AMERICAN FLUTE
By: Wayne Brown
In a recent speech in Ohio, Obama stated, “Together there is not one problem we cannot solve”. That sounds like something that a leader might say as he begins to introduce potential solutions to his listening audience. It is a point of emphasis used to say that our collective effort far outweighs that of any individual effort. It becomes the rally cry for those involved to band together and move forward toward eradicating the problem. And, yes, all that would be true if indeed those words had been spoken by a true leader but in this case they were not, they were spoken by a man who occupies the office of the President of the United States who has failed at leadership at every turn since taking office in 2008. On that basis, what purpose can employing such a statement hold for this President?
Obama rose to his high office on the back of promises made yet never completed. He sold “change” like hot dog vendors shout their wares at the afternoon baseball game yet he was never really challenged to back it up or produce anything. The statement noted above contains plenty of messages but they have little or nothing to do with leadership or inspiring people to do the right thing. Obama uses the statement for one reason and that becomes clear when you look at his actions. He wants the majority of Americans to latch on to his direction of movement without questioning it. Using the word “together”, he cites the sense of belonging; of being a part of something bigger than the individual. He wants people to act on their sense and need for belonging. He also wants to issue the assurance that problems will be addressed and eliminated but leaves the specifics off the table. His need is for momentum among the masses in a blind direction more so than support in solving problem or eliminating an obstacle. For the moment, he is the “Pied Piper” calling to the children to blindly follow him out of the city to God knows where. The question then becomes, “are the children too stupid to ask or question?” He is counting on the fact that they will be too enthralled with the music to question the destination or fate. Remember the 2008 mantra…”Yes We Can”….”Yes We Can What?”
Obama hawked the concept of “change” throughout his initial attempt to gain the presidency. He spoke of “fundamental transformation” and how Americans could work together to make America great again. He used a lot of “feel good” talk which was backed up by nothing of substance. Unfortunately, neither the American public of 2008 nor the mainstream media raised any real challenge to the meaning behind his words. Once in office, it became clear that he had only two real intentions in terms of change…bigger, ever-growing government and spending beyond the scope of any ever witnessed in the history of the country.
The re-election process is maturing and once the Republicans identify a nominee, the head to head battle for the Presidency will be on for 2012. Obama cannot run on the record of his accomplishments, that fact is crystal clear. He cannot run on the promise of “hope and change” as he has already had almost a full term in office to demonstrate that strategy. Little has taken place and what has certainly does not represent progress or improvement in terms of sustaining our country under the framework of the Constitution and the Rule of Law. Essentially, the only measurable accomplishment of the first term in office of the Obama Administration is an approximate 20% expansion in the size of the federal government, healthcare legislation which when fully enacted will cost the taxpayers far more than any previous programs and likely provide less care in the process, and an added six trillion or more dollars to the ever-tilting scales of the national debt. In essence, anything related to the past four years is bankrupt in terms of giving an elective edge to Obama.
That said, Obama is left come up with new strategies which will most certainly be creations from the Saul Alinsky play-book, “Rules For Radicals”. To boil Mr. Alinsky’s theories down to a state of simplicity, one can simply assume that nothing is as it appears it if it comes from the brain trust of that philosophy. Given that Obama admittedly worships at the Alinsky altar, one can be quite sure Alinsky will play into the 2012 campaign strategy for Obama. In fact, we are already getting a taste of it. Obama has harped on the rich and generally stirred the pot of class envy and resentment at every turn in the past few months. Now he comes forward with the statement, “Together there is no problem we cannot solve”. Remember, nothing is as it appears and such is the case here. Obama on the one hand is calling for a collective effort to eliminate our problems; while on the other hand, he is inserting divisiveness or envy between Americans. Stir in a bit of unrest and violence from the “Occupy” crowd as the election draws near and we have the recipe for an unstable climate in which far too many Americans resist making any change at all.
Obama will toss “hope and change” into the ditch as a used commodity of past elections and move on to talk of solidarity and new directions for the country. In his normal way, he will never really tell you where he intends to go other than to hint at the “utopia” that America could be if only enough of us will behind his campaign and send him back to office for another term. That additional term will allow him the time he needs to unite Americans in a common effort toward making America great again. Remember that nothing is as it seems thus we can easily assume that nothing has really changed with Obama except that he is replacing the components or “buzz-words” of his campaign. No matter, all of it is simply campaign rhetoric and will be tossed aside once his re-election is assured. He then can get on with the agenda that he put in place early on in his first term…that of growing government to be the central entity in the lives of Americans; spending our way to prosperity, and generally destroying the middle class of the country so that the only thing left is the “haves” and the “have-nots”. Government will continue to domineer over the private sector; the economy will continue to languish in stagnation leaving unemployment at higher than tolerable numbers and more and more Americans will begin to feel the pain of a country bound to the depths of bankruptcy led by a bankrupt leader with every intention of breaking the back of capitalism and eliminating individual initiative and success in our society.
Nothing is as it seems. We have listened to Obama talk about how he would get Washington working again like it should be only to see a full first term go by without one annual budget for the federal government being past; watch time and again as Congress “temporarily” extends some deadline because no one can find a basis of compromise within their politics to take precedence over stubborn, bull-headed career politicians. From Obama & Company’s perspective, it is beneath the dignity of the President to referee or attempt to shape the Congressional politics for the best interest of America. It is unfortunate for therein lies the one opportunity in which Obama could demonstrate some level of leadership to the American people. Instead, he will distance himself from that involvement, spend his time on the golf course or taking vacations and assume that all the short-comings of his administration will be laid at the feet of those who serve in Congress which is probably a pretty good bet if I understand the American public like I think I do. From Obama’s perspective, his journey to greatness could have reached even loftier heights had he not been hamstrung by a dysfunctional legislative branch incapable of acting on the best interest of America.
So the carrot dangles out there having been issued forth on the tongue of President Obama. “Together there is no problem we cannot solve”. The carrot dangles like a baited-hook in front of a hungry trout. Hanging there until that moment when the fish takes the bait and the hook gets set to reel it in. The 2012 campaign for leadership and unity has been launched by the President and he stands waiting for the public to board his bus once again and ride through another term with him. Nothing is as it seems and no one better understands that than Obama as he baits the hook once again and waits for the fish.
How successful will this new effort be for 2012? That answer depends greatly on how the opposition approaches the election process. If the Republicans allow Obama to set the tone in the race and work solely on the basis of responding to his calls, then it can only work in his favor. The opposition has the means, the facts, and the ability to go after Obama with a full-frontal assault keeping his lack of accomplishment and miserable leadership record in the forefront at every juncture and keeping him and his handlers on the defensive. That message needs to be there every single day at every single opportunity for the American public to absorb and dwell upon. Then as Obama comes forth spewing his new words of unity and leadership, the public can measure it against the backdrop of the realities of his first term in office. Some might recall the attacks of Bill Clinton on George Bush Sr. with a focus on the economy in that historic election year when everyone was convinced that the incumbent could not lose. “It’s the economy, stupid”, was the phrase designed to keep Clinton and company on focus and on message and it was effective.
A second element to consider and a very real possibility is a possible splintering within the conservative ranks. Given Ron Paul’s mediocre performance in Iowa, it is likely that his campaign for the Republican nomination will slowly drift into the sunset as more and more states sort out the nominee process. Now, if Mr. Paul was a true conservative who really cared about “conservative values” being re-instilled in the country, he nor any other conservative for that matter would not contemplate running for the office of the President as an independent. If that should happen, America will see the “conservative voter base” splinter between the Republican nominee and some smaller faction willing to support the independent. In the end, the effect will be nothing more than a “spoiler” role just like the one played by Ross Perot when George Bush Sr. went down in defeat. If that scenario takes place, Obama will never leave the White House in 2012 and America may eventually be only a forgotten memory lost in the mass rumble of financial destruction and socialist manipulation.
Anytime a politician tells us that “together there is no problem we cannot solve”, we need to be looking for the other shoe to fall. To let that statement stand on its own is simple to prop up the false promise of assurance that good things will happen without ever receiving any factual assurance as to “how” or “at what costs”? It is time that someone began asking the hard questions of those seeking to serve America and demanding that answers be forthcoming in great detail. At one time, Americans could count on the media to carry that mantra…those days are over. No longer is the media part of the solution…it is part of the problem. One only has to witness their foaming at the mouth over the President’s speaking of those words noted above to realize it. The magic flute is already playing its tune.
©Copyright WBrown2012. All Rights Reserved.
