“You claim, ‘starvation occurs in famine-stricken areas because profiteers intercept charitable aid.’ I haven’t heard that one. I have heard where corrupt foreign governments steal the aid meant for the starving in really poor countries.”-MG

Corrupt individuals in those foreign governments are selling the aid supplies elsewhere for profit, or warlords are selling them where governments are weak.

“If man could successfully plant those seeds and feed the multitudes privately on their own, without having to go through government at all, would you accept that?”

Man will plant the seeds he needs to, if allowed. If an agribusiness giant corrupts legislators in a government, getting them to mandate the purchase of patented seeds that can’t be saved for free from each year’s crop, and which are designed to require large amounts of expensive pesticides and fertilizers, this keeps man from planting the seeds he needs to. In India, a quarter MILLION farmers have drunk the poisons they were required to buy, in ultimate protest against this atrocity of capitalism, this callous killing off of a millennia-old farming culture that worked. Government was never involved before, because there was never anything rich enough to corrupt this government before. Big government was not the problem; big money was. If government had controlled business more, instead of being controlled by bribes, this wouldn’t have happened.

If we try to set things right again with the current system, you realize, don’t you, that it will require MORE government involvement, not less. If we insist that government stay out of our business, that it not insist on decent behavior in business, then what can you POSSIBLY expect will happen? You want to examine MY intentions? If the most important thing to you is to minimize government, regardless of the damage sure to occur with limited government, then what can YOUR intentions be? I want government to be adequate for the job it needs to do if it’s to be of any use to us. If we keep the current system, then that job entails proactive policing of this economic system. If you really want minimal government, then help imagine a system that won’t require policing. If currency corrupts, then imagine a system without it. Surely the universe is not constructed to allow to exist only this one flawed system invented by man. Surely within one of our seven billion minds common sense hasn’t been paralyzed and become atrophied by the rules of this one system.

Or if coming up with a whole new system feels overwhelming, then allow a few changes to what we already have. Public financing of elections, for instance, and scrupulous policing of lobbying, would be a help, and a place to start.

“Q: You mentioned a "moral govt" in your post. Where does your 'moral govt' derive its morals from?”-fred


Not from lobbyists. Not from Exxon or Xe. The Golden Rule would be fine, whether it’s referenced to the Bible, or to any other religion’s scripture, or to the actions of countless people modestly going about their lives, it doesn’t matter.

"Corrupt individuals in those foreign governments are selling the aid supplies elsewhere for profit, or warlords are selling them where governments are weak." -MQ

So how many corrupt individuals does it take until you can state that government is corrupt? In a dictatorship it only requires one corrupt individual.

"If an agribusiness giant corrupts legislators in a government.."- MQ

"Government was never involved before, because there was never anything rich enough to corrupt this government before. Big government was not the problem; big money was..." MQ

"If you really want minimal government, then help imagine a system that won’t require policing. If currency corrupts, then imagine a system without it."- MQ

Mike, I think you've been looking at the sins of greedy rich Capitalists so long that you don't even realize the sins of government. Your argument is grossly one sided and ignorant of the fact that government has become its own self centered entity not just because of the rich lobbying but because it does not care about the people it is supposed to represent and serve.

As I stated to John, the beast has two heads but you only see the Capitalist side. Let me illustrate both sides with this scenario. Suppose some wealthy philanthropist donated seeds of every kind so that almost everyone could plant their own garden and not have to go hungry.(BTW, this is to illustrate a point, not to go into detail about the cost of pesticides and bad whether but for arguments sake you can imagine everyone was donated a greenhouse). Lets suppose it worked great and starvation was near zero.

The point:

What would the Capitalists do? Raise prices on whatever food they could sell and discourage individuals from doing things on their own, if it will costs them money.

What would the government do? Raise taxes on whatever they could tax and regulate and discourage individuals from doing things on their own outside of government, if it will cost them taxes and dependency.

Good government should encourage us to be independent and self sufficient and strive for a world where their costly services and involvement in our lives is minimal.

Reads like Mike Q wont be happy until there is single govt control of the entire world.....of his making and or approval. nuts

There is no difference between KORIZINE AND MADOFF--EXCEPT KORIZINE, another former Goldman Saks CEO, AND Treasury Department secretary IS NOT IN PRISON. Vice President said that Korizine was the "smartest" man that he knows.

ANYONE WHO CAUSES THE IMMINENT COLLAPSE OF THE UNITED STATES, WHETHER IT IS, E.G., Wall Street PAULSON, OSAME BIN LADI, SADDAM HEUSEEIN, SHOULD HAVE THEIR ASSETS SEIZED AND TRIED AS A TERRORIST.


If you said that you didn't know where $l.3 BILLION DOLLARS WENT--YOU'D BE IN PRISON UNTIL YOU DID KNOW.

THE UNITED STATES HAS GONE FROM THE "MELTING POT" TO THE "BOILING POT!"

MG and Fred:

I really don't see why you have this notion that I want government to RUN things. If it keeps tabs on Goldman Sachs and doesn't actually exacerbate the corruption, then they're doing their job, or part of it. Maintaining courts, so that everyone can have justice, maintaining roads so that everyone can move around, subsidizing the needed new technologies such as solar power, inspecting our foods and water and air, sponsoring research on public health issues,-and other such "socialist" things is government doing its job for us. Something better than private health insurance, too, is a plus for Americans as a whole, even if a few insurance companies have to diversify to make up for lost business. But this notion that I want some kind of Soviet-style central management of all aspects of commerce and living, is all in your imagination. As for "their costly services and involvement in our lives" is concerned,-those costly items are the very things I mentioned,-roads, schools, research, Social Security and Medicare, "defense". Without these, government would not have any function, would not exist, and where would we be? Under the foreign government that DID exist and could just take us over, that's where, using its roads, schools, etc. Human life WILL push for civilization over brutish existance, and civilization means government, with any warts it may have. But having government expediting public improvements is not the same as being in thrall to an oppressive overlord. Enjoying the convenience of infrastructure and institutions is not the same as surrendering to helpless dependency and moral weakness. Anti-government rhetoric seems overheated to me.

