I've been looking over the Gang of Six's bipartisan class war manifesto. Uh, politicians? Although it's unlikely, you may successfully shove these radical and undemocratic changes down our collective throat (if the House progressives let you), but you can't make us go along with your pretense. You all keep talking about "shared sacrifice" and "belt-tightening" when there's an 16% or so effective unemployment rate, wages are continuing their 30-year decline, jobs are non-existent and millions have lost their homes. For far too many of us, if we tighten our belts any more, we'll break our backs!
Meanwhile, Wall Street is doing better than ever.
In what universe is this "shared" sacrifice?
So here's my question to the gentlemen millionaires of the Senate, and their dear friend in the White House: When is it your turn? Where's your pain? We already had our turn. No more.
Economist Dean Baker says it's "striking" that the Gang of Six chose to respond to the crisis created by the collapse of the housing bubble by developing a plan that will give even more money to top Wall Street executives and traders - by taking it from little old ladies' Social Security.
And just to add insult to injury, there's an upcoming series of trade deal votes that amount to a series of setbacks for American workers and taxpayers, unions and public interest groups. But hey, it makes it easier for the Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers to offshore jobs -- and to keep their corporate tax havens.
It just makes me long for the days when we had actual, ass-kicking Democrats:
Just a little historical deja vu....
...there were Republicans who were progressives. Lincoln was pretty much forced into signing Emancipation by the political realities of his time, but it was truly a progressive act. Teddy Roosevelt went against the robber barons of his day, tying up huge tracts of land into the National Park and National Forest systems. Made a lot of enemies like that. But today's Republicans don't want to hear anything about those things as they're in the pockets of the robber barons of today. So are a lot of Democrats...
"Courtesy is owed. Respect is earned. Love is given." --Unknown author, found in Guide to Texas Etiquette by Kinky Friedman
And a long time ago Democrats were the party of Slavery and Jim Crow.
Parties change and the fact that people align themselves with a political party in the same way they do a sports team is insane. There are other teams we can cheer for (in the form of 3rd parties) if more people would let go of their reliance on tradition and take a chance.
Hopefully humanity will one day learn to be humane.
no?
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
Back in Lincoln's time Republican WERE what you call now Progressives ... and Democrats WERE the BIGGOTS who SUPPORTED the Confederates, as a matter of FACT back then Democrats were KKK members !!!
The name DON'T matter, actualy what you call Democrats today are: Democrats, Progressives AND Conservatives ... Government is "a machine for CONSERVING it's people's income" so they CAN afford THE MOST list of services for THE LEAST amount of money !!! !!! !!! (and the Confederate Plantation owners/Barrons/Top 2% can't STAND that, they want to wrenk that machine so it can make room for Corporate BLOOD SUCKING) / (the American people ARE the Government's SHAREHOLDERS) ... take that away and EACH one of those services would COST an ARM and a LEG
Anyways back to the subject ... one side is Democrats, Progressives AND Conservatives(advocating for Government is advocating for CONSERVING) - all together, the other side(wolf in sheep's clothes) just PICKS an IDEOLOGY and MILK that ideology to recruit SUCKERS ... in our case it's Conservatism, in Russia's case was Socialism, in Germany case it was the Nationalism and so on.
GOT IT, MaryK ??!
Get your lemonade, watch the traitors hang
Congress' TREASON have no boundaries, so does M$M's brainwashing/sidetracking
Republicans for Voldemort
Government does work, just not for YOU. Government work ONLY on the behalf of the Tycoons
Repeal stupid
A-freakin'-men.
To their defense though, they do have the stress of wondering whether their tax cuts will be continued, so there's that...
I'm so sick of this talk. The middle and poor classes have shouldered the Entire Sacrifice for the past 40 years. Even our longevity rates are going down! I'd bet all those rich bastards are doing just fine, never miss a doctors appointment or receive the latest treatment while We're All Dying Younger!. WTF? Isn't it enough you've driven millions into hunger and homelessness?
