Now We Know The Truth About Accusing the Right of Being Racists

[MaggieMae]

I guess your news media is not up on the news?

Bush bailed out the banks, but they are still privately owned, yes?
Bush AND Obama bailed out some automobile makers, but they are still privately owned, yes?
The lending instituations...see my remarks on the banks
Healthcare has not been taken over by anyone, and my health insurance carrier, is still privately owned.

Like I said...it seems your News Media is not up on the news.

GM is majority owned by the government.
The government made a decision that priority holders of chrysler stock are the ones to take the loss (that is government control of prtivate CONTRACTUAL decisions)
Both auto companies are doing far better the first quarter of 2010 than they did in all of 2008-09. There is practically no debate anymore than unemployment would have been far, far worse if those two major companies were allowed to go under. Greater unemployment equals more people needing government services (also at taxpayer expense). Which is worse?

The lending institutions can no longer keep the private and confidential information of their clients as private and confidential. They have lost that right to the government. That is government control.
Where do you get that idea? And which part of the financial reform package can that information be found? Are you sure you're not confusing disclosure of hedge fund investor information when manipulation is suspected?

Whereas you were promised that you will be able to keep your docotor if you wish, it has been disclosed that the promise was not true. The government has made it so you very well may NOT be able tomake your own decision as it pertains to your medical care.
Again, where has "it been disclosed" that you can't keep your own doctor?

Losing control to the government does not mean losing OWNERSHIP to the government.

It means losing control to the government even if you retain ownership.

......

 

[boedicca]

Here's the thing about Big Government interference that MM doesn't acknowledge:

We will never know how much better things would have been if they hadn't mucked things up.

What we do know is that at this point after the 1981 recession, economic growth was more than double what it is now and real private sector jobs were being created. The difference? Reagan cut taxes instead of increasing the size of the federal government as a percent of BDP by an Obamanian 25%.

Obamanomics = EPIC FAIL

 

[MaggieMae]

Well, you cant deny that the south typcast itself 160 years ago. No?

No. I won't deny at all. But, I know what it is now...I live here. I wasn't alive 160 years ago!!

Yep. And neither was I.

This may come as a surprise, but neither was I.

 

[MaggieMae]

Yeah, I call bullshit.

I kid you not. I swear if that had taken place at a rest area in Virginia, I truly believe someone would have gotten an ass whoopin' at the very least. But, these guys were so non-chalant about it, that it seemed as if it were simply accepted behavior down there...

Never seen it or anything like it, and I've lived in areas where the Klan used to be pretty active.

I don't think he was describing true Klanmen. Probably just a bunch of yahoos acting like smartasses.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's the thing about Big Government interference that MM doesn't acknowledge:

We will never know how much better things would have been if they hadn't mucked things up.

What we do know is that at this point after the 1981 recession, economic growth was more than double what it is now and real private sector jobs were being created. The difference? Reagan cut taxes instead of increasing the size of the federal government as a percent of BDP by an Obamanian 25%.

Obamanomics = EPIC FAIL

The country was in recession from July of 1981 until November of 1982. You don't know what you're talking about.

At this point in the Reagan presidency the country was IN recession and Reagan was a couple months away from signing the biggest tax increase in history.

 

[boedicca]

The 1981-1982 recession lasted 16 months, and then a real recovery began.

This one started in late 2007, and given the unemployment levels which are not resulting in net increases in the employed, it's difficult to claim that we ever really entered a recovery.


Reagan CUT Taxes in 1981 (Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA)) - the superior GDP growth was due to these.


Here's the Quarterly GDP Growth Rate

Q1 2008 -0.7%
Q2 2008 1.5%
Q3 2008 -2.7%
Q4 2008 -5.4%
Q1 2009 -6.4%
Q2 2009 -0.7%
Q3 2009 2.3%
Q4 2009 5.6%
Q1 2010 2.7%
Q2 2010 3.2% est



And here we have the 1981 Recession and recovery

Q3 1981 5.0%
Q4 1981 -4.9%
Q1 1982 -6.4%
Q3 1982 2.2%
Q4 1982 -1.5%
Q1 1983 0.3%
Q2 1983 5.1%
Q3 1983 9.3%
Q4 1983 8.1%


Not the differences in the last three quarters of each sequence. There is a material difference. Growth matters. Something Obama clearly doesn't understand how to encourage.