MikeQ: Don't get frazzled by fred or G's soundbyte of the moment and labeling theatrics. G is content to hold the blinders over his eyes and pathologically defend crony capitalism from the banksta's, energy perversionists, and other assorted robber barons, as if it were some sort of mandate from high above the heavens.
fred just loves those one-liner gotcha' slurs and labels.

both should read Chomskys "LINGUISTICS OF CULTURAL DESPAIR. Both talk the good talk against the dysfunctionality of polarized idealism and terminology. both dive HEAD FIRST into using it as their first line of defense whenever they are asked to show a plan to correct what is wrong.
All is well in their world, and they wouldn't change a thing. DYSFUNCTION AND STALEMATE WORKS FOR THEM. neither are seeing the whole picture- won't look beyond themselves to see that the entire monetary structutre that they'vve come to know and love will soon be dissipated.
For their sake, let's hope that they are "insiders"who can make the necessary adjustments when it happens.

Neither, Obama and his tax holidaynor Republicans w/ their tax break for the rich deal breaker are of any benefit to the average middle class worker or anyone who views SSI as a life preserving tool upon retirement.
Both parties offer nothing. Congress and the Senate do nothing- Yet work a mere 112days a year.
If you want to start getting results that matterthen let these people work a 5 day week w/ no overtime pay. salary deductions and penalty box party penalization on committees for partisan obstructions or when a member remains or is influenced by lobbyists on the committees. Any closed door last minute alterations of bills by lobbyists or othewwise when found penalizes the offending party 3members and costs the offending corporation/s that benefit.

"MikeQ: Don't get frazzled"-John

Aw, it's fun.

I like this board.

John;good comments about our do nothing congress. I would like to add to that list federal health benefits and pensions. Alot of members of congress are millionaires but still receive generous benefits. The gop earlier this year wanted to mean test social security and medicare. They considered $34000 for ss and 40000 for medicare for a single person wealthy. For social secuity they would not receive it and for medicare they would be charged higher premiums. This should also apply to members of congress. If their adjusted gross income is $40000 they should not received medical benefits or a pension. With all the issued facing congress such as the budget, payroll tax cut unemployment extension and payment to dr for medicare they take the weekend off. In private business they would be on unemployment.

To the manor born......

Government is doing a great job: 46 million on food stamps and 1/3 of American kids carrying too much weight. Perfect

Mike Q and John,

Your posts have this consistent message, that government run programs achieve more for individuals then anything we can do apart from government. That government corruption ONLY happens with Capitalists involvement in the system. History has shown us that is NOT the case, IE; Communism. It would be different if government was run and managed by some higher beings but it is not. It is run by human beings and typically elite, power seeking human beings, with self centered desires. Government is good if it is selfless and puts it's people first, while protecting the rights and liberties of ALL individuals. Yet, there are few government programs that do that because someone almost always benefits at the expense of someone else. It is not justifiable when the powerful privates trample our rights, nor is it justifiable when a powerful organized entity does the same.

I recognize the problem is two fold, yet neither of you are willing or able to see both sides. Who then John, is wearing the blinders?

Who said:

"..a wealthy person has benefited from government in areas like security and roads and should give back."

Mike Q?

Actually, it was Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren

Who replied:

“She’s a socialist,” “She wants the government to do all this.”
“When the state runs things that is a socialist idea that it should be collective,”
“I preach home schooling and private schooling and competition in schools.”
“Governments are always destructive in the production of wealth,”
“They pretend they are going to take care of us like - well the government is going to give us a house – look at what happened to the house. The big guys all got bailed out who ripped us off and the derivatives in the bank, they’re still being protected. Middle class lost it and they lost their houses, so her whole argument is wrong.”

Was it Fred? Actually John don't get frazzled but it was none other then Ron Paul during a Nightline interview Thursday. Say, isn't that the same Ron Paul you support?...ouch, he sounds like he believes in small government too! Watch out, Mike and John, those small government types are everywhere!!

Capitalists own, man, and run this government. Privatizing education and other government termed protective services would either price these labors to costs that would bury the middle class and their families or leave the poor w/ absolutely no way to sustain these critical factors at this time.
"Small government" varies depending upon who is doing the talking, what is included in the overall package, and how they intend to implement the reinfusion of the sellout KGB endearing globalists, and their opposition force IMF colonialist pirates booty back into our ecxonomy.
there has never been a post the seeks to impose any more undue hardship on domestic private businessesthat were unfairly imposed on them ever since Bush/Cheneys offshore tax haven restructure, WARS TO NOWHERE, and deregulation heaped the total burden of inflations to healthcare, insurances and higher educations tuitions squarely on their shoulders.
Another unspoken aberration was the evolvement of the untaxable status afforded to C and S corporations who utilize but do not employ a single person other then themselves- yet consistantly rage on and complain about the taxes they are asked to pay for local services that fall under the headings of gov't employee.
Why should these people be afforded more consideration then the gov't "employees" who job in most cases puts their lives on the front lines protecting and defending and servicing the public. If you profit here and prosper here then at least support the infrastructure.
If private individuals have merged their assets and file their income taxes with their businesses let them deduct their office/business liabilities to determine their actual income.
GOV'T IS A BUSINESS!!!
Again you guys talk in symantics all of these politicians in gov't are in fact "private businesses/corporations" when they use their influence and pledge to do harms to our constitutional rights privileges and to our nation for certain concerns who are not subject to our laws. that includes global corporations, foreign caucuses, and offshored tax havens. They constantly do it when they are allowed to 1.collect fundraising money 2.cater to foreign pact moneys. 3.profit on the stock market from insider knowledge 4. create legislations that take away our individual freedoms and surtax the hell out of us for the shortfalls caused by the listed above.
So poker players MikeG and fred, let me call your bluffs and wager in the amount of your leftist influenced Fannie & Freddie/Acorn/gov't worker benefits shortfalls and losses.
*SSI- "was" fully funded, until private industries infiltrators and complicit bureaucrats raided this trust fund and quit employing americans with living wages for their own selfish greeds and political agendas. LET'S FOR ARGUMENTS SAKE PLACE THE TOTAL AT $2-4TRILLION.

