fulfill those requirements.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

you mistaken... i AM conservative. but I wouldnt choose to consider myself A conservative, because I do not want to be affiliated with political parties at all.

[-] 0 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

How anyone can be a member of today's conservative party is beyond me.

[-] 1 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

How anyone can believe Obama has done anything right is beyond me!

[-] 0 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Osama bin laden Anwar al-Awlaki Abu Hafs al-Shahri Atiyah Abd al-Rahman Ilyas Kashmiri Ammar AL-Harithi Ali Saleh Farhan Harun Fazul Younis al Mautitani Baitullah Mahsud Moordin Muhammed Yop Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan Saleh al-Somali Abdul Ghani Beradar Muhammed Haggani Qari-Zafar Dulmatin Abu Ayyub al-Masri Abu Omar al-Baghdadi Sheik Saeed al-Masri Hamza al-Hawfi And now MuammarAl Ghadafi Quite an accomplishment for a secret M u s l i m…..

You were saying?

[-] 0 points by jay1975 (428) 13 years ago

So you support senseless killing when there is a (D) behind someone's name? Interesting.

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Senseless killing?? These people want to kill you and your family, fool. Wake up!

[-] -1 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

oh really? did HE kill every one of those? or was it the generals and our american soldiers? i must be confused ;)

[-] 1 points by Lindy (2) 13 years ago

Didn't your mama ever tell you sour grapes are unbecoming?

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 13 years ago

But we're all voting conservative so that fits. They wouldn't exist now if it were otherwise.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

uhh... huh? You think Obama is conservative? errrr........

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 13 years ago

I think he will be before we're done with him.

[-] 0 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

There Is a War Going On For Your Mind


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tP5yA3RwzOk

[-] -1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

So how is it I cannot post Ron Lawl but it says Ron Lawl?

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

Ron Lawl? IDK apparently OWS doesnt like him... so they stuff our constitutional rights and dont let us say "Ron Lawl" but i can say bullshit. thats just fine.

[-] -1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Then you CANNOT claim to be the 99% and you set yourself up for failure.....don't you think?

Thats my prediction.

Martial Law will follow

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

yep, thats why im following my SECOND amendment rights and buying guns and ammo. i suggest you also do that, so when martial law is declared we can shoot some pesky OWS people :o)

[-] -1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

It is the checks and balance measure that was put in the Bill of Rights to restrain the Federal Govt from imposing tyranny on the States ;)

And see that is what our Govt wants...dividing the masses and conquering them with Martial Law. I am so frustrated...I see it coming and the masses are clueless....History will repeat itself.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

yeah... maybe if we got rid of obama and his band of idiots we could pull ourselves together... we NEED democrats in the government just like republicans, but everyone trying to run our country right now seem like complete idiots!

[-] -1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

I am advocating a coalition of Ron p a u l , Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader. They agree on four major issues which could be a jumpstart.

1) Civil liberties 2) U,S foreign policies including the wars 3) the FED 4) the national debt.

btw, I think this forum is a government monitored site with this cencorship. its beyond laughable if it weren't so sad!

[-] -1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

I am a Dennis Kucinich liberal who will vote for Ron P a u l because he agrees on more topics with Kucinich and Nader than Obama or any other candidate. I have checked out RP for six years now and can debunk all misconceptions from the left especially after reading Friedrich Hayeks 'Road to Serfdom' which explains most questions people on the left have

Ideally I think there ought to be a COALITION between Kucinich, Nader and Paul because they agree on four major areas

1) Civil Liberties 2) Foreign policies and our Wars 3) the Federal Reserve 4) National debt

watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLdcB0ln9t8&feature=channel_video_title

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 13 years ago

and they have no input on creating jobs?

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Thats why I am a Hayekan who has answers for all these questions from the left.

Friedrich Hayek has solutions to all these issues in his book 'Road to Serfdom.

Friedrich Hayek is from the Austrian school of economics which is what RP preaches

[-] 2 points by looselyhuman (3117) 13 years ago

Hayek, for the left. Pfft. Neoliberal. I'd prefer a real conservative.

A common term in much of the world for what Hayek espoused is "neoliberalism". British scholar Samuel Brittan concluded in 2010 that, "Hayek's book [The Constitution of Liberty] is still probably the most comprehensive statement of the underlying ideas of the moderate free market philosophy espoused by neoliberals."[85] Brittan adds that although Plant (2009) comes out in the end against Hayek's doctrines, Plant gives The Constitution of Liberty a "more thorough and fair-minded analysis than it has received even from its professed adherents."[85]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

and Sir Samuel Brittan (born 29 December 1933) is a British columnist for the Financial Times and an author...