4 Jan 2012
Related
Popular
Comments
AUTHOR@Wizard of Whimsy...Ditto on that! WB
Thanks Wayne. Let's hope for better days, better attitudes and better communication, while we recommit to preserving all of life's blessings, peacefully.
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...Sorry, I didn't get a notice of comment on the system. I agree with that point...damage has been done to the original ship over time and has been ignored by those we have sent to office. I think we have been a naive society in many ways totally trusting far too many elected officials and not wanting to believe that they would sell us out as a country simply to line their own pockets and fulfill their own selfishness needs. Some of that I attribute to the "party system" which becomes like filling in a multiple choice quize for its participants...you cannot form the answer...it's decided for you. At best you can only pick the closest fit. That is normally where the party line and I split in our thinking and I begin to move to the independent line. We have to put some accountability back into our system in some way so that we send the message to all who want to hold office that they answer to the American people first and foremost and if they break that trust there will be consequences. The road to getting there will be as long as the road that brought us here and I am not sure we have the time left to accomplish it. WB
No response, Wayne?
On edit: That's what America was, Wayne, and I celebrate her; but it's the America that's divided and SINKING now that we both morn and need to repair—together.
Wayne, I have no disagreements with anything you've expressed and of course your vote and voice counts. I wouldn't want you to abandon your core principles or want to trample on anyone's rights given by the Constitution.
An analogy: A democracy is a kind of navigational balancing act on a boat that sustains us in all kinds of seas and weather conditions. There can only be one captain and one crew—chosen by the majority of its passengers.
With this in mind, and without fixing any blame on previous captains and crews or present ones—I get it. You think Obama is not a very good captain and you have no confidence in his seamanship.
I would argue that I have no confidence in the present candidates who want to replace him. None of them have captained our vessel ever—especially in the raging storms and seas Obama has been forced to sail in. Moreover, our ship is still for the most part intact even with a sometimes mutinous crew.
I've tried to convey my rationale for staying with Obama without stepping on any toes because you seemed sincere in your curiosity about my genuine view.
I vaguely recall a line that said: We are all angels with one wing, some have left wings and others have right wings—but the ONLY way we can ever fly is to embrace the other who has the wing we don't have.
That's what America was, Wayne, and I celebrate her; but it's the America that's divided and dying now that we both morn and need to repair—together.
"And all I can say to you LH, is right back atcha...and many of you others on "that side if the aisle" as well...
If you think you come of as just people with a different point of view, but no hatred, think again."
Here's proof that some people will never learn. Doesn't surprise me at all. I tried. I'm done.
We're not alone, IMO...never was nor ever will be.
And all I can say to you LH, is right back atcha...and many of you others on "that side if the aisle" as well...
If you think you come of as just people with a different point of view, but no hatred, think again.
- AUTHOR
@Neil Sperling...There is much truth in what you point out in your comment. Basically none of us can be happy with our environment and surroundings unless we have attained a happiness and sense of peace and calm within ourselves. We basically come into this world alone and we leave it alone...nothing or anyone guarantees us anything except the moment we are living in. The rest is simply hopes and dreams. Thanks much for the comment. WB
From the North Pole to the South Pole there is evidence that the current monetary system is broke beyond repair. No solutions can be found if we look to Big Governments - nor Big Business. The solution lies in each of us as individuals realizing "it is time for mankind to give up the struggle to survive, and learn to love life and love living" .... to look to Big Business or Big Government to be a solution - will only delay the corrections society as a whole requires. :-) That's the flute we need to be playing!
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...Hey, Wiz, I didn't frame the question very nicely but I was seriously interested in your answer. I have heard various people discuss their alignment with Obama but none for those reasons so you peaked my curiosity. There are a number of things you point out here that I agree with and I think, as Americans, we have to find those common grounds again and try to build out from them so that we do sustain a basis of commonality for our nation. I can certainly compromise and find it a wise choice in doing so if it stays within the bounds. When we start to trample the Constitution and the rights of our citizens in the name of accomplishing something else, it should cause all of us to pause and question whether the outcome justifies the means. Some level of change is inevitable in order to continue to progress but I don't believe we should lose our core principles and values in the process of implementing some modifications. The world is not going to slow down or speed up regardless of what I think. I am fully aware of that reality but I also still subscribe to the belief that my vote counts for something so I do think the individual has some worth in the total process. I think if you will go back and look at this piece which started all this discuss you will find that my point is simply to say that when someone tells you that we can do better or we can succeed, out to know what they are talking about specifically. Otherwise, it is a just a rah-rah to get the juices flowing and buy some acceptance. It is an unfinished sentence that really says, "we can solve anything together (if you just believe what I do and follow me)." That may be a true statement but the person who is following needs to know where we are headed and why. That's the point...Obama just happens to be the guy in the barrel at this point in time. I have no interest in seeing any president fail at the job becaue that ultimate affects all of us in a bad way but I do not want to hand over the keys when I don't like the direction the individual is headed. WB
Lh & Wayne- Thanks for the sincere and rational retorts above and the new comity is a most welcomed surprise. You're dead-nuts right of course—labels, exaggerations and accusations only promote agitation which disrupts communication and a meeting of minds.
Sadly, the further out your opponent sits on the opposite end of the political seesaw, the further out YOU are forced to sit in order to compensate and maintain a relative balance.
Wrt:"@Wizard of Whimsy...Okay! JC, Allah, and Spiritual Enlightenment. Now, tell us, which one of them was the clincher in getting you in bed with Obama? WB"
I sense a sarcastic tone in this, however, in candor, Wayne, Obama has been a disappointment to me because he was conciliatory to those who overtly declared they would do everything to make sure he was defeated. R's play hardball and take the game as a battle to the death with the "The Great Satan=The Liberal Establishment."
Nevertheless, I view Obama's behaviors, infinitely more "Christian" and ethical than the behaviors of his opponents in Congress and the right wing pundits who have lied and misinformed the American public for political gain.
Enlightenment hasn't anything to do with "being in bed with Obama." We suffered for eight excruciating years with a prep-school bully who swaggered around as a Texas good 'ol boy. He (and the arrogant fools who manipulated him) brought America, the government, politics, the economy and the Constitution to the present impasse. By no stretch of the imagination was it solely Obama.
All this said, however, I don't see any of it as crucial at this point. No matter how much one rails about socialism or capitalism, religion or evil, greed or prosperity, the facts tell all of us all that there is "good capitalism" and there is "bad capitalism," genuine Christian behavior and phony religious behavior, good governmental behavior and bad governmental behavior, good leadership and bad leadership.
What I read in this thread was not remotely objective or reasonable in terms of recognizing the varying degrees and distinctions of the issues and facts. There was no genuine effort to be fair or tolerant of an opposing view.
Personally, I thought: "Okay, you want to politically mud wrestle—no holds barred?" Fine! So I fought with the same kind of attitude. But I've never taken "the game" seriously or have I seen it as a fight with 'the Devil" that has to be won or "God and the good guys" will lose and all will be lost. I know you are all well intentioned and mean well—but a great many injustices have occurred by the well-meaning. Although I would insult, ridicule and condescend consciously, at times, I got the impression that your side was doing it "unconsciously"—that is to say, I got the sense you weren't even recognizing your own biases and prejudices.
To find out, I tried to provoke you into anger and emotion to see what you were made of. I retained the mask of The Wizard to put you even more off balance and was able to discern quite a lot from your projections about whom you think I am. (By the way, I really enjoyed the comment about me being a "young kid in my mother's basement!")
FYI Department: I keep my Wizard persona because I have worked for the State Department and may do so again—so my anonymity will remain. I share this information, not to try and impress, but to share the facts.
I heard a radio interview with Ben Kingsley, who played Gandhi and he mentioned a quote, inaccurately attributed to Gandhi, that actually came from the movie's screen-writer: "An "eye for an eye" makes the whole world go blind!"
I think this to be sage advice for all of us—liberal or conservative, believer or non-believer. America is at the precipice and I'm looking for the "aware people" who understand and appreciate this fact.
We don't need anymore reckless and inflexible fanatics who can't compromise their principle for the good of America.
That's all I really wish to say.
LMC, I have no idea if there are others trying to get you thrown off HP. It honestly wouldn't surprise me if there were but I can assure you I'm NOT one of them. If you're pointing your finger at me, you're wasting time aiming in the wrong direction, lady.
You wrote: "And for what? My politcal views?"
Perhaps it's not your political views, LMC, but rather your attitude and presentation. Here's the impression I got from dealing with you months ago. You can take or leave it. I really could not care less but here goes.