... and raise you "the private sectors deficit spending policies and I see a 10:1 descrepancy and shortages on your side of the ledger. THAT'S $11TRILLION and "9million full time well paying private sector jobs lost" OVER THE LAST DECADE, alone. Shouldn't they be included in the top causes in FORECLOSURE numbers? Think hard, evaluate your chances of coming up with another 8trillion and know that "we the people will not allow you the latitude to borrow, tax or attempt to steal another dime from our wages and contractual benefits.
Ante Up!!! ...or fold???

Ron Paul-
-END ALL WARS.
-WOULD HOLD FOREIGN NATIONS LIABLE FOR THE PROTECTION COSTS THEY RECEIVE FROM OUR MILITARY.
-WOULD ELIMINATE THE FEDERAL RESERVES "INCOME TAX AND REPLACE IT WITH- ...A SOLID "1% ACROSS THE BOARD- WEALTH TAX".
My thought on this would be a 4% wealth tax on the top 400 families which would eliminate the entire deficit and set us up on solid footing. In so doing, this affords the time restructure the entire tax system. Once the deficit is gone, they the upper crust of the 1% will receive a tax free holiday for life on all US stateside earnings, holdings and businesses having done their timely and stoic "patriotic duty" at our nations greatest time of need, ... so long as their businesses do not do, nor cause damage to our environment.

-WOULD "PROTECT" OUR BORDERS W/ THE MILITARY PERSONNEL COMING BACK HOME.
-WOULD END THE BUSH TAXCUTS, TAXHAVENS, AND TAX SOME OF BUT NOT ALL OF ANY ADVANTAGES (gleaned by the K-Street(*private sector) CATCH 22 clauses placed in the Bush Homeland Security Bill that made offshoring moneys legal. A bill in it's own right was totally unpatriotic and treasonous in three areas- it's intent to undermine the rest of the nbations taxpayers, it's affect on all other domestic businesses and its outcome on the entire nations economy ) FROM RE-PATRIOTED MONEYS PIRATED OUT OF OUR ECONOMY THAT LED US TO THIS HUMONGOUS DEFICIT AND IT'S DECAYED INFRASTRUCTURE STATE.

In short, the upside of Ron Paul far outweighs the negativity of nit picking individual items.
Collapsing gov't agencies and folding them into one tent at the top Federal rungs where the "insiders and wheeler/dealer contingent where sociopathic re-engineering ideologs and raiders reside" is not the same thing- nor, will it have the same affect on our economy as immediate wholesale elimination of middle class jobs under the heading of government.

SS was totally funded and had billions in reserve until.......president Johnson raided it to pay for his vast new social welfare policies.

Dude, you are pathetic. Probably un diagnosed as well.

LOL! Spirit supports Ron Paul?

Hey Doofy. Under a Ron Paul admin you'll be fending for yourselves. Paul is adamant against transfer. In a Paul admin, you either earn, starve, or rely on PRIVATE charity. Get It?

note. This writer has been a supporter of Dr. Paul since '88.

Mike G: Does Q have 'plantation mentality.'
Where he views his govt as some kindly old Coronel Sanders looking out for the best interest of his 'childlike' charges?

Coronel Q rationalizes it by saying, "lookee here boy, we built roads, bridges, housing, ...infastructure out the wazoo. I teach in the schools what I think they should know and let em practice my religon. Whats that you say boy? Freedom??? They dont need no stinking freedom, they cant think for themselves anyway. They get everything they need, right here. Now go away boy, ya bother me."

Does anyone remember a cablevision cable access show of about 20 years ago, that featured a host who rambled on and on, -sometimes in coherently- about political matters and wore a tampon afixed to his afro?

John, do you tie a tampon to your locks when you inscribe your un thought provoking rantings?

Fred: If you want to be an ungracious brat and say things like you didn't ask to be born, or you didn't ask the government to build roads to facilitate public and private FREEDOM (What is freedom if your day is occupied, dawn to dark, trying to get the necessities taken care of with nothing to make it easier or more efficient? Freedom to do what? Be bone-tired and falling farther and farther behind? I can't imagine being any freer than I am in this country right now. What on Earth could greater freedom consist of?),-if you want to pretend society is not structured with the populace tacitly agreeing to pay for daycare, so to speak, while we work and go about our lives,-if you want to act like it's all an oppressive daddy state being forced on poor little you, well go right ahead and sulk and act out and be insulting and disrespectful to people.

If the populace hired some private contractor to take care of a few things for us, oh that would be peachy, right? But if we eliminate the waste of public money that profits are, then it's an awful arrangement that takes away all our freedom and beats up on puppies.

MG: I've freely damned the corruption in government, whether the personal benefit derived by the corrupted is monetary, political, or whatever. But it sounds like you are saying that since there is some corruption in some part of government that we should not accept any authority in government. Courts are part of government, that apply the rules written by elected legislators. Police are part of government, that keep order by uniformly (ideally) monitoring people's behavior, limits of which are voted on in Congress. ALL of government falls apart if we get too fastidious about it and reject its legitimacy.

fred: Whoa boy! It appears that I must have struck and frayed some nerves with some of those points. As long as you can work the system to your advantage- all is well in "fred"dom.
Bet you all, dollars to donuts, it was that eye opening, "C and S corporation loophole" that was opened and unmasked as the pyriah it is to communitys at-large as well as short changing our nation when it comes to funds required to supoort our military for everyone's safety without exception- for further discussion and closer inspection.

Remembering once again, that it is both he and G-man, who have often tossed the soundbyte quotation around consistantly about "having 50% or a better percentage of Americans who don't pay their "fair share" of taxes.

fred: Whoa boy! It appears that I must have struck and frayed some nerves with some of those last points.
As long as you can work the system to your advantage- all is well in "fred"dom.

Bet you all, dollars to donuts, it was that eye opening, "C and S corporation loophole" that was opened and unmasked as the pyriah it is to communitys at-large, as well as, short changing our nation when it comes to funds required to suport our crushing military budget that is sucking the life's blood out of our infrastructure both of which are for everyone's safety without exception- for further inspection, discussion and "independent" oversight especially where shortfalls are involved.

