Which Side Are You On?

[Wry Catcher]

I'm reluctant to guess at the motivations of USMB posters.
I strongly suspect many are not what they appear to be.
That said there is a framing thing (I guess) that inspires some/most on the right to immediately resort to personal attacks whenever the issue of economic class arises.

Since I don't own a television or listen to "talk radio" I have no way of knowing what rich white elites on the right tell their audiences; however, I don't think those who listen regularly ever hear much in the way of honest debate.

Since there's been little fundamental change to the way Wall Street does business since 2008, I'm guessing we'll have to wait for an economic collapse on the scale of the Great Depression in order to focus right-wing consciousness on the principles of class war.

Hopefully that will occur around November of 2012.

I'm not reluctant to guess at what motivates those on the right. I knew many who manifested the same behaviors in the late 1960's - we referred to them as the radical chic. They were faux liberals; today's conservatives are faux conservatives and faux Christians. They want to be accepted so they play the role, instead of saying "Right on" and flashing the peace symbol, they bless everyone and wear the Christian cross - loudly and proudly. What those in the 60's and those today have in common is a desperate need for attention and a lack of conviction - their words are scripted by others, their behavior belies the words.

You truly are an idiot.

Thanks for sharing Dave, you always offer a smart, reasoned and concise response. I expect no less from you.

 

[daveman]

I'm not reluctant to guess at what motivates those on the right. I knew many who manifested the same behaviors in the late 1960's - we referred to them as the radical chic. They were faux liberals; today's conservatives are faux conservatives and faux Christians. They want to be accepted so they play the role, instead of saying "Right on" and flashing the peace symbol, they bless everyone and wear the Christian cross - loudly and proudly. What those in the 60's and those today have in common is a desperate need for attention and a lack of conviction - their words are scripted by others, their behavior belies the words.

You truly are an idiot.

Thanks for sharing Dave, you always offer a smart, reasoned and concise response. I expect no less from you.

Poor Wry. Gets his feelings hurt when people dare question him.

 

[georgephillip]

What's pathetic is your effort to paint others as holding false pathos.

I'm reluctant to guess at the motivations of USMB posters.
I strongly suspect many are not what they appear to be.
That said there is a framing thing (I guess) that inspires some/most on the right to immediately resort to personal attacks whenever the issue of economic class arises.

Since I don't own a television or listen to "talk radio" I have no way of knowing what rich white elites on the right tell their audiences; however, I don't think those who listen regularly ever hear much in the way of honest debate.

Since there's been little fundamental change to the way Wall Street does business since 2008, I'm guessing we'll have to wait for an economic collapse on the scale of the Great Depression in order to focus right-wing consciousness on the principles of class war.

Hopefully that will occur around November of 2012.

I'm not reluctant to guess at what motivates those on the right. I knew many who manifested the same behaviors in the late 1960's - we referred to them as the radical chic. They were faux liberals; today's conservatives are faux conservatives and faux Christians. They want to be accepted so they play the role, instead of saying "Right on" and flashing the peace symbol, they bless everyone and wear the Christian cross - loudly and proudly. What those in the 60's and those today have in common is a desperate need for attention and a lack of conviction - their words are scripted by others, their behavior belies the words.

I hadn't made that connection.
There's certainly no shortage of those willing to say whatever they are paid to say.
Possibly that comes from growing up in front of a television.

I heard Noam Chomsky respond to a question about whether he would like to live another 82 years recently, and the great linguist dodged it. He implied humanity has dug such a deep hole that it will be very difficult for coming generations to climb out.

Lack of conviction certainly won't help our recovery.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You truly are an idiot.

Thanks for sharing Dave, you always offer a smart, reasoned and concise response. I expect no less from you.

Poor Wry. Gets his feelings hurt when people dare question him.

No Dave, my feelings aren't hurt and if you actually believe calling me an "idiot" is questioning me, you're even dumber than I know you to be.
Your post is a classic idiotgram, a typical retort by a card-carrying member of the echo chamber. I have no doubt you believe your opinions are valid, but I had no doubt the sincerity of psychotics when I transported them to county on 5150's.

 

[georgephillip]

Never happened once before of after 911 yet you're sure it happened three times on one day?

Yes. Normal people agree. Abnormal people believe stupid horseshit they see on the internet.

You shouldn't be so hard on yourself.
Maybe one day reality won't be so scary for you.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I'm reluctant to guess at the motivations of USMB posters.
I strongly suspect many are not what they appear to be.
That said there is a framing thing (I guess) that inspires some/most on the right to immediately resort to personal attacks whenever the issue of economic class arises.