Your posts say it all, LMC. You're one pissed off individual, devoid of all happiness, and you hate everything and everybody. You HATE yourself, your life, your job, your boss, Republicans, Conservatives, Bush, Cheney, Corporations, Israel....the list goes on and on and on. You say you don't hate but it certainly appears that way? It's certainly the impression you gave me! Maybe others got the same impression. Think about it.
You seem like you might be an intelligent person, LMC, but it's lost COMPLETELY in your holier-than-thou presentation and attitude that, frankly, makes you seem more than a little nuts sometimes. That's not intended as a insult, just an observation.
As for me, yes, I have some faults and can be a REAL SMARTASS when I want to be. Liberals tend to bring that out of me. At least I try to make my posts in hubs and forums focus on the subject matter presented. I don't always succeed but I try. You, on the other hand, are like the parent who's ALWAYS screaming and I just tune you out.
You probably won't like what I wrote here, LMC, but it was and is my impression and, frankly, it's a waste. I would much rather have a conversation and maybe even learn something. I've also been known to teach a thing or two as well.
Again, take it or leave it. I care not which and you can look elsewhere on the blame game. When it comes to you, my 'give a damn' broke a long time ago.
Now, I apologize to Wayne for taking up space on his comments section. I'm sorry, Wayne, for going completely off subject.
- AUTHOR
@lovemychris...Gee LMC, I have no intention of banning you or deleting your posts unless they just get too personal and the same rules apply for others as well. I have posted everything you have offered up in this venue in an attempt to be as fair and just as I can be as host. I think it is reasonable to say that we live in tense times and the feelings on both sides of the aisle run high. In many ways that is good because when people get engaged, they also get informed and make choices which are more aligned with how they feel and think. That is a freedom we all share and if we are to be good voters, we have to be engaged. I think we could all do a better job of managing our emotions when we have these discussions and put that energy into presenting our viewpoint and anything we can find to back it up. When we get emotional, we usually start taking cheap shots at each other and no one really comes out of that a winner. Never has there been a war or a fist fight for that matter where the countries or the people involved on each side walked away likeing each other better with their problems solved. I have a very deep fear that we are losing our common basis of belief as a people. Not the liberal or the conservative aspects of it but just the basic premises that were shared beliefs and commonalities in the beginning. "Party-Think" has taken over the individual's ability to think for his or her own self and make choices. We are inundated with polls that predicate the outcome of everything and it leaves one to wonder why we even bother to hold the election if everyone is so sure of the outcome based on the polls. That was never the intent. People were suppose to have a voice and to be able to vote their conscience and beliefs and it should be that way today. We may differ on how we would like the outcome of an election to be but regardless of which side of the aisle you sit on, all of us should want it to be an honest, legal process and be representative of the desires of the people. That sounds easy but in this day and time, there are folks who will steal an election to keep themselves in the winner's circle...the end justifies the means. As a people, we cannot tolerate those, regardless of politcal affiliation, who want to do things that take away our Constitutional rights, liberties, and freedoms. We must call them on it when it happens and we must hold them accountable for their actions. Eventually, those who follow get the message that we are paying attention. WB
Oh ok...you didn't say many people have a problem with me, and it remains to be seen what can be done about it. But it's not up to YOU ALONE. So--I assume there are others....in fact, I know there are.
No use putting time and effort into writing hubs because they get flagged and voted down.
Always banned in forums, even my sock-puppet banned for life.
And for what? My politcal views?
And you all just go on your merry ways insulting and smearing. Must be nice.
"So, how many if you are working to get me kicked off here?"
The paranoia has set in. Not I, LMC. I will say it doesn't surprise me given you attitude and presentation.
LH, thanks for your response—more later.
Good grief, Wayne you are soooo verbose—you need a good editor who'll spank your big ego as often as necessary—IMHO . . . and with all due respect to your passion and skills.
But more importantly, I'm playing a different game here than you may think I'm playing. And I don't mean that with any condescension.
I may be mistaken and you may prove me wrong with some things poorly expressed on my part, or with me losing patience and directly insulting you, but in all sincerity, my intent was to focus on the behaviors and the personas—not the genuine human beings behind the bravado and the repartee.
I admit to intentionally riling you all up, because I found your attitudes so knee-jerk and typical of the Texas culture—namely: a swaggering machismo and anti-intelectual, religiosity that I experienced all too often when I was in the Air Force there and in Mississippi.
Sufficed to say, with regard to my 'beliefs," I have come to a time in my life when I see them for the illusions that they are. And I am not using "illusions" in a pejorative sense here, but rather in the Hindu sense of "maya." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion))
I minored in religious philosophy in my undergraduate studies and, as mentioned before, I love all religions—but as ideas that can only point to enlightenment and awareness of the sacred in life—which is essentially human love, kindness and sacrifice.
I have to go now but I'm sure I'll get whacked for any and all in this post—especially Wikipedia—so be it and have a ball!
Here's a chart on how gvt programs work: compare it to a corporation, where the bulk goes to the ceo.
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/01/chart-da...
But here's where gvt sux: facilitaing these policies! Tax cuts for wealthy, leading to tax increases on the middle!
FACT: The top 1% saw a 278% increase in real income from 1979 to 2007. The middle 60% had an increase of less than 40%
- AUTHOR
@LMC...I have not said that people who need a hand should not get it and most probably are. As to Social Security...yes the system takes care of those who had no chance to pay into it early on and it takes care of those who stayed home and supported breadwinners while they worked...of which my mother is a prime example. That system has some very good merits...properly managed from conception. The fact of the matter that bothers me is that it has been totally mismanaged by our elected folks on both sides of the aisle since LBJ was in office and we, as a voting public, have held no one accountable for that mismanagement. Instead, we want to let the politicians convince us that we have nothing coming. Our money simply was taken on the basis of false promises. If that is the case, how long do we continue the lie and take people's money giving them that expectation. How long do we NOT hold the government accountable for the deceit? I am not hanging this around the neck of liberals with the exception that it was LBJ and company's idea to spend the money and place IOU's on the books for it and that ballooned into what it is today...a disaster in the making.
There are few things that the government touches that do not eventually end in the worst case scenario given that those in elected office cannot leave it alone when it does work. Clinton's manipulation of a false housing market is a good example...eventually the cows come home. Free markets stand on their own and the government needs to get out of the private sector and for the most part out of the economy. Our current situation is not going to improve economically until someone takes the reins of government and backs that mule out of road in order that the ebb and flow of a free functioning market can return. If we are to believe in Obama's economics, we might as well all work for the government...wow, think of the synergy of that concept! WB
@Wizard of Whimsy...Okay! JC, Allah, and Spiritual Enlightenment. Now, tell us, which one of them was the clincher in getting you in bed with Obama? WB
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...Come on..."We are rigging the issues?" Hell, I wrote the piece that is driving this discussion. I bared my butt on how I feel and why and have tried to put forth as much detail as I can as to why I believe those things. We have literally begged you to state your stand specifically on anything and you more often not just reply by assigning us some new found label and kicking the can down the road. If what it is you believe has that much substance, go ahead and lay it out for us. I don't think there is a person here that is not big enough to say that they can respect your opinion if you put it out there in a reasonable fashion. But, starting on a a footing of assuming that I am a racist with your opening comments is not what I would call a "proper footing" and it takes away from your ability to credibly make your point. Assigning labels and ridicule will not cause me to doubt what I believe and embrace a totally different politic. Until the fears I associate with concepts that have totally failed other people in this world are proven to be unfounded, I do not plan to go there nor would I advise anyone else to do that. When I find a limb in the tree that is a reliable perch, I keep my feet wrapped around it and wait for the strong winds to blow...because they will and your resolve to stay on that limb will be greatly tested along with a litany of utopian carrots that will be dangled in your face to get you off the limb. Arguing for the sake of argument achieves nothing. WB
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...The mentally taxing part is not understanding that you think we are stubborn and bullheaded but that you use your statement to describe our inability to embrace other alternatives and concepts when it appears that the same conclusion could be applied to yourself. You are as dogmatic about the woes of democracy, constitutional government, and the economic free-market as you are gleeful with any concept that is found on the road to a socialist society. You never really get there in terms of making the point (with the exception of ridiculing others for their beliefs)but you leave enough on the table that drive the conclusions in that direction. We are evil, misguided people with only our own selfish concerns who care little for others and their welfare...that is your concept of any of us on the right side of the aisle defending the foundation and roots of our country. You are willing to throw all of that in the trash for any concept that embraces your definition of fairness and justice. Apparently Obama's brand of socialism is just what the doctor ordered in your case. If that is your choice, fine...go with it. This is still America and thank God (can I say that now?) you still have the right to choose. That right may disappear if you get the world that you want but you are not likely concerned over such trivial ideas. Had our founders not been a dogmatic breed, this country likely would not be here today in any form that we recognize. Luckily they were the type of people who learned much from the lessons of domination, tyranny and the lack of freedom/liberty for the individual. Luckily they had enough dedication and motivation along with compassion for their fellow man to remain dogmatically on a course which produced that vision. Knowing they had that resolve, I find it quite upsetting when someone comes along and suggests that we toss it all aside and just try to think of something new. Call me a fool if you will but I can look past the flaws of mankind and still see a foundation of government and economics that has very strong merit and much promise and I elect to defend it dogmatically if you will. WB
"As for LMC's frustration with attitudes, she has one of the biggest ones here and more than a few are just as frustrated with her and it. I count myself as one. That may or may not get fixed but, then again, it's not all up to only me."