 

[MaggieMae]

Really? Like I said, I am getting the impression that you believe that only Fox and conservative websites are biased.

I have to say this and want to say it very politely so don't take this wrong, but in my book, that makes your research highly suspect.

So far, all I've done is take a headline, one that becomes a top news story everywhere, and copied how each headline is worded--not any text. The problem is the embellishment of those headlines which are directed to a desired audience that fits the political leaning of the particular news medium. This is a hypothetical example:

FINANCIAL REFORM BILL HURTS ECONOMY

FINANCIAL REFORM BILL - ANOTHER WIN FOR OBAMA

OBAMA SIGNS FINANCIAL REFORM INTO LAW

Only the last headline is unbiased accuracy. Now an unbiased report may be included in the text of each, and there may be some opinionators contributing to those news stories, but the headlines alone are often ONLY what people read and thereby form THEIR opinions around.

 

[MaggieMae]

"If the right forces us all to either defend Wright or tear him down, no matter what we choose, we lose the game they’ve put upon us. Instead, take one of them — Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists. Ask: why do they have such a deep-seated problem with a black politician who unites the country? What lurks behind those problems? This makes *them* sputter with rage, which in turn leads to overreaction and self-destruction." full quote from Atlantic

It is curious that some opinion writer's defensive position means so much to conservatives? Defending Obama during the Wright incident is long past, but because it is racially packed issue it never goes away. The story lasted through the whole campaign so pretending MSM didn't cover it is a denial of reality.

I also find this funny because the 'no, you are' tactic is the only tactic used by most wingnuts on usmb et al. I guess they have a patent on this comeback, or is that nothing more to say. LOL

This is another non story as Rome burns. Racism is in behavior, it is in results, denying it doesn't make it disappear. Imagine a moment in life when caught in a wrong and your argument is not what you did, but that you are not what you did. That is politics today, racism can be used - and it has been used since LBJ by republicans - but it must be subtle and deniable. Weird stuff.

Good piece here: Journolist scandal: Liberals planned open letter - War Room - Salon.com


Journolist Liberal Conspiracy Story: Scandal or Overblown? | The Atlantic Wire

Jeremiah Wright is a racist and spoke about racist topics in his church. Fact.

Obama attended Wright's church for over 20 years. Fact.

Fred Barnes and Karl Rove are racists. Lies.

See the difference? Do you think it's acceptable to tell lies about your political opponents because of uncomfortable facts about your guy?

You're missing the point. If you want to discuss Obama and the Reverend, let's do that. But the ONLY reason this particular website was mentioned NOW is to deflect the fact that the right wing media (especially bloggers like Breitbart) are distorting facts. If Rove can convince people that, due to what this one man opined in that journal, liberals are indeed in the business of deliberately baiting people like Breitbart, then he (Rove) will have succeeded by tricking the mind into believing some liberal pulled a fast one.

 

[MaggieMae]

So somebody set up a blog on Wordpress asking the Tea Party Movement to support their bigotry, and the Tea Party has not done so.

You point is?

That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.

I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.


Bada bing.

I was waiting for someone to bring him into the conversation. I'm oh so shocked that it was YOU!
Bada bitch.

 

[MaggieMae]

That there are white supremists in Florida...btw, this is the group Trent Lott used to be associated with.

I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.


Bada bing.

And the moral of the story?

Our politicians have US duking it out for them.

They all need to go. Every dam last one of them.

And replaced with what? A bunch of newbies that will take, oh I don't know, a year before they get sucked in by the thousands of lobbyists too?

 

[MaggieMae]

I heard that Robert Byrd used to hang out with a bunch of them as well.


Bada bing.

No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.

And OJ never committed another murder again.

Why don't you ask any resident of West Virginia, black or white, how they feel about Robert Byrd, then get back to us.

 

[MaggieMae]

and the south isn't "FULL" of them either
you DO understand the meaning of FULL, right?

Yes...I forgot how literal you people are. There are many white supremists in the south.

Quantify "many" please. If you're going to make accusations, I think it's important we know all the facts.

Thanks.

Oh please. You seem to be in denial that they exist, in larger numbers than ever before.

 

[DiveCon]

Yes...I forgot how literal you people are. There are many white supremists in the south.