Remember once again, that it is both he and G-man, who have often tossed the soundbyte quotation about "having a country whereby 50% or a better percentage of Americans who either don't pay their "fair share" of taxes and/or receive some form of governmental assistance.
To me it says, that the private sector has been negligent/treasonous in its duties and obligation to the nation that provided that decade long tax abatement, and more importantly to those paupers who made them rich beyond their own individual/physical capabilities as well.

Hey guys, at least be honest for once and admit to yourselves which sector has cut jobs in order to increase profit margins to the insane and obscene levels that we see today at the cost of jobs rather than innovations- that were once reserved for underworld crime familys who worked their trade the same way.
... and which sector picked up and kept from total degradation at least some of the tossed aside "millions" of patriotic and loyal castaways? Hmmmmmmmmm?
Go ahead, fred. Make my day! Show me the jobs, and the business plan going forward, mister JOB CREATOR.

Spirit. We only create jobs for profit. Eliminate the profit motive and voila! No more jobs.

Stick that up your personal think tank.

Poor little Q. When he actually thinks for himself, meaning not copying articulate lefty soundbites, he cant seem to advance his argument any farther than cops, firemen, roads, ect.

Q; MikeG eats your lunch everyday; you pathetic
little armchair idelogue.

fred: You don't create jobs, period. You engage in a contract of service production with an individual. A human being. A mother or a father that deserves respect not only for their labor, skills, but for their ability to preservere putting aside their pride, emotions, and natural instincts to work for the likes of you.
You should consider yourself blessed, instead you stand precipitously upon that pedestal you've imagined for yourself without a clear thought or vision in your head.

$$$... ???... pssssst! Gone in an instant. Then what?

"Eliminate the profit motive and voila! No more jobs."---> AGAIN, YOU DIDN'T FINISH THE THOUGHT PROCESS. IT READS AS FOLLOWS-



"Eliminate the profit motive and voila! No more jobs."--->
...THEN, THERE GOES FRED, BACK TO WORKING FOR HIMSELF, OR AS KARMA MIGHT HAVE IT(in a hellish nightmare reversal of fortune)- WORKING SLAVISHLY, HEAD JUST ABOVE WATER, FOR A LIKEWISE MIRROR IMAGE OF HIMSELF, WITH AN EVEN BIGGER AXE TO GRIND.

CAVEAT EMPTOR!!!
“It is the mark of the mind untrained to take its own processes as valid for all men, and its own judgments for absolute truth.”
¯ — Aleister Crowley

fred: You don't create jobs, period. You engage in a contract of service production with an individual. A human being. A mother or a father that deserves respect not only for their labor, skills, but for their ability to preservere putting aside their pride, emotions, and natural instincts to work for the likes of you.
You should consider yourself blessed, instead you stand precipitously upon that pedestal you've imagined for yourself without a clear thought or vision in your head.

$$$... ???... pssssst! Gone in an instant. Then what?

"Eliminate the profit motive and voila! No more jobs."---> AGAIN, YOU DIDN'T FINISH THE THOUGHT PROCESS. IT READS AS FOLLOWS-


"Eliminate the profit motive and voila! No more jobs."--->
...THEN, THERE GOES FRED, BACK TO WORKING FOR HIMSELF. BUSINESS CLOSED!!!OR AS KARMA MIGHT HAVE IT(in a hellish nightmare reversal of fortune)- WORKING SLAVISHLY, HEAD JUST ABOVE WATER, FOR A LIKEWISE MIRROR IMAGE OF HIMSELF, WITH AN EVEN BIGGER AXE TO GRIND.

RNN Staff:
Does Fighting Have a Place in Hockey?

Yes. There is no way to completely eliminate it. It is human instinct to react to pain inflicted in an offensive manner, with an immediate retaliatory defensive response. It is human instinct that reflexively propels the initial response. The brain doesn't kick in until much later once the shock to the body, which has short circuited the brain has been recognized, located, and processed.
In this sport of high speed collisions, where emotional ebbs and flows run at fever pitch and pride and machismo rule... FIGHTS WILL BREAK OUT!

Instead of couch potatoes judging sanctimoniously to eliminate survival instincts consistant to human conduct of those pitted against each other for sport in the arena... let's fit the leaders of all nations with shock therapy headgear whenever they perceive the ideas to engage to manuever their countrymen toward wars, and its deadlier consequences that are fatal, irresponsible, wanton acts of pure hatred and vengence. Mostly led by armchair cowards flexing the muscles of someone else's children.

Whoa, looks like I am late for this party, whats this a tag team, the good guys verses the bad guys? Who are the good guys I wonder? I guess it depends on who you ask.

"MG: I've freely damned the corruption in government, whether the personal benefit derived by the corrupted is monetary, political, or whatever." MQ

"Capitalists own, man, and run this government." John

"There is no difference between KORIZINE AND MADOFF...Vice President said that Korizine was the "smartest" man that he knows." - Gail

"Alot of members of congress are millionaires but still receive generous benefits."
"In private business they would be on unemployment." - Peter

"Government is doing a great job: 46 million on food stamps and 1/3 of American kids carrying too much weight. Perfect" - Fred

“Governments are always destructive in the production of wealth,” - Ron Paul

So everybody on this board recognizes we have serious problems with our government. John, (making sure we don't include "leftist influenced theft like Fannie & Freddie/Acorn/" because somehow their sins don't count), makes the point that Capitalists stole multi- trillions of dollars from us. While at the same time, Mike Q points out that "Courts are part of government, that apply the rules written by elected legislators."

So where was the government court protections when trillions of our dollars were allegedly being stolen? Whether government was owned by Capitalists, corrupt, self centered, ignorant, incompetent, the fault lies with government and needs to be corrected by government. Yet explicitly, John and Q want to put more of our resources into the hands of those that are mismanaging our money. John wants it to come from the rich, whether or not they had anything to do with the crime and Q just wants more money to go toward government.

So what if for now, until government gets its act together, we paid less taxes and managed more of our own money? What if we could be more independent and not need to rely on government as much? Wouldn't we all be better off?