So, how many if you are working to get me kicked off here? You Constitution-Loving people--except for the 1st, 4th and 8th amendments?
I respect that, Wizard, as a person's religion and how they may or may not practice it is a very personal thing.
I do believe in Capitalism, not Socialism. I, too, believe we should be good stewards of what God gave us, realizing that, if we are, God will take care of us and what He has created.
As for LMC's frustration with attitudes, she has one of the biggest ones here and more than a few are just as frustrated with her and it. I count myself as one. That may or may not get fixed but, then again, it's not all up to only me.
As for Mr. Starr, he doesn't need me to speak up for him but I will say he is a good man. A kind and gentle soul. He's like anyone else here on HP. He wants to be treated with the respect he's earned. I won't pretend to speak for Mr. Starr but I have a feeling if you do that, you'll get the same in return. You two won't always agree but you'll have some good, spirited conversations and, if you'll keep an open mind, you'll learn a thing or two.
Longhunter, to answer your question—I believe in Christ, Allah, The Tao and Enlightenment. I'll sleep with any of them in order to grow spiritually, in love, kindness and respect for the entire Universe.
I find I can't believe in capitalism or socialism, but rather believe we should be stewards of every aspect of nature that sustains us as well as all creatures and beings on this sad and beautiful little planet of ours.
That is not to say I don't agree with lovemychris's frustration with the attitudes around here.
I'll presume that Will doesn't speak for you, LH.
You and I have one thing in common, Wiz...neither one of us know what the hell you're babbling about.
Hate? Where did I say hate? You can't handle a simple conversation. You don't listen, only condemn.
I'm not perfect, LMC, but I am forgiven.
As for the insults, is it Christ-like to sling an occasional one here or there? Nope, but I decided a while back to give as good as I get. I tried turning the other cheek and got it slapped as well. I decided to fight back. If you don't like it or the truth, that's your problem.
As for hating Christians, I first thought you did so as a hobby but then I remembered from dealing with you in the past that you hate EVERYTHING including yourself and your own life so Christians are just another thing on your LOOOOOONG list.
Me and Wizzer got a few things to work out but at least I think we might come around to being able to have a reasonable debate. You, on the other hand, are a lost cause.
Oh, wait, was that an insult? NAAAAA, just being honest. Can you handle it?
Why believe and then don't follow the mandates???
Insulting people is Christ-Like? Give me a break! That's why people don't like Christians...they use it to pat their own back without actually displaying the Spirit of it.
You have them pegged Whiz.
No insult, Wizzy, just a personal observation.
On your question, as a Christian, I don't put Jesus Christ in a category. From what I know of Him, He would shun both sides. It's only us as humans that take sides. As one of those humans and a believer in Jesus Christ, I do find it odd to see a Liberal bring Him up even though you did so only in trying to put me and other Conservatives down. That doesn't surprise me in the least.
Before I go further, I want to ask you something, Wizzer. You can answer or not. That's up to you.
Since you brought Him up, are you a believer in Jesus Christ?
lovemycris - You just gave them the perfect opportunity to evade my question with an insult—another thing they like to do while they blame you for the behavior.
You just gotta wonder if Liberals drool when they type this crap.
"More evasions—you challenge me, call me out, I respond and then you try to interrogate me without addressing the issues behind your conservative stance. You're rigging the game, fellas—but then that's what you do . . . and then accuse me of doing it."
This!!They do it all the time!
BTW....my grandmother never worked, yet collected social security.
My mother worked part-time, after us kids were grown: she's collecting my dad's SS.
AND--after 4 years, you use up all that you ever put in.
so...this notion of earned money is correct, up to a point. If you live 4 years after collecting, you are "on the dole". As my mother is, as my gramma was...and so was yours.
So, don't tell me they deserve it and poor moms with kids do not.
Or poor families.
Or veterans of war.
Or the unemployed.
Disabled.
Any number of others who need a hand. We should be providing MORE!
After all, Bachman got $250,000!
"You have got to be kidding about Obama. Longhunter!"
Nope, not in the least, Wizz.
Okay. Replace the Jihadi with Jesus Christ and his willingness to be crucified for his beliefs—especially his beliefs as they relate to his sermon on the Mount.
Are NEO-Con's beliefs closer to Jesus' ideology or is a liberal's beliefs closer?
You have got to be kidding about Obama. Longhunter!
"...you may well see it as a "blanket comparison" because of the examples I used."
Wizzy, might I suggest you use a comparison that doesn't compare Conservatives to murdering Islamic extremist anymore than ALL Liberals should be compared to Hitler.
Some Conservatives may be rigid in the beliefs but certainly no more rigid than what you and others have put on display here for all to see.
For this thing called America to work, there has to be flexibility on both sides. That's something that's sorely lacking from both sides of the aisle in Congress but even more so from President Barack Hussein Obama.
More evasions—you challenge me, call me out, I respond and then you try to interrogate me without addressing the issues behind your conservative stance. You're rigging the game, fellas—but then that's what you do . . . and then accuse me of doing it.
There doesn't seem to be an original idea among all of you—just parroting of reactionary boilerplate.
"The Jihadi sees only true-believers or infidels. The Neo-Cons see it all in terms of money=power and poverty=weakness."
And the liberals see...what?
Why did you leave them out?
No, Longhunter, you may well see it as a "blanket comparison" because of the examples I used.
Nevertheless, I'm making an observation that a commitment to one overarching ideology makes people dangerous because , after a while, they only see their own ideological idea in a kind of binary game of good & bad and they are inflexible in their beliefs.
The Jihadi sees only true-believers or infidels. The Neo-Cons see it all in terms of money=power and poverty=weakness.
This kind of inflexibility makes governing impossible with war and destruction (physical, political, economic, theological) inevitable.
So what you're doing is making a blanket comparison of all Conservatives to "a jihadist who dies for Allah in the next world," like to the people who were responsible for 3,000 American murders on 9-11-01.
That would be like someone saying "all Liberals are little Hitlers because they tend to dislike our support of Israel and the killing of millions of Jews wasn't enough in their opinion."
Am I to believe you'd agree with that assessment as well, Wizzer, since it's obvious from your postings you're a Liberal.
No boys it's not an indictment, it's a perception of some peoples' behavior and mindset as it relates to ideology and politics.
You either understand it or you don't. You either agree with it wholly, in part or not at all.
You either see yourself in it or you don't.
It's not as simplistic as "Obama is a socialist and therefore evil to America."
Sorry to give you something more mentally taxing than you are normally accustomed to on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
He probably doesn't have the guts, Wayne. He might prove me wrong, hiding behind the anonymity of his HP avatar. We'll have to see if Wizzy will step up. It would be something new for him, if he does.
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...now as soon as you can go ahead and tell us who you might be referring to in this comment, we can get on with the business of considering it. WB
Nothing is more dangerous than a dogmatist who can only retain one idea in his head—whether that fanatic be a jihadist who dies for Allah in the next world or a NeoCon whose God is money and power in this world.
- AUTHOR
@LMC...With regard to Social Security and Medicare...working Americans funded those benefits over their working lives. Washington squandered it on other forms of spending. There are no handouts there...just the hope that will get some of the money back that we paid into the programs. That is not welfare nor is it redistribution of wealth as is seen in a socialist setting. Regarding oil companies, I am not particularly in favor of subsidies to them but once something gets started in Washington, there seems to be little that can be done to reverse it on either side of the aisle.