NOT a Nobel Peace prize winner in economics ;)

Next please

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 13 years ago

Well, using that logic, Paul Krugman is the man because he received the same award. His award is more recently won so that makes him better; that is of course if you only use one metric to judge a person's worth.

[-] 1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Yeh.....but...Paul Krugmans format is the one failing today....

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 13 years ago

Do you know how long the Washington Consensus has been around? Trickle down economics is what's failing us. give the money to the little man and he will consume here. Give it to the rich man and he will fly across the world looking for the biggest return on investment, no matter how shoddy it is.

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

and what Ronald Reagan did was BREAKING DOWN the requirements and protections for Keynesian Economics! And he did it in the name of Free Market Capitalism . But that is NOT what he practiced. He used Free market Capitalism as an excuse to get rid of these protections!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Here's how our current "Fiat Money" system works, only on a much larger scale than described below:

It is a slow day in the small Saskatchewan town of Pumphandle and the streets are deserted. Times are tough, no one has any money, everybody is in debt and is living on credit.

A tourist visiting the area drives through town, stops at the motel, and lays a $100 bill on the desk saying he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs and possibly pick one for the night.

The motel owner hands the tourist a few of the empty room keys and as soon as the guest walks upstairs, the motel owner grabs the bill and runs next door to pay his debt to the butcher.

The butcher immediately takes the $100 and runs down the street to pay off his debt to the pig farmer.

The pig farmer takes the $100 and heads off to pay his bill to his feed supplier, at the local Co-op.

The guy at the Co-op takes the $100 and runs to pay his debt to the local prostitute, who has also been facing hard times and has had to offer "services" on credit.

The hooker rushes to the hotel to pay her room bill with the hotel owner. The hotel proprietor, surprised to see the bill back, then places the $100 down on the counter so the traveler will not suspect anything.

At that moment the traveler comes back down the stairs, states that the rooms do not meet his needs, picks up the $100 bill and leaves.

All of the people of the town feel relief, because they are "out of debt", but what really happened here?

Because there was no real money, everyone in town had to borrow (thereby creating Fiat money, in a sense) to conduct their business. When all of the business debts were paid, everyone was still broke and there was no money left in the town! But in the real world, everyone would still have to pay their income taxes to cover the interest owed to the central bank (The Federal Reserve), on the money that was really never there, until it was borrowed into existence by the townspeople. But the catch is that there isn't any money left in town to pay those taxes which still need to be paid, until more "money" is borrowed into existence, by the people of the town. As the Fed creates more "money" from debt, the people become further and hopelessly enslaved to the central government and the central bank.

Now you see how the Fiat money scam works! Any Questions????

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

TRICKLE DOWN is a concept that ONLY WORKS when applied to Capitalism.

We do NOT have Capitalism. We have a system that has NO CAPITAL!!!!!!!!! its called Keynesian economics backed by FIAT money which has its basis in DEBT BASED SPENDING!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 13 years ago

And there is no Nobel Peace prize in economics. Next.

[-] 1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

replypermalinkeditdelete

↥ ↧

Lockean (New York, NY) 5 points 45 minutes ago

Our "colectivism" was working great during the liberal consensus years of the 40s-70s. The downfall of American capitalism and this nation itself began with the deregulation, tax reforms, anti-labor policies, and free trade agreements of neoliberals beginning in the 70s and culminating in Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and now Obama. It will never be pure, free markets, but it's been close - the Gilded Age - and the last 30-40 years have seen us moving in that direction. Crony capitalism is a direct result of deregulation and a concerted anti-New Deal effort that has undermined government effectiveness and accountability over this time period.

Bill Moyers can lay it out far better than I. You're such a great learner and avid reader, I'm sure you'll be away for some time while you read it in detail before coming back with an in-depth response:


Bill Moyers did NOT tell you....it was Keynesian economics with FIAT money that failed and our lovely Nixon who took us off the Goldstandard.

[-] 2 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Sigh. What happened to the collectivism that failed us?

Yes. We had an oil shock. We had the Nixon Shock. They helped us towards our decline. Nixon's China policy as well. Reagan took it to the next level. But really, your team's obsession with monetary policy is pathological. Fiscal and tax policy are far more important.

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Also..Reagan did NOT practice Capitalism. He practiced the exact same format of today, Keynesian with fiat money and YES he took down all the protections that Keynesian with fiat money NEEDS.

Unless you understand that Reagan did NOT practice what he preached and neither did Milton Friedman who was his economic advisor. They practised the OPPOSITE of what they preached while tearing down the protections of Keynesian economics.

