Which Side Are You On?

[daveman]

How much stupid is required to believe two planes collapsed three steel framed skyscrapers?

Not a bit. Believing they were controlled demolitions, however, takes a great deal of stupid.

And as you've already admitted, you're stupid.

Now there is a liberal for you. Rumsfeld goes on TV outs himself over the missing funds, and then has terrorists blow up the WTC, and Pentagon the next day to cover his trail. He almost got the White House too. Damn this guy was extremely good. To think that he could put an operation like that together in less then 24 hours and carry it out in absolute secrecy. This almost rises to the level of President Bush, personally blowing up the levees in New Orleans as Katrina was rolling ashore. I forgot why you libs said he did that. I wonder though how Rumsfeld knew months in advance to have the terrorists trained as pilots to carry out this plot. Oh I forgot this too. Weren't the airliners that left Logan spotted with missiles attached to hard points under the wings? I've heard accounts that the planes fired the missiles, and then flew the air craft through the holes in the twin towers that they had created. The planes were then flown to club Med were the air crews, passengers, and terrorists are living in the lap of luxury. You libs are brilliant.

It's funny how leftists can believe simultaneously that Bush is the stupidest man in the world yet brilliant enough to pull off 9/11 undetected.

 

[daveman]

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?

Actually, it was about taxation without representation.

And who levied the taxes?

Hint: King George.

Let's see...Oh... wait.. that's what YOU guys want.

No, it's not. Don't be stupid.

You want even our poorest to pay taxes(even though they still do on the state and local level, and sales tax, and SSI... and), but you want to cut them off of all that damned Socialism that you rail against continually.

You're terribly confused.

Then you want our wealthiest to pay even less than they do now and get rid of all those pesky regulations that keep them from raping us more than they already do.

"Raping"? Who's forcing you to buy what rich people are selling, again?

Note for the mentally impaired and leftists (pardon the redundancy): There is no Man keeping you down. You do it to yourself.

You are not a "Tea Party" person...

I am not a Tea Party person because my political activites were limited during my Air Force career.

...you guys are the catalyst for the next Tea Party.

Considering the backlash to the Tea Party is coming from the left, the Tea Party will be the catalyst for a Glorious Worker's Revolution.

 

[daveman]

You know what doesn't fail? Capitalism.

missed the bailouts, did we.....?

That was more socialism. Capitalism would have allowed those companies to fail, which would have been a good thing.

I refuse to ever buy a new GM product again. They were rewarded for failure. When I buy a pickup truck, it'll be a Toyota.

 

[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.

How many "progressives" do you see in the US Congress?

How many millionaires do you see in congress?

A vast majority are progressives.

There is nothing wrong with being a millionaire.

 

[daveman]

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.

From your link.

"In 1773, the East India Company had a lot of tea it could not sell in England and was almost ready to close down its business. To help save the company, the British Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773. This allowed the company to sell its goods to the colonies without paying taxes. This meant the East India Company could sell their tea cheaper than the American merchants."

The Boston Tea Party - December 16, 1773

Based on the preceding paragraph can you tell us who owned the tea dumped into Boston harbor?

Can you tell us who wrote the account you are linking to?

Based on who ever wrote the account you link to, is it accurate to say the East India Company required "special tax favors" granted by their Monarch in order to compete with American colonists?

Are you functionally illiterate? "...the British Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773..."

Why do "proud conservatives" continue to side with monarchs and other assorted parasites?

The reality is, George, that if you and I were alive in the 1770s, I'd be fighting alongside the Founding Fathers, and you'd be informing on us to the King.

Leftists don't like freedom. They love their oligarchy.

 

[Steelplate]

That was more socialism. Capitalism would have allowed those companies to fail, which would have been a good thing.

I refuse to ever buy a new GM product again. They were rewarded for failure. When I buy a pickup truck, it'll be a Toyota.

Are you going to avoid the banks that got the bailouts for your next loan?

 

[Steelplate]

Leftists don't like freedom. They love their oligarchy.

Who promotes the oligarchy more? Those of us fighting for the working and Middle Class, or those fighting to give the oligarchy even more power and control?

 

[editec]

Leftists don't like freedom. They love their oligarchy.