The state run healthcare plane in place in MA is one of the strong reasons that I do not want to see Romney as the nominee. If what you point out is in fact true, it is representative of what we can expect from a national system only the effective will be largely reversed...those who are seniors will and need medical attention will receive less benefit than they would on Medicare. The government will practice "selective" medicine which is what those who have pushed through national healthcare have blame the insurance companies for doing all along. In the free society, I nor anyone else should be forced or penalized to purchase health insurance...government run or any other way. That is the creep of socialism at the door...no liberty, no freedom of choice. Even a large central government with all its ability cannot protect a fool from himself...we need to wake up to that fact and quit spending taxpayer money trying.
We certainly do not have a perfect system in what we have but that should not be the basis for throwing away our foundation such as the Constitution and our freemarket economy in the name of the actions of "some Americans". The basis for our government system is strong and viable...it is the selfish greed of politicians that cause shortcomings. Unfortunately, we, as a public, have not held our elected ones accountable for their actions. We need to change that and get back to the basics that we were founded on.
I am all for people have assistance when they need it. Food Stamps have a place in our society as does unemployment insurance protection. But, in both cases, we have to do more to stop people from "gaming" the system merely to get out of working for a living. To continue to grow that process in nothing more than our elected officials using taxpayer dollars that we don't have to buy votes.
CEO's of some companies are rewarded quite nicely...that is up to their board of directors and their shareholders as to how that is executed as a contract. Do I totally support it in terms of the level of compensation...no but I support their right in a democratic society as a free market entity to do it. The bottomline will be the eventual litmus test as to whether or not a company can afford such services. The marketplace will also determine to value of those services. We see that in professional sports and in the media.
Almost 50% of the American public pays not taxes at all...none. That sector flies under the radar while the call goes out to raise the taxes on the folks who are earning more money and who already pay more taxes. Taxing the high end wealth in this country will not bring in the revenue that taxing the middle class will raise...there are far too many middle class wage earner including a large chunk of small business owners. As the cost of government grows; as the welfare state expands to support more and more of that type of spending (mainly in the interest of buying voters), the pressure rises to tax the middle class again and again. In the process, we don't eliminate any of the debt, we just raise the bar higher on creative spending and the problems continue and pressures come back to raise taxes again. That is how the pie gets smaller...eventually those earning income in the middle class give up and join those producing little or nothing and paying no taxes in the process. Eventually the number lined up to receive pieces of the pie far exceed the number strapped with providing the pie and the system collapses.
I do not make that observation to appear cold-hearted or cruel in my views. I apply simple common sense. I would like to bring every homeless animal I see home and feed them but it is not possible nor practical to do. If I did, sooner or later I would exhaust the funds and the facilties available to do it and I would not eliminate the problem. America has to get on a path back to "what we can afford" in terms of our government and we have to do it in such a manner that our savings in those areas go to pay down our debt load if we are to ever regain our fiscal and financial health as a nation.
One last observation with regard to corporations, I see churches pay handsome salaries and benefits to get the preachers they want in their pulpit. This is a decision made by the directors (deacons) of the congregation. In many cases, the salary and benefits for the preacher far exceeds the cross-section of that represented in the congregation yet I don't hear public outcry over that. On top of that churches do not pay taxes. I am sure most of them will tell you that they cannot fill their pulpits unless they pony up and compete in the marketplace for the minister who fits their needs. Do I agree with paying all that money to the preacher...not really, but I respect the churches right and freedom to make that decision as a congregation and elect to go in that direction...that is the true value of what we have in a Constitution form of government...freedom and liberty...not to steal and cheat or break the law mind you but to pursue those things which are our inalienable rights as citizens of this country. When we turn control of those things over to the government, we slowly but steadily lose those liberties and freedoms as a people. WB
Thank you, Ms. Blair, for your kind words.
The troll and his friends, as you so rightfully refer to them, have screamed and spewed their way into the Book of Irrelevant and Unwanted as their demagoguery grows with each posting. Eventually they'll fall by the wayside as the useless and delusional "individuals" that they've made themselves into. IMHO, the sooner the better.
You just can't fix crazy.
My mom recently told me about this new medical procedure they are working on--laser something, will cost $50,000 to do, and medicare will pay for it!
Reminds me of Romney when he was gvr here in Mass . He cut masshealth eye and teeth care for kids, but didn't mind that tax-payers foot the bill for a 78 yr old man to have a new procedure, so he could "get back on the golf course".
Yeah....I'd say from experience....all you anti-socialists really don't mind socialism, as long as it's directed where YOU want it to go!
Let me geuss.....you people deserve your social security and medicare: socialism
Big oil and gas and mega-farms deserve subsidies: socialism
Romney's company deserved for tax monies to bail it out,then reaping huge profits: high-way robbery
Israel deserves 8 mil + a day: socialism for another country!
300,000 Americans who are worth a mil or more deserve tax breaks: reverse robin-hood
Companies deserve tax breaks to move jobs overseas:socialism and anti-Americanism
....But don't you dare talk about unemployment insurance and food stamps for those whose jobs were sacrificed on the alter of 52-mil-a-year CEO's: No Good Bums
Is that about right?
Shame on you!
Thank you, Wayne -- hope folks like you can keep going and keep us all from the drain of socialist destruction. I'm mad as hell -- obviously -- but in no way am I qualified to state my case as effectively as you guys do. There's a lot of folks out here like me -- we know what we want to happen, how we want it to happen and what results we want to see. We don't however, have good, grounded information as to what's happened or exactly why it's happened and are in no way expert enough to defend what we know, want or hope to see. I'm one of those persons who knew this was all wrong and going the wrong way from the get-go -- but wasn't informed enough to present an intelligent case. If one's gonna get in the fray (in my opinion) you gotta be horseback and I'm still ridin' a Shetland. So -- it's my great pleasure to have you guys speak up for me. I'm gaining knowledge daily -- might just pop out of the chute any day now! LOL! Best, Sis
- AUTHOR
@Angela Blair...One thing keeps me going, Sis...I know that there are so many people out here who approach our government and or economy with just plain good old common sense. These are people who know that results come from hard work and determination and that two and two equals four. These are people who see where we are currently headed and want it turned around pronto. These are people who know the folks of this country deserve far better than the current direction will ever bring them, and you lady, are one of them. I applaud you for speaking up and sending additional assurance that us "ten-gallon hat neo-conservatives" will not go quickly into the night and see our country taken down into the drain of socialist destruction. WB
Wayne, Will, Frog, Longhunter -- just a tip of this old lady's 10-gallon Stetson (I got one of them hats, too and damned proud to wear it) to all of you for your patience and persistence in dealing so effectively with the troll and his friends. It's folks like you, who'll stand up and be counted, who are going to make the difference in turning the mess our country's in around. Thank you. Sis
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...Oh, and you might also note that you are wrong about Longhunter as well, he's not a one trick pony. I've seen one and his name is Obama. WB
That's the best you could come up with, Wizzy? Why am I not surprised?
I guess there's no cure for the 'liberal idea' disease except maturity and honesty with oneself. Obviously, in your case, we'll be waiting a while for you to gain both.
Will, thanks for a tip of your ten-gallon hat to my tactics.
Longhunter, if your only tool is a hammer—every solution is a nail—you're a one trick pony!
The 'liberal idea' IS a weakness, a mental disease that festers in the minds of the lazy that won't do for themselves but rather do all they can to suck the life blood out an economy and society, waiting for the government to give them a handout.
hyperbole
Noun
1) A way of emphasizing what you are saying by describing it as far more extreme than it really is
An example:
"The 'liberal' idea makes room for human weakness, for the bare desperation of what it is to be alive in this world, for the underdog and those who struggle for justice but don't want to live in the fear that breeds hate and blame and the exclusion of everything different."
Wayne, keep dancing with your delusions, it's of no concern to me.
I can't help it if appealing to hate and fear is a commercial success in your America.
The 'liberal' idea makes room for human weakness, for the bare desperation of what it is to be alive in this world, for the underdog and those who struggle for justice but don't want to live in the fear that breeds hate and blame and the exclusion of everything different.
- AUTHOR
@LMC...You won't have long to worry about the middle-class of Obama continues for a second term...it will become non-existent. As for your Carlyle link, you might stop and consider that the EPA, environmentalists, and the pressures on our elected ones have pretty much placed a straggle hold on domestic oil production. Terrorist activity has a way of driving the price even higher for foreign oil especially when they attack and destroy the assets...ie,Saddam in Kuwait. Ultimately that comes out of our hide here at the pump.