Quantify "many" please. If you're going to make accusations, I think it's important we know all the facts.

Thanks.

Oh please. You seem to be in denial that they exist, in larger numbers than ever before.

do you have any proof they are growing in number, from a reliable source?

 

[MaggieMae]

No, that was the KKK. But Byrd eventually quit them, Lott continued his ties.

The KKK are not White Supremacists?

Nope...becuase democrats belong to the KKK

Make that past-tense, and also your history needs review. They were dubbed Dixicrats, but white Southern bigots nonetheless.

 

[boedicca]

It's pretty telling seeing MaggieMaggot defend a known member of the KKK.

Buying indulgences with OTHER PEOPLE'S TAX MONEY doesn't absolves him of being a KKK member and building is political career (as noted by Bill Clinton at his funeral) by associating with them.

 

[MaggieMae]

Correction, millions of tea partiers.

Yes, but I was not in the mood for the defelction and her start to debate how there is "No way there are millions of tea partyers"....

SO I went with a more agreeable number.

Just send them to the Gallup Poll. 28% of Americans sympathized with the Tea Party in the April 2010 poll. I suspect that ratio has increased since then.

Tea Partiers Are Fairly Mainstream in Their Demographics

Yes, I "sympathize" with them too because until they start detailing how in hell they're going to do all they demand, the tea partiers are just making a lot of noise and spinning their wheels.

 

[MaggieMae]

And OJ never committed another murder again.

What does that have to do with this discussion?

There are certain actions that you can just never give a pass to.

A man makes a mistake and kills someone while drunk driving? Yep. In time, you give him a pass. It was a horrible mistake and he learned from it. Itr was not aoconscious decision. He truly believed he can drive safely. (And I lostr a relative to a drunk driver). It was not premeditated

A man conciously murders someone out of revenge? Not a mistake. A conscious decision. He should never get a pass. It was premeditated.

A man not only hates black people but is part of a group that admittedly tries to hurt and kill black people? That is not a "mistake". That was a conscious decision made and he continued with for a period of time. It was premediated. He knew what he was doing wheile he did it. That is unforgiveable and he should never be given a pass. Much less be allowed to be part of our law making.

Oh that is just bullcrap. What about all those "Born Again Christians" who become icons of their communities and church even after they have acted like bastards all their lives toward other people? THEY believe that what Jesus preached was forgiveness, period.

 

[boedicca]

Oh that is just bullcrap. What about all those "Born Again Christians" who become icons of their communities and church even after they have acted like bastards all their lives toward other people? THEY believe that what Jesus preached was forgiveness, period.

So what about a "Born Again Civil Rightist" who became an icon of the Senate after acting like a racist bastard during the formative years of his political career? HE believed that all that POLITICS required was just spreading around other people's money in order to buy absolution, period.

 

[DiveCon]

Oh that is just bullcrap. What about all those "Born Again Christians" who become icons of their communities and church even after they have acted like bastards all their lives toward other people? THEY believe that what Jesus preached was forgiveness, period.

So what about a "Born Again Civil Rightist" who became an icon of the Senate after acting like a racist bastard during the formative years of his political career? HE believed that all that POLITICS required was just spreading around other people's money in order to buy absolution, period.

hey now, he had a (D) after his name, so all is forgiven
but if you have an (R) after your name, it doesn't matter if you were the first in the senate to hire blacks on your staff, you are still a racist to your dieing day

 

[MaggieMae]

Here's the thing about Big Government interference that MM doesn't acknowledge:

We will never know how much better things would have been if they hadn't mucked things up.

What we do know is that at this point after the 1981 recession, economic growth was more than double what it is now and real private sector jobs were being created. The difference? Reagan cut taxes instead of increasing the size of the federal government as a percent of BDP by an Obamanian 25%.

Obamanomics = EPIC FAIL

On the flip side, we can be 100% sure that the economy WOULD have been devasted if the banks were not given TARP funds. The Big 6 had the capability of taking down the entire world's economy, as it had already begun to show that effect with the crash of Lehman Brothers. The jury is still out on health care reform. Cutting taxes further at this delicate point in time would mean a decrease in billions from the Treasury which would simply add to the deficit. And those are simple F.A.C.T.S that you cannot seem to get through your thick skull.

I don't give a shit what Reagan did. Times were different then. Very, very different.