It does take a more thorough research approach from your part. You think I don't agree with your grievances but I do. It is you do does not get it is NOT Capitalism that is failing...it is the deregulation of Keynesian economics and fiat money that is!

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

there is NO CAPITAL in our current system...its NOT CAPITALISM that is failing.

Here.....explained in terms that should resonate ;)

Here's how our current "Fiat Money" system works, only on a much larger scale than described below:

It is a slow day in the small Saskatchewan town of Pumphandle and the streets are deserted. Times are tough, no one has any money, everybody is in debt and is living on credit.

A tourist visiting the area drives through town, stops at the motel, and lays a $100 bill on the desk saying he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs and possibly pick one for the night.

The motel owner hands the tourist a few of the empty room keys and as soon as the guest walks upstairs, the motel owner grabs the bill and runs next door to pay his debt to the butcher.

The butcher immediately takes the $100 and runs down the street to pay off his debt to the pig farmer.

The pig farmer takes the $100 and heads off to pay his bill to his feed supplier, at the local Co-op.

The guy at the Co-op takes the $100 and runs to pay his debt to the local prostitute, who has also been facing hard times and has had to offer "services" on credit.

The hooker rushes to the hotel to pay her room bill with the hotel owner. The hotel proprietor, surprised to see the bill back, then places the $100 down on the counter so the traveler will not suspect anything.

At that moment the traveler comes back down the stairs, states that the rooms do not meet his needs, picks up the $100 bill and leaves.

All of the people of the town feel relief, because they are "out of debt", but what really happened here?

Because there was no real money, everyone in town had to borrow (thereby creating Fiat money, in a sense) to conduct their business. When all of the business debts were paid, everyone was still broke and there was no money left in the town! But in the real world, everyone would still have to pay their income taxes to cover the interest owed to the central bank (The Federal Reserve), on the money that was really never there, until it was borrowed into existence by the townspeople. But the catch is that there isn't any money left in town to pay those taxes which still need to be paid, until more "money" is borrowed into existence, by the people of the town. As the Fed creates more "money" from debt, the people become further and hopelessly enslaved to the central government and the central bank.

Now you see how the Fiat money scam works! Any Questions????

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/

oops...Friedrich Hayek is on the list at the official Nobel Peace Prize list in economics.

[-] 2 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 13 years ago

It is not the Nobel Peace prize in economics.

[-] 2 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 13 years ago

OMFG!!!

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

I cannot help you.

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Actually...neo liberalism is today's Democratic party and merely the other side of the same rotten coin called neo conservatism, todays Republican party.

But there is nothing 'liberal' about these parties. You wait and see...Martial Law is coming.

[-] 1 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Martial law. Hmm. I think all neoliberals/libertarians, and especially those obsessed with Hayek (or Friedman) should have to live under the next Pinochet.

Ya know, and this is serious, Hayek and Friedman are popular with the communist party in China - just as they were (and it was reciprocated) with Pinochet. If there's a military coup and a new junta in Greece, they will be thumping the road to serfdom in between thumping on their peoples' heads, guaranteed.

You are, indeed, clueless.

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Lolll. Well..I say......everybody has a responsibility to search for themselves of what Hayek is about. I believe you to be a troll who is hired to ensure from reasonable debate and real sources. I for once cannot help you nor can I make others see or learn. All I can do is lead a horse to water but i cannot make him drink.

[-] 1 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 13 years ago

I am a troll "because you don't like what I say ;)"

Pretending you share the progressive goals of OWS and pimping Ron Lawl as the solution is definite trolldom.

[-] 0 points by jay1975 (428) 13 years ago

So the "99%" are progressive? I thought progressive made up a part of the 20% self identified liberals, putting you closer to the 10%. That's why OWS is doomed to fail.

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Oh Oh....OWS ...progressive?? I thought it was representing the 99%?

[-] 1 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 13 years ago

The goals of social/economic justice and egalitarianism have always been progressive, yes.

Libertarianism has become nothing but a shill for free market capitalism - which means the freedom of the market to own our society and operate without accountability. It means the opposite of individual liberty. It means economic slavery. You can cite as many progressive quotes from Hayek as you like, but I know the economics, politics, and motivations of Austrian proponents, and there's a reason the ideology is popular with the Kochs and all the rest of the neoliberal elite.

You want to read a new political book this month? Try Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. She doesn't get it 100% right, but (since you only respect Nobel Prize-winning economists), in the words of Stiglitz: "the case against these [neoliberal a la Friedman and Hayek] policies is even stronger than the one Klein makes."