Obama is certainly not doing anything to stem that situation so we can add a jump to that link that assumes that anything that benefits the Carlye Group which you believe benefits Bush must also benefit Obama. Add that to his growing portfolio of off-shoring drilling and refining in South America and his watchdog EPA that is driving the little man out of the coal production business in the USA only to turn those assets over to companies owned or controlled by George Soros who is already putting plans in place to export that coal resource to China...since their domestic reserves are estimated at about 40 years at the moment. Coal will soon lose its label as a cheap fossil fuel. I don't know whether you have noticed it or not but we don't go to the other side of the world or to other countries for that matter to buy refined gasoline...it is done as near to the point of sale as possible thus dropping over 200 billion American taxpayer dollars in gasoline refining is South America is not likely to benefit anyone here. Oh, and by the way, when Obama's term in office does end (short of him declaring himself ruler for life), he won't need to work for Carlyle...Soros already has a job for him and you can bet it will more than utilize any connections he has from his time in office. If we are to be 80% dependent on central Asian oil, it will be much to the credit of Obama killing off domestic production and rejecting pipelines to Canada...that should really make for a great payoff for the Bush investments, if there are any. Mr. Lewis (of the Center for Public Integrity) seems to want to shore up the integrity he is attempting to create on the basis of hearsay and estimated conjecture.WB
@Wizard of Whimsy...Isn't it a shame that the left cannot manage to keep a so-called "deceitful demogogue" on the air due to the boredom levels they generate with the listening public. Just in case you have not noticed, the little socialist hedge fund thief, George Soros, has all his wagons, think tanks, and dirty propanda agencies lined up on the left. He and his buzzards can't wait for Obama to finish off the USA financially so there will be no further resistance to his acts of world manipulation. You boy, Clinton, rode a long wave of success credit driven by the actions of the Reagan Administration...a very long one and easily identifiable in that Clinton spent most of his time in office doing nothing or fighting legislative gridlock. He did manage to team up with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd long enough to set the stage for the collapsing housing market bubble that showed up in 2008. Othewise, most of what he did in office showed up on a blue dress down at the dry cleaners. WB
- AUTHOR
Looks like a large number of the liberals left about have decided to drop in for appreciation day! WB
What ties it all together? Big Oil.
"I left wondering whether 6,000 Americans might prove to have died in New York for the royal family of Saud, or oil, or both. But I didn't have much more than insider dinner gossip to go on. I get my analysis from the standard all-American news outlets. And they've been too focused on a) anthrax and smallpox, or b) the intricacies of Muslim fanaticism, to throw any reporters at the murky ways in which international oil politics and its big players have a stake in what's unfolding.
A quick Nexis search brought up a raft of interesting leads that would keep me busy for 10 years if the economics of this war was my beat. But only two articles in the American media since September 11 have tried to describe how Big Oil might benefit from a cleanup of terrorists and other anti-American elements in the Central Asia region. One was by James Ridgeway of the Village Voice. The other was by a Hearst writer based in Paris and it was picked up only in the San Francisco Chronicle.
In other words, only the Left is connecting the dots of what the Russians have called "The Great Game" -- how oil underneath the 'stans' fits into the new world order. Here's just a small slice of what ought to provoke deeper research by American reporters with resources and talent.
The Carlyle connection means that George Bush Senior is on the payroll from private interests that have defense business before the government, while his son is president. Hmmm. As Charles Lewis of the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity has put it, "in a really peculiar way, George W. Bush could, some day, benefit financially from his own administration's decisions, through his father's investments. And that to me is a jaw-dropper."
TPC-" 'splain to me Lucy!"
Actually, if truth be told, there's plenty of blame to go around. Though I was shocked the American public were taken in, I can understand it because Reagan was a likable snake-oil salesman and he believed his pitch.
I tend to trace America's present war of political division on the Bork and Thomas hearings. The D's were arrogant and foolish and pushed the right wing into a holy jihad with the birth of the reactionary think-tanks (like Cato and AEI ) funded by powerful money interests.
The Right, always better at playing dirty, knew exactly how to game the system with corporate lobby money coupled with lies, distractions and phony morality.
Mix this with a ruthlessly meretricious media billionaire, like Rupert Murdoch and deceitful demagogues like Limbaugh, Beck and Hannity, it had to become the political cesspool we are all forced to swim in today.
Wizard:
Look how they can't see that much of the domestic and foreign messes we're in can be laid solidly at the feet of "St. Ronnie"
lovemychris-You shouldn't expect deluded people to acknowledge the truth about their heroes and demagogues. You'd have more success getting cats to bark like dogs.
"I think Bush was working with Bin Laden. In fact, he was: Carlyle Group."
It's official. Time to call the people in the long, white coats.
I think Bush was working with Bin Laden. In fact, he was: Carlyle Group.
And don't you worry about Romney...he has all the Conservative Moxie now.
Repeal Roe v Wade,
Let corporations rule,
Let Israel have whatever Bibi wants: including our soldiers to fight in Iran,
No regs on business,
No regs on banks,
Regs on females, gays and immigrants
Rich get richer,
Poor get poorer,
Middle class becomes poorer still.
He's got it down!
- AUTHOR
@lovemychris...Do you actually really think Bush left office unaware of the location of Bin Laden? I seriously doubt that but he was not willing to risk the lives of Navy Seals and undermine the cooperation with Pakistan as a counter to India and Iran to get to one man. At the same time, you don't find it at all suspicious that Obama and company were so quick to dispose of a person who, if he was all that was claimed, given them much downstream intelligence on the terrorist movement???
Corporations are most certainly people...otherwise they are nothing more than a file folder of paper and stock. People sometimes spoil the mix and create problems just as they do in society. That does not make the concept of corporations bad. The fact that Bernie Madoff is in jail for his fraud does not make investing a worthless prospect. You want to treat the effect and not the cause and you want that treatment to extend to every aspect and be administered by a government too big to fit into the confines of the country. As long as people are involved, there are going to be some problems...that is the reason we have laws and courts.
As far as your opinions on the war on terror, maybe you should consider that Bush, as president, should have just shrugged his shoulders and done nothing...3,000 people died on our own soil and you would elect to do nothing waiting for them to come back for more. As for your reference to to Cheney, knowing the liberal media like I do, I would suggest that 82% disagreement you refer to is much aligned with a pollster's question asking in just the right manner to achieve the proper reaction...people with an axe to grind do that as well. Obama does not seem to care that over 70% of the American public does not want his healthcare plan...he is going to shove it down our throats in the name of his legacy as a president. He has no other alternative except to elect failure as the theme.
I personally am not a big Romney fan because I don't think he possess the conservative moxie to do the job. He is a fence straddling moderate at best and probably always will be. At the same time, the media is so focused on keeping him in the limelight that some of the others running are left in the dark. The media is more interested in swaying the nomination than on informing the public. That was evident in George Stepenopoulus' line of question in the NH debates. He made contraception a centerpiece to the debate for no other reason than to aid the liberal cause...that is some fine journalistic objectivity.
Principles and values are a function of the documents given to us by the Founders. The shortcomings, mistakes, and errors committed by human beings in the process of applying them do not make the documents damanged goods...the damaged goods are the people. Obama is making it clear that he has no use for those documents and attempts at every turn to either circumvent or ignore them. At some point, he will take it further. In my mind, that is not just ignorance or abuse at work. In my mind that is an agenda with only one purpose...undermine the foundations on which this country was founded and then allow that failure to be the opportunity to instill a new government and a new philosphy of government...Marxist socialism. WB
Hmmm, lying us into an invasion and using torture.....what principles?
Oh I know: "Mr. Vice President, 82%of the country disagrees with you"
Cheney: "So"
Unitary Executive, The Constitution is just a piece of paper, Bin-Laden? He's not even on my radar, Mission Accomplished!, Nucular Nucular Nucular.....yeah, what a beacon of morality and virtue.oooops, i just threw up my pretzels!
Or you have the principes of your new man, Romney: "Corporations are people too, you betcha"
I have 2 words for you: Jeff Perry. Romney supports him. Cofer Black, pres of Blackwater. Bain Capital....really research it, as well as his sons.
And don't forget to go back to grade school; like you did with Obama.
And ask him where he was during Vietnam--you remember Russsshhhh: Pot-Smoking Draft-Dodger (about Clinton)
Cause you know you're fair and balanced, only care about America.
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...Call it what you will, Wiz. We call it democracy and we love being stupid together...all of us. WB
Knuckle-dragging cowboys united in ignorance and anger—what a team!