Since I don't own a television or listen to "talk radio" I have no way of knowing what rich white elites on the right tell their audiences; however, I don't think those who listen regularly ever hear much in the way of honest debate.

Since there's been little fundamental change to the way Wall Street does business since 2008, I'm guessing we'll have to wait for an economic collapse on the scale of the Great Depression in order to focus right-wing consciousness on the principles of class war.

Hopefully that will occur around November of 2012.

I'm not reluctant to guess at what motivates those on the right. I knew many who manifested the same behaviors in the late 1960's - we referred to them as the radical chic. They were faux liberals; today's conservatives are faux conservatives and faux Christians. They want to be accepted so they play the role, instead of saying "Right on" and flashing the peace symbol, they bless everyone and wear the Christian cross - loudly and proudly. What those in the 60's and those today have in common is a desperate need for attention and a lack of conviction - their words are scripted by others, their behavior belies the words.

I hadn't made that connection.
There's certainly no shortage of those willing to say whatever they are paid to say.
Possibly that comes from growing up in front of a television.

I heard Noam Chomsky respond to a question about whether he would like to live another 82 years recently, and the great linguist dodged it. He implied humanity has dug such a deep hole that it will be very difficult for coming generations to climb out.

Lack of conviction certainly won't help our recovery.

True. But we are the same age (I believe you too were born in 1947) so a couple of points need to be made. At one time I was able to impact policy in my own county; I retired in 2005 and understand why Chomsky may have dodged the question. The swing to the right offends me, the avarice, bigotry and callousness of today's elected officials I find reprehensible.
Such is also short-sighted. I find it incredulous that supposedly educated 'leaders' are unable to critically evaluate the consequences of the policies and values of the New Right. It belies any understanding of history.

 

[georgephillip]

We've had two hundred years of experience in this country that prove corporations pose a conflict with Americans. Starting with East India Company tea that was dumped into Boston harbor.

Leftists don't know shit about history.

The conflict was with King George, you moron. The East India Company was just the vehicle.

Let me guess -- public education?

Thom Hartman

"More than two thousand corporations had been chartered between 1790 and 1860. They helped protect themselves from economic disasters by keeping tight control over the economy and the markets within which they operated. In this they echoed the Federalist ideas of Alexander Hamilton and John Adams.

"Many companies deal with competition by working hard to earn our business, just as Adam Smith—whose 1776 book The Wealth of Nations summarized many economic principles for the founders of this nation—envisioned.

"But others don’t; they feel that the best way to deal with competition is to eliminate it.

"And, as the East India Company had shown, two ways to do so were by getting the government to grant a monopoly or special tax favors or by crushing or buying out one’s competition."

Thom seems to think King George and other parasites of the time used the East India Company as a tool to enhance their fortunes.

Do you agree?

"Unequal Protection": The People's Masters | Truthout

 

[Avatar4321]

True. But we are the same age (I believe you too were born in 1947) so a couple of points need to be made. At one time I was able to impact policy in my own county; I retired in 2005 and understand why Chomsky may have dodged the question. The swing to the right offends me, the avarice, bigotry and callousness of today's elected officials I find reprehensible.
Such is also short-sighted. I find it incredulous that supposedly educated 'leaders' are unable to critically evaluate the consequences of the policies and values of the New Right. It belies any understanding of history.

If you don't like the avarice, bigotry, and callousness of today's elected officials, stop supporting progressives.

 

[georgephillip]

I'm not reluctant to guess at what motivates those on the right. I knew many who manifested the same behaviors in the late 1960's - we referred to them as the radical chic. They were faux liberals; today's conservatives are faux conservatives and faux Christians. They want to be accepted so they play the role, instead of saying "Right on" and flashing the peace symbol, they bless everyone and wear the Christian cross - loudly and proudly. What those in the 60's and those today have in common is a desperate need for attention and a lack of conviction - their words are scripted by others, their behavior belies the words.

I hadn't made that connection.
There's certainly no shortage of those willing to say whatever they are paid to say.
Possibly that comes from growing up in front of a television.

I heard Noam Chomsky respond to a question about whether he would like to live another 82 years recently, and the great linguist dodged it. He implied humanity has dug such a deep hole that it will be very difficult for coming generations to climb out.

Lack of conviction certainly won't help our recovery.