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Oh...but may I remind you...its not Libertariansm and free markets ( which requires sound monetary policies and solid legal justice) that are failing today....it is COLLECTIVISM in its worst form that is! Its called...Corporate Welfare

;)

[-] 2 points by Lockean (671) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Our "colectivism" was working great during the liberal consensus years of the 40s-70s. The downfall of American capitalism and this nation itself began with the deregulation, tax reforms, anti-labor policies, and free trade agreements of neoliberals beginning in the 70s and culminating in Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and now Obama. It will never be pure, free markets, but it's been close - the Gilded Age - and the last 30-40 years have seen us moving in that direction. Crony capitalism is a direct result of deregulation and a concerted anti-New Deal effort that has undermined government effectiveness and accountability over this time period.

Bill Moyers can lay it out far better than I. You're such a great learner and avid reader, I'm sure you'll be away for some time while you read it in detail before coming back with an in-depth response:

http://www.truth-out.org/how-did-happen/1320278111

[-] 1 points by looselyhuman (3117) 13 years ago

You don't have a clue. Neoliberalism is a blanket term. Neoconservativism is a tiny and not very interesting part of it. The economics of Hayek and Friedman DEFINE neoliberalism, and libertarianism of all stripes plays right into its hands.

[-] -1 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

I 'don't' have a clue because you don't like what I say ;) I have noticed how you follow my posts...funny...I DO have a clue. I actually read...............BOOKS!

[-] 4 points by looselyhuman (3117) 13 years ago

You read A book, and thump it harder than any self-respecting baptist thumps the bible. You don't have a clue. You have indoctrination. You have a lie about being a progressive/liberal. You have libertarian propaganda and the full backing of the campaign to elect Ron Lawl. You are a tool. Just like all libertarians are tools for the neoliberalism that's been destroying the world since the 70s.

[-] 3 points by flip (7101) 13 years ago

you are right, of course, but i think it is pointless to argue with these people - it is their religion. there are some who want a serious discussion and are trying to figure out how things work - we need to spend our time with those people not fools. the money system is crucial to the understanding of what has happened to us and to finding a solution - very complex and not well understood even by those who run the system

[-] 1 points by looselyhuman (3117) 13 years ago

Yeah my goal isn't to convert the faithful - I know that's impossible. I just don't want to lose any more to them. The abstract elegance of their utopian worldview, and the fanaticism of its proponents, are dangerous.

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

And let me show you who Dennis Kucinich wanted as his running mate last time around ;)

You are a fool who never did his homework.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py8cXlLyX18

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

I read one political book a month...... So no you are terribly mistaken.

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 13 years ago

WTF. Is Hayek your sugar daddy? Every post I read of yours is HAyek this Hayek that. You do realize that the Chicago Boys are the architects of our current economic policies. The Washington Consensus should be called the Chi-town Consensus. If you are going to read right wing economic books, be intellectually honest and read counter claims. Your allegiance to one man's ideas is as detrimental to your brain as a Christian Fundamentalist's inability to read Buddha. Get over It; there will never be utopia, no matter how much you hang on the words of your sugar daddy.

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Ok, let me try and educate you a bit.

There is NO CAPITAL in the current system. Therefor we do NOT have Capitalism or Free Markets as which Hayek advocates.

Here's how our current "Fiat Money" system works, only on a much larger scale than described below:

It is a slow day in the small Saskatchewan town of Pumphandle and the streets are deserted. Times are tough, no one has any money, everybody is in debt and is living on credit.

A tourist visiting the area drives through town, stops at the motel, and lays a $100 bill on the desk saying he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs and possibly pick one for the night.

The motel owner hands the tourist a few of the empty room keys and as soon as the guest walks upstairs, the motel owner grabs the bill and runs next door to pay his debt to the butcher.

The butcher immediately takes the $100 and runs down the street to pay off his debt to the pig farmer.

The pig farmer takes the $100 and heads off to pay his bill to his feed supplier, at the local Co-op.

The guy at the Co-op takes the $100 and runs to pay his debt to the local prostitute, who has also been facing hard times and has had to offer "services" on credit.

The hooker rushes to the hotel to pay her room bill with the hotel owner. The hotel proprietor, surprised to see the bill back, then places the $100 down on the counter so the traveler will not suspect anything.

At that moment the traveler comes back down the stairs, states that the rooms do not meet his needs, picks up the $100 bill and leaves.

All of the people of the town feel relief, because they are "out of debt", but what really happened here?