(snicker!)
- AUTHOR
@lovemychris...I don't serve masters, you do. I elect principles and values as my core and I vote for candidates who subscribe to those in a respectful manner. You are confused when you in your assessment, the Constitution and freemarket capitalism are not in conflict, in fact, they are in perfect harmony when properly employed. Your see the Constitution has everything to do with the basis for our governance...not the framework of our economy. Capitalism is not a governming philosphy but an economic one. That might be quite a revelation to someone who subscribes to Marxism or Socialism in that the the government and the economy are one and the same. Those approaches where fully implement have only one successful track record and that is "failure". You moan and cry about the evils of corporations but show no concern for the dangers of big central government inserting itself into every facet of your life. You derive security from the presence of an all-knowing, all-seeing government without realizing that you are trading aways your liberties and your freedoms for the warmth of a false security blanket. Our liberties tell us that we will have a say in our life and how we conduct it, our freedoms tell us that we will have choices within those options. Instead, you would elect to have the government decide which mayonnaise is best on your sandwich. I seriously doubt that the comparison of Bush and Obama in terms of debt and deficit if a cooked book. This information came via NPR and everyone knows what a left-leanig liberal rag of radio outfit that is...not likely to purposely do a trip on Obama. No, at best this is his best profile in terms of that comparison. But you go on out there and find yourself something which explains it more clearly and fairly in your mind and we'll take a look. You might remember the words of Thomas Jefferson who observed that a government large enough to give you everything you want is also large enough to take everything you have. That is the master I will not serve. WB
@Wizard of Whimsy...Wow, Wiz...that is the most coherent statement you have made since you showed up here and tossed the race card on the table. These short general statements seem to work for you and most of the other folks who visit here can keep up with your superior intellect and inherent ability to reason.WB
BTW, conservatives were very upset with Bush and the wild spending spree, asking if he had lost his veto pen!
But he was a real penny-pincher compared to Obama!
"You can't add Bushco's spending onto Obama's, and call it Obama's fault!"
Nobody is. The debt when Bush left office is the combined debt accumulated by ALL PRESIDENTS SINCE WASHINGTON!
Barack Obama is well on track to more than double that in his first term!
You rock, Lady!
You can't add Bushco's spending onto Obama's, and call it Obama's fault!
Obama put Bushco's 2 "wars" and medicare bill for big pharma on the budget--W left it on the tab.
And I want to get corporations out of making policy. Get crapitalism out of homes, heating, healthcare, food, education.
Make your money selling things people WANT, not things people NEED.
Your policies nearly did us in: we don't want to give you the power to finish the deal.
You cannot serve 2 masters.....PERIOD!
You chose the wrong Master.
- AUTHOR
@Wesman Todd Shaw...Here is a link to an article published by NPR (National Public Radio) which tends to normally lean to the left that will offer you some information. This information was published in January 2011 and as such does not really include the spending that has taken place since but the trend is there.
- AUTHOR
@Wesman Todd Shaw...I don't have the numbers or the link right at hand but I do remember seeing a comparison that showed the Bush Administration ran an average deficit in spending of about $600 billion dollars moving the total national debt from just over $5 trillion to $10 trillion in eight years. A good portion of that amount came with the spending of the democrat controlled Congress in the last two years. So far with Obama, the average deficit spending is running over $1.7 trillion per year and has driven the national debt above the $15 trillion dollar mark in just over three years. Two of those three years saw the Congress dominated by democrat majorities in both chambers and no real budget in place to hold spending in check. That situation continues as does the spending levels which even with the agreements recently reached have not been reduced by any significant level. The national debt will soon exceed the annual value of the GDP...by individual measures, at that point, the country is offically bankrupt. The lack of fiscal responsibility will at some point drag the value of and the confidence in the dollar to record lows which can only come back to bring hardship on the American taxpayer in the end. There is a price to be paid for a lack of fiscal responsibility. For too long now, those in Congress aided by the President have simply shoved the debt and the problems forward in time borrowing and spending their way toward prosperity. The wiggle-room for continuing on that path is getting very small if not non-existent. As a nation, we could quickly approach the same problems shared by the European countries such as Greece. While some actually believe the problem can be avoided by simply raising taxes, that is not the case since our elected ones have a proven track record of simply squandering all new revenue streams which come to the government on additional spending...there is no provision to pay off the debt in the minds of our leaders. WB
true that Will! that IS a fact.
"So far as Will Starr's first comment....WTF? Back that up! Provide links and data!!!"
Sure:
"...by the end of his first term, Obama will have added as much debt as all the prior 43 presidents combined -- that was accurate enough to earn a Mostly True from PolitiFact."
Bashing Obama is perfectly fine, and I do it all of the time.
So far as Will Starr's first comment....WTF? Back that up! Provide links and data!!!
I've never yet seen ANYTHING showing that the Obama admin has created the debt that the previous amoral Bush Admin did.
Listen, I'm not a fan of B.H.O. - but I damn sure can't support much of anything done by the W.Bush admin, the murderous corporate war monger administration that Obama continued on with the same policies of...oh hell no.
In fact, the reason why I do not support Obama is because he's too similar to Bush. But everything I've ever seen shows that W. Bush created more debt than has Obama.
One of the major things that bothers me about Obama is that he's such a persuasive speaker who never backs anything up - the PERFECT person to continue on with the hideous policies of George W. Bush.
- AUTHOR
No defensiveness here...proud to be conservative; proud to be a practicing capitalist, and happy to support the Constitution. WB
Again:
"The 'change' that the left talks about is the total destruction of capitalistic and prosperous America, and the tearing down of our borders. The 'change' they want is a militarily weak, socialist America so they no longer feel guilty over our success and strength.
But if we ask them directly what they mean by 'change' all we get are evasions. That's why they speak in riddles and attack others."
Then they prove me right about their hatred of the capitalism that made America great:
"Neo-con-captialism=maximize my stock options and profits at the expense of everything, even the planet that sustains us!
Neo-con-captialism=screw the public, they're free-loaders!
Neo-con-captialism=So let's NOT "change" a good thing!"
See?
I'm beginning to think LMC has come up with yet another alter personality and it's none other than Wizzer, the Wizard of Whimsy. She did it once before. Perhaps she's done it again.
My how defensive we can become when we identify with . . .
Neo-con-captialism=maximize my stock options and profits at the expense of everything, even the planet that sustains us!
Neo-con-captialism=screw the public, they're free-loaders!
Neo-con-captialism=So let's NOT "change" a good thing!
The 'change' that the left talks about is the total destruction of capitalistic and prosperous America, and the tearing down of our borders. The 'change' they want is a militarily weak, socialist America so they no longer feel guilty over our success and strength.
But if we ask them directly what they mean by 'change' all we get are evasions. That's why they speak in riddles and attack others.
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...Wiz your only center line is hope and change. You have no foundation, no port in a storm...you are simply adrift in the winds and moving about with the tide. If your references are a reinforcement to replacing our current constitutional form of government with one of a socialist ilk then you have totally convinced me that the rudder is flopping on the back of the boat. I am not worried about the pie until the socialist start serving it. At that point, it will be as big as it ever can be and rapidly begin to diminish in size downward as productivity takes a plunge downward. We "neo-conservatives" as you put it may find it miserable but we know you'll be happy or will ya? WB
lovemychris- Neo-Conservatives hate change because that's what progressive movements represent—even when it's for the better of the American majority. They fought to preserve slavery, Jim Crow, immigration and anything they see as a threat to their ideology and 'piece of the pie."
They're ruthless, deceitful and they have no concern for the destruction of others' lives—as long as they preserve their way of life and most of all their bank accounts, nothing else matters to them.
Their refusal to accept change also carries the seeds of their demise because change is constant and eternal—especially when what they adhere to is unjust, cruel and ignorant—like all of their enslaving causes mentioned above.
A perfect example of my thesis is the gerrymandering going on in the four new congressional districts in Texas, where the increase in the Hispanic population hinders their balance of power in Congress.
The history of America and the reason for our Constitution is really about preventing the gangsters and extortionists from stacking the deck of democracy—which, sadly, has been occurring and accelerating at an ever alarming rate ever since Barry Goldwater and the John Birchers learned how to appeal to the greedy, the fearful and the ignorant in our country.