President Eisenhower once noted that a few Texas oil millionaires wanted to abolish social security
http://tinyurl.com/bp7h8 / Nov. 8, 1954
http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/ike.asp

Whattya gonna do when amazon most sells products that local stores do at deep discounts? Considering local retail has different marginal cost like salaries, insurance, cost of rent and supplies, the mark-up on items can be substantial. Let alone the loss of sales tax to local and state jurisdictions. That means less money for fire, police, schools, ect. Any thoughts on the free market capitalist tool that amazon is?

Obama’s Campaign for Class Resentment:

The president has nothing to run on but crude populism

December 9, 2011



In the first month of his presidency, Barack Obama averred that if in three years he hadn’t alleviated the nation’s economic pain, he’d be a “one-term proposition.”

When three-quarters of Americans think the country is on the “wrong track” and even Bill Clinton calls the economy “lousy,” how then to run for a second term? Traveling Tuesday to Osawatomie, Kan., site of a famous 1910 Teddy Roosevelt speech, Obama laid out the case.

It seems that he and his policies have nothing to do with the current state of things. Sure, presidents are ordinarily held accountable for economic growth, unemployment, national indebtedness (see Obama, above). But not this time. Responsibility, you see, lies with the rich.

Or, as the philosophers of Zuccotti Park call them, the 1 percent. For Obama, these rich are the ones holding back the 99 percent. The “breathtaking greed of a few” is crushing the middle class. If only the rich paid their “fair share,” the middle class would have a chance. Otherwise, government won’t have enough funds to “invest” in education and innovation, the golden path to the sunny uplands of economic growth and opportunity.

Where to begin? A country spending twice as much per capita on education as it did in 1970 with zero effect on test scores is not underinvesting in education. It’s mis-investing. As for federally directed spending on innovation — like Solyndra? Ethanol? The preposterously subsidized, flammable Chevy Volt?

Our current economic distress is attributable to myriad causes: globalization, expensive high-tech medicine, a huge debt burden, a burst housing bubble largely driven by precisely the egalitarian impulse that Obama is promoting (government aggressively pushing “affordable housing” that turned out to be disastrously unaffordable), an aging population straining the social safety net. Yes, growing inequality is a problem throughout the Western world. But Obama’s pretense that it is the root cause of this sick economy is ridiculous.

As is his solution, that old perennial: selective abolition of the Bush tax cuts. As if all that ails us, all that keeps the economy from humming and the middle class from advancing, is a 4.6-point hike in marginal tax rates for the rich.

This, in a country $15 trillion in debt with out-of-control entitlements systematically starving every other national need. This obsession with a sock-it-to-the-rich tax hike that, at most, would have reduced this year’s deficit from $1.30 trillion to $1.22 trillion is the classic reflex of reactionary liberalism — anything to avoid addressing the underlying structural problems, which would require modernizing the totemic programs of the New Deal and Great Society.

As for those structural problems, Obama has spent three years on signature policies that either ignore or aggravate them:

- A massive stimulus, a gigantic payoff to Democratic interest groups (such as teachers and public-sector unions) that will add nearly $1 trillion to the national debt.

- A sweeping federally run reorganization of health care that (a) cost Congress a year, (b) created an entirely new entitlement in a nation hemorrhaging from unsustainable entitlements, (c) introduced new levels of uncertainty into an already stagnant economy.

- High-handed regulation, best exemplified by Obama’s failed cap-and-trade legislation, promptly followed by an EPA trying to impose the same conventional-energy-killing agenda by administrative means.

Moreover, on the one issue that already enjoys a bipartisan consensus — the need for fundamental reform of a corrosive, corrupted tax code that misdirects capital and promotes unfairness — Obama did nothing, ignoring the recommendations of several bipartisan commissions, including his own.

In Kansas, Obama lamented that millions “are now forced to take their children to food banks.” You have to admire the audacity. That’s the kind of damning observation the opposition brings up when you’ve been in office three years. Yet Obama summoned it to make the case for his reelection!

Why? Because, you see, he bears no responsibility for the current economic distress. It’s the rich. And, like Horatius at the bridge, Obama stands with the American masses against the soulless plutocrats.

This is populism so crude that it channels not Teddy Roosevelt so much as Hugo Chávez. But with high unemployment, economic stagnation, and unprecedented deficits, what else can Obama say?

He can’t run on stewardship. He can’t run on policy. His signature initiatives — the stimulus, Obamacare, and the failed cap-and-trade — will go unmentioned in his campaign ads. Indeed, they will be the stuff of Republican ads.

What’s left? Class resentment. Got a better idea?

"President Eisenhower once noted that a few Texas oil millionaires wanted to abolish social security" - Caspian

The progressive media and its followers want to make the point of this piece about "Millionaires that want to abolish SS" which is nothing more then class warfare. Eisenhower said himself, "Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

The bigger point of this piece is that Eisenhower wanted a smaller degree of government centralization or "we will lose everything." He wanted "moderation in government." He wanted to "increase funding for programs he thought had good track records." That is good leadership and sound judgement. So by default, this means decreasing, eliminating or changing programs that don't have good track records or are not working. So the only question is, which programs do we invest more into and which ones do we eliminate to maintain moderation in government? The answer is, eliminate the ones with the worse track records and increase the ones that work.

But Ideology is not sensible. The far left blindly believe that the majority of programs, except military, should increase or remain, regardless of cost or whether or not they are good. The far right believe most programs should be cut, except military, regardless of whether they work, with the sole purpose of making government smaller. Sensibility is neither far Right nor far Left but somewhere in the middle.


"Now it is true that I believe this country is following a dangerous trend when it permits too great a degree of centralization of governmental functions. I oppose this — in some instances the fight is a rather desperate one...The political processes of our country are such that if a rule of reason is not applied in this effort, we will lose everything — even to a possible and drastic change in the Constitution. This is what I mean by my constant insistence upon "moderation" in government."

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history.There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things.Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

"Politically, Ike was a classic small-government Republican. Since the Depression and the war were over by the time he took office in 1953, President Eisenhower felt it was time to return to the "middle way" — pruning federal subsidies of industries such as agriculture and power companies, which he believed no longer needed government assistance. At the same time, he wanted to sustain and even increase funding for programs he thought had good track records, and Social Security was paramount among these."