True. But we are the same age (I believe you too were born in 1947) so a couple of points need to be made. At one time I was able to impact policy in my own county; I retired in 2005 and understand why Chomsky may have dodged the question. The swing to the right offends me, the avarice, bigotry and callousness of today's elected officials I find reprehensible.
Such is also short-sighted. I find it incredulous that supposedly educated 'leaders' are unable to critically evaluate the consequences of the policies and values of the New Right. It belies any understanding of history.

Right. Born in '47 graduated from high school in 1965. I've never had any influence in affecting policy, but I'm also troubled by today's conservatives.

Possibly, part of what we're experiencing is something all generations have to endure as their days dwindle. My grandmother was so conservative she refused to sign up for Social Security when FDR made it mandatory.

You can imagine the mood the '60s put her in at the end of her life?

Somehow I suspect Chomsky is way ahead of me on this generational angst thing.

There are global threats to the freedom and survival of our specie that many of us couldn't imagine half a century ago. And they are growing by the minute, imho.

Frankly I think today's Republicans AND Democrats are isolated from the world many of their constituents live in. They seem to spend most of their free time with 1% of the electorate and it's not those losing their homes, pensions and jobs.

They seem to be on the wrong side of history and understanding.

 

[bripat9643]

What's truly pathetic is the way you place the rich above the law.

When did I do that? The last time I checked, being rich isn't a crime.

After the Savings and Loan looting of the late 80s hundreds of bankers were prosecuted, convicted and jailed on charges far more complex than the securities and control fraud crimes of 2008, at least according to William Black who was responsible for many of the S&L convictions.

If people break the law, they should be prosecuted. However, not a single liberal turd has been able to explain what laws were broken. Losing money isn't against the law, especially when it happened because the government forced bankers to give mortgages to Democrat deadbeats. There are plenty of politicians and bureaucrats who should go to jail, but not bankers.

This Republic is being destroyed by rich parasites like Henry Paulson and Robert Rubin and alleged patriots like you babble about "envy" and "hatred for those having a better time in life."

You named two government bureaucrats, which are parasites, buy definition. I can't fathom how that indites the rich is general.

A parasite is someone who obtains resources from an unwilling host. Rich businessmen don't qualify because all the money they have was obtained through voluntary exchange. Only people sucking on the government tit qualify as parasites.

Grow a pair before you lose what's left of your "freedom."

Putting a stop to you and your ilk is how we regain our freedom.

 

[Dr Grump]

Putting a stop to you and your ilk is how we regain our freedom.

Depends on your definition of freedom....

 

[bripat9643]

The people who make the economy of this country work are the millions of productive citizens and non citizens with money in their pockets to fuel a GDP that is 70% consumption.

That money was put in their pocket by capitalists. If it wasn't for capitalist investment in factories and equipment, those "citizens" would be digging in the dirt like aboriginies for a subsistence barely above starvation. The only thing the provide to the process is their brute labor. A trained chimpanzee could do most of the jobs you idolize. eventually machines will do it all, and then they will be totally superfluous. Drones like you are already whining about the fact that dumb brutes are no longer needed in the production process.

The rich are bloated tics sucking the blood from the real drivers of the US economic aircraft.

The rich are not tics. You want to paint them as such because you can't justify looting their property unless you can turn them into villains. If America ever becomes foolish enough to fall for your scheme, this country will collapse into despotism, poverty and mass starvation. It has already taken great leaps in that direction.

People like you are too brainwashed to tell the difference between the pilots and the terrorists who nearly crashed that plane three years ago.

Remember?

Obama is the terrorist. He, along with the likes of Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters, and Harry Reid are the ones flying this burning hulk into the ground.

 

[bripat9643]

Putting a stop to you and your ilk is how we regain our freedom.

Depends on your definition of freedom....

Looting your neighbors is not freedom. Only totalitarian thugs define it that way.

 

[georgephillip]

Putting a stop to you and your ilk is how we regain our freedom.

Depends on your definition of freedom....

Looting your neighbors is not freedom. Only totalitarian thugs define it that way.

Speaking of neighbors.

"ll my life I've heard Latin America described as a failed society (or collection of failed societies) because of its grotesque maldistribution of wealth. Peasants in rags beg for food outside the high walls of opulent villas, and so on.

"But according to the Central Intelligence Agency (whose patriotism I hesitate to question), income distribution in the United States is more unequal than in Guyana, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, and roughly on par with Uruguay, Argentina, and Ecuador.

"Income inequality is actually declining in Latin America even as it continues to increase in the United States.

"Economically speaking, the richest nation on earth is starting to resemble a banana republic.