Who promotes the oligarchy more? Those of us fighting for the working and Middle Class, or those fighting to give the oligarchy even more power and control?

Who IS fighting for the working and middle class, exactly?

Damned if I know.

Do YOU?

 

[georgephillip]

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.

Last time you checked... was control fraud criminal?

"'We need to do a top 100 priority list – the way it was done in the savings and loan crisis,' Black said. 'The FBI, the Justice Department and the regulatory agencies got together and put together a list of top 100 companies to target.'

"'There was a recognition that these were control frauds.

"'The top executives were using seemingly legitimate savings and loans as their weapons of fraud.

"'And that is why any serious look will tell you the same thing about this most recent crisis as well. The criminal justice referral process has collapsed at the agencies.'”

Calling Paulson and Rubin government bureaucrats is like calling John McCain a war hero.

Paulson, Rubin and McCain are war-whores for Wall Street.

So are you, apparently.

If you can't fathom how Wall Street crimes indict those who have nearly doubled their share of returns to wealth since the crimes were committed, you're willfully stupid, as well.

Were TARP funds an example of a voluntary exchange?
I don't care if you were in favor of TARP.
Did parasites who caused the Great Recession suck the government tit afterwards?

Have they stopped sucking?

Have you?

Russell Mokhiber: The Top Ten Ways to Crack Down on Corporate Financial Crime

 

[Steelplate]

Leftists don't like freedom. They love their oligarchy.

Who promotes the oligarchy more? Those of us fighting for the working and Middle Class, or those fighting to give the oligarchy even more power and control?

Who IS fighting for the working and middle class, exactly?

Damned if I know.

Do YOU?

Good point. Both sides are so far up the Conglomerate's ass that really... no one is fighting for them(us). But hey... the issues that I feel are important to the middle and working class(Health Care, Education and Social Security)? At least one side talks about the problem and TRIES to help. The other side would rather bluster about "American Exceptionalism" and maintain a sink or swim attitude(even though most of their constituents want Medicare and want their monthly government checks from the Social Security Administration).

 

[georgephillip]

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.

From your link.

"In 1773, the East India Company had a lot of tea it could not sell in England and was almost ready to close down its business. To help save the company, the British Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773. This allowed the company to sell its goods to the colonies without paying taxes. This meant the East India Company could sell their tea cheaper than the American merchants."

The Boston Tea Party - December 16, 1773

Based on the preceding paragraph can you tell us who owned the tea dumped into Boston harbor?

Can you tell us who wrote the account you are linking to?

Based on who ever wrote the account you link to, is it accurate to say the East India Company required "special tax favors" granted by their Monarch in order to compete with American colonists?

Are you functionally illiterate? "...the British Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773..."

Why do "proud conservatives" continue to side with monarchs and other assorted parasites?

The reality is, George, that if you and I were alive in the 1770s, I'd be fighting alongside the Founding Fathers, and you'd be informing on us to the King.

Leftists don't like freedom. They love their oligarchy.

Are you functional at all?

What do your "proud conservative" instincts tell you about the political loyalties of the British Parliament in 1773?

Monarch or Democracy?

That's a tough one, right daveslave?

Based on everything you've posted, the reality is you would have fought for whichever side paid you the most in the Revolutionary War.

Conservative love their Monarchs (and Wall Street)

 

[daveman]

That was more socialism. Capitalism would have allowed those companies to fail, which would have been a good thing.

I refuse to ever buy a new GM product again. They were rewarded for failure. When I buy a pickup truck, it'll be a Toyota.

Are you going to avoid the banks that got the bailouts for your next loan?

My bank wasn't bailed out.

 

[daveman]

Leftists don't like freedom. They love their oligarchy.

Who promotes the oligarchy more? Those of us fighting for the working and Middle Class, or those fighting to give the oligarchy even more power and control?

You're fighting for the working and middle class...how, exactly? By voting Democrat?

Then you're fighting to give the oligarchy even more power and control. Congratulations.

 

[daveman]

From your link.

"In 1773, the East India Company had a lot of tea it could not sell in England and was almost ready to close down its business. To help save the company, the British Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773. This allowed the company to sell its goods to the colonies without paying taxes. This meant the East India Company could sell their tea cheaper than the American merchants."