President Dwight Eisenhower

"So what if for now, until government gets its act together, we paid less taxes and managed more of our own money?"-MG

Shutting down various departments via not paying for them has nothing to do with the corruption that exists on the legislative level. It would put millions of nine-to-fivers who are doing nothing wrong out of work for no reason, without touching the ones you're after, the ones we're all after who are ruining things for us all. Starving out the blameless parts of government doesn't help anything. Making it harder for legislators to be corrupted by lobbyists and millions of dollars from many corporations backing a party and not good governance,-this would be more productive than closing fire departments and still complaining if response time suffers, or pulling a Fred.

G: I like Ike's comments. Sounds good to me.

The Class War was over a long time ago.

They won and we lost.......Period.

==============

"The two greatest obstacles to democracy in the United States are, first, the widespread delusion among the poor that we have a democracy, and second, the chronic terror among the rich, lest we get it."

--Edward Dowling

"G: I like Ike's comments. Sounds good to me." MQ

Then there is hope for some unity after all Mike Q.

First he says: "Shutting down various departments via not paying for them has nothing to do with the corruption that exists on the legislative level. It would put millions of nine-to-fivers who are doing nothing wrong out of work for no reason, without touching the ones you're after, the ones we're all after who are ruining things for us all. Starving out the blameless parts of government doesn't help anything. Making it harder for legislators to be corrupted by lobbyists and millions of dollars from many corporations backing a party and not good governance,-this would be more productive than closing fire departments and still complaining if response time suffers, or pulling a Fred"

Then he says: G: I like Ike's comments. Sounds good to me.


????

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/ron-paul-%e2%80%9cthe-patriot-act-was-written-many-many-years-before-911-and-the-attacks-simply-provided-opportunity-for-some-people-to-do-what-they-wanted-to-do%e2%80%9d.html


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/educationgram-copy-the-body-of-this-post-and-send-it-in-an-email-all-browsers-allow-you-to-do-it-to-everyone-you-know-and-your-elected-representatives-and-local-law-enforcement-agencies.html


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/joe-biden-drafted-the-core-of-the-patriot-act-in-1995-before-the-oklahoma-city-bombing.html

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/obama-claims-more-tyrannical-powers-than-hitler-or-stalin.html

"Shutting down various departments via not paying for them has nothing to do with the corruption that exists on the legislative level."Starving out the blameless parts of government doesn't help anything." Mike Q

"Now it is true that I believe this country is following a dangerous trend when it permits too great a degree of centralization of governmental functions.This is what I mean by my constant insistence upon "moderation" in government." - Ike

Fred, I think these are two different points. One is Ike saying we must do things in moderation and invest in the programs that work. The other is Q saying we can't go after corruption by starving out the programs we "need".

Except, Q does not use the word "need." He uses the word "blameless" and that makes all the difference in the world. There is this idea from Mike that we are throwing the "baby out with the bath water" Certainly, we don't want to do that. Yet if a program is no longer needed or of value, it is not a baby and we cannot just keep it anyway because innocent people may lose their jobs. By keeping it you are spreading that burden out among the public and where does it end? That goes beyond moderation in government and becomes a more Progressive or Socialized ideology because it insists the public must pay for something that is not needed any longer. A "midway" philosophy would be to help to some degree, to prepare these people for new careers either to fill voids inside government or outside government.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/12/ron-paul-what-if-chinese-troops-occupied-texas.html

Not necesarily G. Ike opined that since the depression and WW2 were now over that the govt should regress its programs back to pre depression levels. And that working programs like Social Security should be expanded on.

In Ikes tenure, Social Security was a working persons, savings program that worked very well. In suceeding administrations the Social Security trust funds were spent and the program was reduced to nothing more than a ponzi scheme.

So what is it that Q agrees with Ike? That Social Security (in 1954 )is good or that some fed beauracracy should reduce to 1929 levels?

Q has fed off the govt largesse trough himself so I dont question his motives. I only question when he advocates more money flowing from my pocket into his.

"if a program is no longer needed or of value"-MG

Then don't waste money on it. Agencies that do a useful service, keep them, and the jobs that they provide. You've heard me question the usefulness of Homeland Security, and 80% (OK, maybe 65%) of the military. So you know I don't want to float wasteful things.

"Q has fed off the govt largesse trough himself so I dont question his motives. I only question when he advocates more money flowing from my pocket into his."-Fred

First, from whose pocket into whose? Aren't just as many of my tax dollars flowing into your pockets as your dollars into mine? What a really cockamamie sourpuss notion, that you're the only one paying out and supporting an Ayn Rand-style degenerated population of useless, impotent, pasty-faced socialist slugs. Straight out of Chairman Luntz's handbook. I see what you mean, John, about sound bites.

Second, somehow I've "fed off the govt largesse", while you haven't gotten a dime's value back for your investment? How do manage to not benefit from your taxes?

Actually Q, lets try to nail your bias down.

Have you or your immediate relatives have or had careers in fed, state, or local govt? Or represented workers in fed, state, or local govts?

You and John must have been test candidates for Luntz' assertion that "80 percent of our life is emotion, and only 20 percent is intellect."

I may be overly generous.

"Have you or your immediate relatives..."-Fred

Actually, nope. My "bias" (regarding what?) must be from something else. Perhaps lack of intellect. LOL.

haha liar

"Agencies that do a useful service, keep them, and the jobs that they provide. You've heard me question the usefulness of Homeland Security, and 80% (OK, maybe 65%) of the military. So you know I don't want to float wasteful things." MQ

Homeland Security well maybe, only because we don't even protect our borders but cut 65% of the military? That is suicide by progressive whackoism!

You must be aware that there can be no more important role for government then defense. I mean, the average schlob can save some money for retirement and may have some access to affordable healthcare. We have charities that can help the poor but nobody can fight a foreign enemy without the help of government.

There must be some other program or agency other the the military you find wasteful. What about Medicaid, Welfare or the new healthcare bill? How about Federal Education spending, you can keep all the state funding you want. I know, Fannie and Freddie surely that is less important then cutting the military. Wait I got it. ACORN I will settle for ACORN. Man show me you are real! Give me ACORN!!