LMC - It is the establishment who wants to continue all the excessive spending and expansion of the federal government who fear the TPM. Things need to change where we spend what we take in, maybe even spend less, and cut the size of the federal government and make it what the Constitution says it should be - "a limited federal government" with only the enumerated powers that are contained therein. When people start fearing adhering to the document that is the law of this land then that's pathetic. Those two things - fiscal responsibility and adherence to the US Constitution - are the cornerstone of the TPM. If those principles are feared then I suggest that people get rid of their stinkin' thinkin' as my old friend Zig Zigler is fond of saying.
I'm like Wayne, I've thought that way long before the advent of the TPM. Why? Because I've actually paid taxes for years on end as I watch the idiots on Capitol Hill waste my hard earned dollars over and over again. I'm sick of watching it myself and fed up with all the political BS that I see going on up there.
The Frog
- AUTHOR
@lovemychris...You seem to have a propensity to make assumptions. Twice now you have associated me with the Tea Party Movement as if my writing is an arm as such. While I do subscribe to fiscal conservatism and constitutionally-oriented government, I held these principles and values long before any mention of the TPM, as many conservatives like me did. I don't have any axes to grind with the TPM but, at the same time, I have no affiliations with that movement no more so than I am involved with the "Occupy" crowd.
Now, I already know that you will trash every aspect of the TPM efforts and raise the "rah-rah" cheers for the efforts of the Occupy crowd. TPM is demanding fiscal responsibility and constitutional adherence in our government yet you will trash everything about them. "OWS" is oriented toward increasing the government dole in greater amounts and to more of the masses...basically more welfare on the backs of
American taxpayers yet you think the movement is just grand. Never mind that the OWS movement tracks right back to the doorsteps of the raging socialist, George Soros.
You may not place any danger on out of control spending as you see the government free to simply print more money or raise more taxes. The point you miss is that those in office will squander that money as well and our financial conditions only worsens...never improves. Obama has now accounted for one-third of the deficit spending on the books in the name of hope and change yet he has nothing to show for it and in some cases has only worsened the situation. How much deeper does the American public let him dig that hole before his term(s) of service are up.
FDR stuck around for 12 years...four of them as a self-appointed despot in violation of the rules assigned to that high office and he did it in the name of trying to pull the country out of economic depression, a feat that he had already failed out for the previous eight years. It's no wonder he was failing as the focus was on the government curing all our financial ills. If not for WWII and the industrial momentum arising from it, America would have gone down into the red financial dust of time at that point.
LBJ opened the doors for full-throttle spending with his concept of the "Great Society" and managed to pull through the legislation allowing him to spend the assets of the Social Security program on other pursuits. Of course, he had good intentions but poor accounting skills. Once that horse was out of the barn, the pork-barreling and earmark us of the money was fair game for all of them. Fiscal responsibility was not a word that was understood in Washington and that trend continued. As the excess funds began to run down, the debt began to pile up but the money kept on flowing in one direction. Raising taxes was not the answer because no one in Washington had any intention of taking any inbound revenue streams and applying them to the debt...they simply looked for new ways to spend the money.
Clinton and company set the stage for the development of the current mess by attempting to manipulate the housing market such that it grew and provided more Americans access to homes. A noble cause but an unfortunate one in that it ignored the principles of calculated risks and put the taxpayers on the hook for the bill when the market came crashing down as unqualified and quick to quit anything that doesn't look like a handout walked away from their mortgages. In the end, all we had left was a big bill for the taxpayers and a gross devaluation of home values across the nation. Just another example of the fine work our government does when it involves itself in the private sector. Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd engineered that bit of genius and Clinton signed it into law as a modification of the Fair Housing Act...LBJ would have been proud!
Now, along comes Obama touting hope and change with transparency as his backdrop. He immediately slams an undefined healthcare package down Americans' throat and at significant start up expense to a Medicare Program which was already mired in the same fiscal irresponsibility of Washington as was Social Security. He takes his majority position in Congress and pushes through over $800 billion dollars in so-called stimulus spending so that he can spend his way into saving America...a carryover of the philosophy of FDR. That money had little impact in that it took too many circular routes back to the coffers of the democrat party as opposed to making it into the mainstream of the American economy.
Add an out of control EPA with a budget increase of 125% under Obama, a do-nothing Congress filled with thieves, idiots, and rag-pickers, an ILRB with a singular focus of shutting down any business growth not associated with unions and you have the makings of a jack-boot society driven by a federal government which has grown in size by more than 17% in just three years. Add another $400 billion into the mix for last years budget extension debacle...added by Obama by the way, and mix that with another $1 trillion dollars that he recently indicated that he will need to cover the spending of government as the years works toward a close.
Personally, I think we are past the point at which some fiscal sanity should have taken over in our government. Like the European system, we are rapidly approaching the same bankruptcy cliff and driving toward it like Thelma and Louise in a runaway Ford Thunderbird with Obama and his cronies holding down the throttle. That might suit your purposes in that you dream of a socialist utopia where everything is free and easily gotten without work but it certainly is not my dream nor that of many, many, other Americans who think it is way past time that we took ownership of our country and our future. WB
Now you see why most people don't like Liberals and Democrats.
They want to change this country into something totally different from what our founding fathers created, thus shredding our Constitution.
Here's a clue: WE WON'T LET YOU!!!
Now you see why people don't like the Tea Party.
And why this country will never be united.
Some people think they own it.
here's a clue: you don't.
And you still have no substance, Wiz. You consistently exemplify the left's ability to type a lot words and still say nothing. The sooner you realize that, the sooner we'll be rid of you.
More group-think, hey boys? You never disappoint and consistently exemplify GWB's "low expectations of bigotry."
Wayne - Intelligence? If what he writes is a measure of intelligence then we're all in big trouble. He seems intent on having the last word, as trolls are wanting to do, but other than that I'm not sure where he is adding anything of value to the conversation and content of your writing.
The Frog
We may know nothing about you other than what you've spewed here, on other hubs, and in the forums, Wizzer, but it's given us all a real good impression of who you are thus the reason for the things being said.
Simply put, we all have the impression you don't know your butt from a hole in the ground. You're a person who's only capable of slinging insults but you have no real substance, thus inconsequential.
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...You seem to be the one sorting people into bins and assigning labels. I simply pointed out that no one asked for a definition but I do recall them requesting your impression of what "justice" might be which you have neglected in the interest of continued ridicule. I think most of us are quite clear on the point that you don't assign any intelligence or basis of reason to our opinions and say so on a quite high frequency. I think anyone speaking here will argue that you are entitled to whatever beliefs you want to have but honestly, I don't think anyone is quite sure what they are since you never really state them. You hint at them and then launch into some form of ridicule attempting to raise your intelligence quotient but never really defend a position. I don't expect everyone to agree with me but I do expect that they will defend what they actually believe in some manner. Otherwise, what is the sense of being here? Or do you just enjoy rolling in the mud? WB
This is great, I feel like I'm in a game of Indian Poker with dimwits and dupes—no wonder I'm accused of arrogance.
Nothing is known of me, personally, by this crowd, yet they hurl their imagined projections and accusations—always about how lazy I am or that I make personal attacks as they relentlessly vilify me.
I really hope the unjaundiced readers out there are having as much fun with this "confederacy of dunces" as I am!
- AUTHOR
@Wizard of Whimsy...I don't recall anyone asking for a definition or taking any interest in the one offered. With regard to "justice"...I have this gut feeling that you are referring to the "social" kind. That would make sense in that your social perspective on the world says the pie is shrinking and you rightly have been given your proper share. So, it becomes the government's task to balance the scales as opposed to maybe you trying a different method. One of great things about capitalism is that it grows things so there is always room for one more person to log in on success and achievement thus earning the spoils of their efforts. We can all sit back and be envious of that, cry unfair and unjust until someone takes it aways from those who earned it and shares it equally with those who did not. If that is the justice you are looking for...we already have far too much of it in America now. WB
Whizzy - What most of us here really "hate" is the type of ignorance you have on open display. Get off your butt and take the bull by the horns and work hard and you just might succeed. You know, become a tax payer and productive citizen, that sort of thing.
We all make choices and have to live with the results of those choices. That's the American way. Success or failure is measured by the individual and what they are made of. If you need a Nanny then hire one.
Will - You have to have a position to state one.
The Frog
So let me guess, Wizzer, we're suppose to give you and others too lazy to work all our money, thus freeing us of that fear of loosing it?
To your way of thinking, it's do anything so you don't have to leave mom's basement and work. Right? Does your mom bring you your mail at the same time she brings you your milk and cookies?
"Obviously, the only thing you know, Will, is your own hatred."
See? Another personal attack. That's his entire MO. He never states his own position on anything.
Troll.
219