The Boston Tea Party - December 16, 1773

Based on the preceding paragraph can you tell us who owned the tea dumped into Boston harbor?

Can you tell us who wrote the account you are linking to?

Based on who ever wrote the account you link to, is it accurate to say the East India Company required "special tax favors" granted by their Monarch in order to compete with American colonists?

Are you functionally illiterate? "...the British Parliament passed the Tea Act of 1773..."

Why do "proud conservatives" continue to side with monarchs and other assorted parasites?

The reality is, George, that if you and I were alive in the 1770s, I'd be fighting alongside the Founding Fathers, and you'd be informing on us to the King.

Leftists don't like freedom. They love their oligarchy.

Are you functional at all?

What do your "proud conservative" instincts tell you about the political loyalties of the British Parliament in 1773?

Monarch or Democracy?

That's a tough one, right daveslave?

Based on everything you've posted, the reality is you would have fought for whichever side paid you the most in the Revolutionary War.

Conservative love their Monarchs (and Wall Street)

At least I would have fought.

You wouldn't. You're a coward.

 

[georgephillip]

Who promotes the oligarchy more? Those of us fighting for the working and Middle Class, or those fighting to give the oligarchy even more power and control?

Who IS fighting for the working and middle class, exactly?

Damned if I know.

Do YOU?

Good point. Both sides are so far up the Conglomerate's ass that really... no one is fighting for them(us). But hey... the issues that I feel are important to the middle and working class(Health Care, Education and Social Security)? At least one side talks about the problem and TRIES to help. The other side would rather bluster about "American Exceptionalism" and maintain a sink or swim attitude(even though most of their constituents want Medicare and want their monthly government checks from the Social Security Administration).

One possible solution to this dilemma could materialize in November of 2012 if millions of voters FLUSH hundreds of Republicans AND Democrats from DC.

The Internet makes it doable:
Third party candidates already appear on many ballots across the US.

All that's required at this point is the Will to consider how much would Change if 100, 200 or more Dems and Repubs were replaced by an equal number of Greens, Libertarians and Independents within the next 18 months.

Fire the second shot heard 'round the world?

 

[Steelplate]

You're fighting for the working and middle class...how, exactly? By voting Democrat?

Then you're fighting to give the oligarchy even more power and control. Congratulations.

I know... you think that GOVERNMENT is the oligarchy. Congratulations on your ignorance. Governments come and go... but the influence peddlers remain.... that falls directly in the laps of those "exceptional Americans" that make up our Plutocracy that runs the government.

I want this country to be of, by and for the people... not the top 1%... but ALL the people. Not the people that YOU like.. but the people YOU despise too.

 

[georgephillip]

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.

Capital doesn't exist without labor.
Do you agree?

In their present incarnation many capitalists are parasites.
Even those with factories or businesses that produce useful goods and services.
At some point the machine will replace their need for human labor.

Then what?

Wounded Knee meets Auschwitz?

Which side are you on?

 

[daveman]

You're fighting for the working and middle class...how, exactly? By voting Democrat?

Then you're fighting to give the oligarchy even more power and control. Congratulations.

I know... you think that GOVERNMENT is the oligarchy. Congratulations on your ignorance. Governments come and go... but the influence peddlers remain.... that falls directly in the laps of those "exceptional Americans" that make up our Plutocracy that runs the government.

I want this country to be of, by and for the people... not the top 1%... but ALL the people. Not the people that YOU like.. but the people YOU despise too.

Again with the 1% boogeyman.

 

[georgephillip]

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

Then why do you routinely defend the policies of Wall Street parasites that are skewing US income inequality to levels seen in "Ecuador and Venezuela, Brazil and Columbia?"

 

[georgephillip]

Which Side Are You On?

I'm on the side of America.

Guess that puts me at odds with the Republicans and al Qaeda.

Not to mention...

"Robert Edward Rubin (born August 29, 1938) served as the 70th United States Secretary of the Treasury during both the first and second Clinton administrations.

"Before his government service, he spent 26 years at Goldman Sachs eventually serving as a member of the Board, and Co-Chairman from 1990-1992.

"His most prominent post-government role was as Director and Senior Counselor of Citigroup, where he performed ongoing advisory and representational roles for the firm."

Robert Rubin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Possibly Democrats AND Republicans are the problem?