Acorn? Never! Thats the holy grail of the Democratic Underground.

"Give me ACORN!!"-MG

Jeez, guys, don't you know that ACORN has been gone for a long time now, thanks to dirty tricks and cowardly legislators who couldn't stand up to faux outrage over a fabricated hatchet job? What else don't you know about?

All the help with crappy landlords, all the advice about arranging a neighborhood service of some kind,-this work that ACORN did, all thrown out because the people empowered and enfranchized by ACORN's activities happened to be predominantly Democratic-leaning. If they were right-leaning, ACORN would be alive and getting massive aid from us all. It's all so predictable.

"cut 65% of the military? That is suicide by progressive whackoism!"-MG

A perfectly adequate DEFENSIVE force doesn't require maintaining, generation after generation, 800 or so overseas bases. They are for proactive attacks anywhere in the world with minimal inconvenience. OFFENSIVE militarism. Excessive militarism. Wasteful militarism.

"Jeez, guys, don't you know that ACORN has been gone for a long time now, thanks to dirty tricks and cowardly legislators who couldn't stand up to faux outrage over a fabricated hatchet job?...If they were right-leaning, ACORN would be alive and getting massive aid from us all. It's all so predictable."- MQ

Is it gone or just changed its name? If it were right leaning it would be the same difference, still misguided and wasteful. So if it is gone, we could probably label this one under, the proper thing for the taxpayers, motivated by perhaps the wrong reasons.

"A perfectly adequate DEFENSIVE force doesn't require maintaining, generation after generation, 800 or so overseas bases." MQ

Apply that same reasoning to other non-military programs that you will not mention and we can agree in principle. Certainly, I am not in the position to provide figures as to how much to cut on any program but to believe that government is only wasteful when it comes to the military and not with anything else, does not stand up to reason.

Ok guys, stop the nonsense.

Watch!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZtY0845BD8&feature=related

CFR /Trilaterals Rosters[dated not up to date]
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/cfr-members.htm
----
Daniel Estulin- Foremost Bilderberg Investigative reporter- JUNE 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utvHiVdIed4&feature=related

Bilderbergs FEAR REVEALED- David Estulin JUNE 4th, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rltdXqG7QjA
============

You are not going to resolve anything punking minutia like ACORN, unions, or playing the class warfare cards.
Wake up!

Check out the Rosters above- Everything is orchestrated from above.
Add Geithner, Obama, Bernanke, Monti, Bolton to the list. Bolton is soon to be nominated to head one of the majors AGAIN!!! Remember too that he was evicted from his post the first time. This man like Phil Gramm has a golden parachute to infiltrate and escape from every scene they enter.
Phil Gramm- Given top position at the CFTC by the Bush/Cheney clan. Investigate that nightmare which Brooksley Borne inherited. Then he screwed up our nations Energy Department policys with his over night burglary that altered the Energy Bill perhaps for all-time placing veto powers in the hands of Dubai/UAE. NEVER APPREHENDED!
Was the orchestrator of DEREGULATION. NEVER INDICTED!
Was the kingpin in the UBS scandals and offshoring tax evasions. TO DATE PHIL GRAMM STILL REMAINS UNINDICTED and at large.
John Bolton flunked his World Bank/IMF auditions along with Paul Wolfowitz. Now the deck chairs are being shuffled again.

HOW DOES THIS HAPPEN? DO YOU REALLY HAVE TO ASK? Every policy, every commission, every agenda, every ponzi scheme apparatus flows from these people who don't give a tinkers damn about Democracy, our rights, or our imagined freedom as long as the mantra holds in place our trust in "their graven image" worthless paper. Soon if Rocky and his Friends have their way, even that will be eradicated and they'll go paperless. No paper trail, no accountability, just like the voting.

HOW CAN "We the people" impede them and achieve equally in an instant?.
Figure it out! Hint. The answer was left in one of the videos.


THE CFR JUST LIKE THE FEDERAL RESERVE
"The first question that comes to mind is, who gave these people the authority to decide the responsibilities and obligations of the United States, if that power was not granted to them by the Constitution" READ MORE...
Link to DL Cuddy's words-
" In 1913, prior to the passage of the Federal Reserve Act President Wilson's The New Freedom was published, in which he revealed:

"Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the U. S., in the field of commerce and manufacturing, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."

On November 21, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt wrote a letter to Col. Edward Mandell House, President Woodrow Wilson's close advisor:

"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson... "

That there is such a thing as a cabal of power brokers who control government behind the scenes has been detailed several times in this century by credible sources. Professor Carroll Quigley was Bill Clinton's mentor at Georgetown University. President Clinton has publicly paid homage to the influence Professor Quigley had on his life. In Quigley's magnum opus Tragedy and Hope (1966), he states:

"There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international ... network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known."

Viola!!! I betcha dollars to donuts that this will be the last post on this board. Until, ... it is covered up by another of Bilbo's paste jobs.
RNN prove me wrong.

Hey guys, watch Bilbo freak out after he learns a thing or two from this. Cant post these Site/URLs.

Israeli Psychosis
Rockefeller's Solution to the Jewish Question- by Nancy Bradeen Spannaus

A View from Jerusalem...
New World Order's Control of Israel's Economy- By Barry Chamish (1998)


Two headed serpents??? NWO is action. First, like the "Bone-heads" THEY supported the Nazty Germans, then they SHAPE SHIFT policy. relocate and bankroll the oppressed giving them new FEARS!!! to indenture- and enslave.

WORD TO THE WISE: NEVER GIVE IN TO FEARS!!!

Amazing! Don't miss the previous post, guys it lays out what's coming ahead... "if"

REMEMBER THAT JUST A MONTH AGO ISRAELI YOUTH AND WORKERS AMSSED A HALF MILLION MAN/WOMAN PROTEST AGAINST "THEIR NEWLY ACQUIRED KNOWLEDGE AND REALIZATION OF THE CERTAINTY AND PERMANANCY OF AN INDENTURED STATUS TO FOREIGN BANKERS AND THE IMC WHICH PROVIDES THE "FEARS" ADDICTION WITH THE NEWEST WEAPONS FIXES.
We ain't much better. But we could learn surely from their situation and the background history that produced and preceeded todays current, ... WORLDWIDE AWAKENINGS!