"The main difference is that the United States is big enough to maintain geographic distance between the villa-dweller and the beggar.

"As Ralston Thorpe tells his St. Paul's classmate, the investment banker Sherman McCoy, in Tom Wolfe's 1987 novel The Bonfire of the Vanities: 'You've got to insulate, insulate, insulate.'"

Why we can't ignore growing income inequality. (1) - By Timothy Noah - Slate Magazine

 

[bripat9643]

What utter horseshit. Have you ever been to Latin America? If it's so great living there, why do millions of them apply for visas to the United States every year? Why do they attempt to immigrate by the millions illegally every year?

I personally know people from Ecuador and Venezuela, Brazil and Colombia. They would all give their eye teeth for a visa to the United States.

Speaking of neighbors.

"ll my life I've heard Latin America described as a failed society (or collection of failed societies) because of its grotesque maldistribution of wealth. Peasants in rags beg for food outside the high walls of opulent villas, and so on.

"But according to the Central Intelligence Agency (whose patriotism I hesitate to question), income distribution in the United States is more unequal than in Guyana, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, and roughly on par with Uruguay, Argentina, and Ecuador.

"Income inequality is actually declining in Latin America even as it continues to increase in the United States.

"Economically speaking, the richest nation on earth is starting to resemble a banana republic.

"The main difference is that the United States is big enough to maintain geographic distance between the villa-dweller and the beggar.

"As Ralston Thorpe tells his St. Paul's classmate, the investment banker Sherman McCoy, in Tom Wolfe's 1987 novel The Bonfire of the Vanities: 'You've got to insulate, insulate, insulate.'"

Why we can't ignore growing income inequality. (1) - By Timothy Noah - Slate Magazine

 

[daveman]

Thanks for sharing Dave, you always offer a smart, reasoned and concise response. I expect no less from you.

Poor Wry. Gets his feelings hurt when people dare question him.

No Dave, my feelings aren't hurt and if you actually believe calling me an "idiot" is questioning me, you're even dumber than I know you to be.
Your post is a classic idiotgram, a typical retort by a card-carrying member of the echo chamber. I have no doubt you believe your opinions are valid, but I had no doubt the sincerity of psychotics when I transported them to county on 5150's.

And there it is: I must be psychotic.

Face it, Skippy: You don't tolerate disagreement at all.

 

[daveman]

Never happened once before of after 911 yet you're sure it happened three times on one day?

Yes. Normal people agree. Abnormal people believe stupid horseshit they see on the internet.

You shouldn't be so hard on yourself.
Maybe one day reality won't be so scary for you.

Reality is beautiful. I suggest you visit it sometime. Since you have to cross a border, don't forget your passport:

 

[daveman]

We've had two hundred years of experience in this country that prove corporations pose a conflict with Americans. Starting with East India Company tea that was dumped into Boston harbor.

Leftists don't know shit about history.

The conflict was with King George, you moron. The East India Company was just the vehicle.

Let me guess -- public education?

Thom Hartman

"More than two thousand corporations had been chartered between 1790 and 1860. They helped protect themselves from economic disasters by keeping tight control over the economy and the markets within which they operated. In this they echoed the Federalist ideas of Alexander Hamilton and John Adams.

"Many companies deal with competition by working hard to earn our business, just as Adam Smith—whose 1776 book The Wealth of Nations summarized many economic principles for the founders of this nation—envisioned.

"But others don’t; they feel that the best way to deal with competition is to eliminate it.

"And, as the East India Company had shown, two ways to do so were by getting the government to grant a monopoly or special tax favors or by crushing or buying out one’s competition."

Thom seems to think King George and other parasites of the time used the East India Company as a tool to enhance their fortunes.

Do you agree?

"Unequal Protection": The People's Masters | Truthout

Make up your mind. First you said the Boston Tea Party was directed against the East India Company. Then, when I showed you how utterly incorrect that was, you change your tune.

 

[Dr Grump]

Putting a stop to you and your ilk is how we regain our freedom.

Depends on your definition of freedom....

Looting your neighbors is not freedom. Only totalitarian thugs define it that way.

What do you mean 'looting'. Are you using the word literally, or as a metaphor?

 

[bripat9643]

Looting your neighbors is not freedom. Only totalitarian thugs define it that way.

What do you mean 'looting'. Are you using the word literally, or as a metaphor?

I mean it literally. Voting for politicians who promise to do it for you is still looting. Everyone who voted for Obama because they thought he would pay for their mortgage and their gas and their healthcare is a looter.

You're a looter.