Because there was no real money, everyone in town had to borrow (thereby creating Fiat money, in a sense) to conduct their business. When all of the business debts were paid, everyone was still broke and there was no money left in the town! But in the real world, everyone would still have to pay their income taxes to cover the interest owed to the central bank (The Federal Reserve), on the money that was really never there, until it was borrowed into existence by the townspeople. But the catch is that there isn't any money left in town to pay those taxes which still need to be paid, until more "money" is borrowed into existence, by the people of the town. As the Fed creates more "money" from debt, the people become further and hopelessly enslaved to the central government and the central bank.

Now you see how the Fiat money scam works! Any Questions????

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 13 years ago

Even if it's that simple, the hotel owner ate meat, the butcher received product, the pig farmer received pig food, the feed producer got laid, and the tourist was free to go somewhere else. Those are the important things. As for the taxes, If they were not paid, how the hell would the tourist have gotten to the hotel in order to turn down services. all you described is the reason why money looses value over time. As long as the services are provided who cares. That is why we have ss, medicare, and other government programs. I f we were to save money ourselves, the money would be useless. That is why minimum wage should go up, and government programs should be indexed to inflation. that has not happened so here we are.

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

JesseHeffran1 points 3 minutes ago

My understanding of the history of the Fed is that it was created to ensure economics would not be used as a political football. imagine if we had no fed and we had to deal with partisanship every year to move the economy foreword. The problem, I perceive, is that Greenspan did not do his job efficiently and allowed a bubble. He thought that giving a speech about irrational exuberance would deflate the bubble. it did not. If he was not a market fundamentalist, He would have raised the interest rate and that would have ended irrational exuberance. The problem we have is that we keep putting the wrong people in that position. Greenspan was a Wall Streeter so he only seen the problem from that perspective. Now the new fed chairman has top fix the problem that the derelict caused.It is not an evil conspiracy; it is just a problem caused by a man who listened too much to a quack, Ayn Rand.


First of all I am NOT an Ayn Rand fan. She does NOT believe in Altruism.

Secondly, Alan Greenspan was ANOTHER fake Free Market guy who DID NOT practice what he preached ( like Reagan and Milton Friendman as Reagans economic advisor).

The problem lays into the fact that Reagan and CO USED Free Market concepts to justify the breakdown of the protections of the Keynesian model ( which is anything but true free market).

[-] 0 points by Dutchess (499) 13 years ago

Allright then...

Your income tax goes SOLELY to pay interest to the Federal Reserve ( Not federal and not a reserve but a private and independent agency within our govt that makes private profits for merely guaranteeing) on money the Federal Reserve ordered the Treasury to print of their press and never had themselves in the first place.

We do NOT have Capitalism because all our money is created not based on Capital but on debt based spending!

And so when Reagan who preached one thing ( Capitalism) but practiced another ( Debt based economics in the form of the current system called Keynesian with Fiat money) he BROKE DOWN the proective barriers of the Keynesian model while implying he was practicing Free market Capitalism , USING Free Market Capitalism as THE excuse to justify his actionsd.

the CONFUSION on this topic is rampant but unless you identify who is preaching what and what they are actually practicing...you will stay confused.

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 13 years ago

My understanding of the history of the Fed is that it was created to ensure economics would not be used as a political football. imagine if we had no fed and we had to deal with partisanship every year to move the economy foreword. The problem, I perceive, is that Greenspan did not do his job efficiently and allowed a bubble. He thought that giving a speech about irrational exuberance would deflate the bubble. it did not. If he was not a market fundamentalist, He would have raised the interest rate and that would have ended irrational exuberance. The problem we have is that we keep putting the wrong people in that position. Greenspan was a Wall Streeter so he only seen the problem from that perspective. Now the new fed chairman has to fix the problem that the derelict caused.It is not an evil conspiracy; it is just a problem caused by a man who listened too much to a quack, Ayn Rand.

[-] -1 points by humanprogress (55) 13 years ago

he's an excellent president given all the hurdles that the republicans and business community gave him. you have to give him credit.

[-] 0 points by REALamerican (241) 13 years ago

um... what? He owned the government the first two years and continually made things worse. how exactly did the republicans get in the way when democrats owned the entire executive and legislative branches? also.... HE gave money TO businesses.... how did THEY create hurdles? He has not done ONE single thing right...

[-] 1 points by humanprogress (55) 13 years ago

a lot of people are experiencing dimentia on this bail-out subject. remember that bush started the bail-out plan that extended to the following year 2009 so obama only inherited it.

[-] 0 points by Mooks (1985) 13 years ago

It is basically like that for any President with a divided Congress.