Bilderbergs Are Terrified!!! NEVER FEAR!

"Bilderbergs FEAR REVEALED- David Estulin JUNE 4th, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rltdXqG7QjA
WORD TO THE WISE: NEVER GIVE IN TO FEARS!!! -John

Fear?? John you crack me up man..lol. Where did he get that shirt, that's all I want to know..lol.

Keep digging John. You are almost there.

However, you may not want to know the truth as it will schock you. (Word not mis-spelled)

"A perfectly adequate DEFENSIVE force doesn't require maintaining"

But Mike, the very best defense is always having the very best offense. That is exactly how your existence has been maintained for your entire life, as well as preserving your rights to make such ridicules comments in a free and democratic country and democratic society.

"the very best defense is always having the very best offense."

For the very best military we need adequate funding but we also need the right decisions by leadership. If we ignore the big problems festering in the background, it usually does not go away but costs us more later. If we overreact or over commit to everything we perceive as a threat, it costs us more now and makes us weaker and needing even more resources in the long run. If we use this same logic to determine the usefulness of most government programs, we will soon discover that what is costing us the most is all due to a failure of leadership.

"For the very best military we need adequate funding but we also need the right decisions by leadership."

Agreed! For instance, Obama's inaction to destroy the drone in Iran has compromised the entire US's
strategic defense abilities.

------------------------------------------

Iran to practice Strait of Hormuz closure while unlocking US drone secrets:

December 12, 2011

Bigheaded from capturing the US stealth RQ-170 Sentinel drone, Tehran Monday, Dec. 12 announced plans to conduct a navy drill son for practicing the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the most important oil transit channel in the world for 40 percent of its fuel. Iranian lawmaker Parviz Sorouri, member of the Majlis national security committee, who announced the drill said, "Iran will make the world unsafe if the world attacks Iran."
On Dec. 12, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta called Iran "a very grave threat to all of us" and warned that any Iranian disruption of the free flow of commerce through the Persian Gulf "is a red line" for the United Sates.
Tehran's announcement of a navy drill in Hormuz augments the Syrian ruler Bashar Assad's mantra since his people rose up against him nine months ago, that an attack on his regime would start a regional blaze.

The Iranian lawmaker spoke at length about how his government planned to use the military and intelligence software mined from the top-secret US UAV on Dec. 4.

He said Iranian engineers and technicians were "in the final stages of "cracking" the drone's secret technology, although he did not say when this research would be complete. "Our next action will be to reverse-engineer the aircraft," he said and boasted: "In the near future will be able to mass produce it. Iranian engineers will soon build an aircraft superior to the American one."

This data would also be used, the Iranian lawmaker said, in a lawsuit against the United State for the "invasion" by the unmanned aircraft. Sorouri did not say where the lawsuit would be filed but Tehran is thought to be preparing an complaint to the international war crimes court at the Hague.

debkafile's Iranian and military sources note that the linkage Sorouri made between the capture of the RQ-170 and the naval drill in the Strait of Hormuz was intended to inform Washington that Tehran in possession of the drone no longer fears the ability of the naval air carriers the US has deployed in the Persian Gulf to prevent its closure of the strategic waterway.

In the last six months, Adm. Habibollah Sayyari has emphasized more than once that the Iranian Navy which he commands is master of the Persian Gulf and dominates the Strait of Hormuz. After trapping the American stealth drone, Iran is mounting a challenge to the warning issued by Panetta and testing the resolve of Washington and the Saudi-led Gulf Arab region to contest the Hormuz drill.

Mere verbal protest will not serve. It will just leave Tehran crowing over its possession of the US drone as the key to the military and intelligence mastery of the Persian Gulf waters and the ability to make US back down. However a real threat by the US and Gulf oil powers to stop the drill by force will send regional tensions shooting up.

In the meantime, Saeed Jalili, head of Iran's National Security Council has arrived in Moscow to clinch a deal for the transfer of drone secrets to Russia in return for nuclear technology and sophisticated military hardware.

"Agreed! For instance, Obama's inaction to destroy the drone in Iran has compromised the entire US's strategic defense abilities."

Yes, there are many examples I am afraid. I wish I can pin them all to this administration or the Democrats but I can't and that's what makes this a difficult time. Unfortunately, the vacuum of leadership spans both parties and there are no clear choices. The only thing that is certain for me personally, is that I will not be choosing 4 more years of Obama.

The only thing that is certain for me personally, is that I will not be choosing 4 more years of Obama. MG.

------------

The odds are very favorable for Obama to lose "BIG" just like he won "BIG" in 10 Bush Red States.

The other lesser scenario would be another Bush/Kerry with Bush narrowly winning reelection.

Kerry the Flip Flopper and now it is Romney the Flip Flopper.

I wouldn't worry who comes in because Wall Street wins with both Obama and Romney.

"I wouldn't worry who comes in because Wall Street wins with both Obama and Romney." - Caspian

I suppose if I believed that everything that is wrong with the world, our government or our leaders has only to do with Wall Street, then I would tend to agree. However, I believe the current leadership in this country is even more destructive then the wall street power grab.

"www.thirdworldtraveler"- Casp

Be careful my friend, reading that stuff is like being hooked on grain alcohol. It tends to rot the mind and corrupt sound judgement.

G: third world traveler is a tremendous catalogue of historical reference. I've been reading it for years.

Regarding human behavior: through the written word I think we have pretty much witnessed everything imaginable. History always repeats. No doubt about it. The human condition is very predictable. I suggest you pour over those pages G. You have a good dogma antenae, so you can distinguish. So read for the historical perspective

Also domestic and foreign policy initiatives are sometimes multi generational in size, scope and implementation.

They may well be queuing to obtain in, but are you positive this is as an indication of the attractiveness of your family members bathroom designs? Might it not simply mean that your property could actually do with additional facilities or some fresh bathroom remodeling ideas?