Fu*k them, fu*k them all. May they rot in hell and Mr. President may you join them if you pass anything that cuts Anything from S.S. Medicare or Medicade.
If this passes I'll tell you somebody's house needs to be burnt down - and it's not mine.
here"Illegals paid more in taxes than many top U.S. corporations :http://www.alan.com/2011/04/23/illegal-immigrants-pay-more-taxes-than-many-top-u-s-corporations/
corporations are getting more tax exemptions, and subsities. People in Power Make Better Liars.
it's a little more than obvious were the money is. Maybe the WH needs this - nah, they wouldn't look at anything representing fairness.
Just finished reading a book titled Railroaded. About the corruption of the lawmakers and judges by the crooks who built the first transcontinental railroads. Sure are a lot of similar things going on today.
search "Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific Railroad".
It's great to say NO MORE but the reality is if you are not very wealthy you really don't have much of a say one way or the other. I just don't see who is going to make a difference in the way the status quo will be continued and enhanced. I agree with what you say and believe it all to be true Susie Madrak, I wish it were not so for my kids sake. We "petition" congress people tho it does not good, elect majorities tho it does no good, contribute to causes and there is no effect.
hell in a hand basket now is that it used to be BETTER. That "better" wasn't spontaneous combustion - it took a whloe lot of people who fought (and sometimes died) to make it better for those who would follow.
I can't imagine what it would have been like to have to sit in the back of the bus or to have no rights because of my gender. I'm not because people rose up and refused to lie down until they had their rights.
So while it's bad now, the only way it's going to get better is if we all work our butts off to MAKE it better. I know -- who is this "WE" you speak of? It's .... We the People. It's our democracy and our freedom we're talking about -- guess whose job it is to make sure that it's working for us?
Yep, that would be us.
So here's my contribution to overturning the plutocrats - a new video that I call the Needy Billionaires Welfare Fund:
http://youtu.be/mBK70i7OSzA
I am going to be contrary and point out something only FEW people have done. The People had power in their Money. When they passed the law creating Federal Treasury, they took our power away. Try to stop paying taxes and see how far it gets you. IF everyone stopped paying taxes we would have our power back. But the system is so ingrained now, that they take the money out of your check before you even see it. That is what is illegal. Taxes should be VOLUNTARY. See? It's a give and take. They (congress, senate, Whitehouse) does what you want, you pay your fair share of taxes. They don't? You use your first amendment right to redress the government for grievances, withholding your taxes until they satisfy your grievance. It was also meant that should the Government STOP working that it was MEANT we over throw it and put a NEW one in place. Read your constitution, learn what they have removed. Now figure out WHY they removed it? GET PISSED OFF! 300+ Million PISSED OFF > 547(ish?) members of congress. Who do you suppose will win?
Education is that which remains when everything learned in school has been forgotten. - Albert Einstein
Did anyone notice how he named all the leadership in the House and Senate... EXCEPT Eric Cantor?
OMG, I just about spit out my afternoon coffee when I heard that. LOL!
not
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
It just makes me long for the days when we had actual, ass-kicking Democrats:
But...then we can't get the best that we can get under the circumstances. You're just an intransigent left wing hippie who wants the Prez to punch you again, 'cause you crave attention.
"Ironic, isn't it Smithers? This anonymous clan of slack-jawed troglodytes has cost me the election, and yet if I were to have them killed, I would be the one to go to jail. That's democracy for you." --Mr. Burns
He only hits me 'cause I deserve it and he loves me.
Hopefully humanity will one day learn to be humane.
Did anyone notice how he named all the leadership in the House and Senate... EXCEPT Eric Cantor?
The little boy has been hiding in his room since he got spanked and scolded.
"Ironic, isn't it Smithers? This anonymous clan of slack-jawed troglodytes has cost me the election, and yet if I were to have them killed, I would be the one to go to jail. That's democracy for you." --Mr. Burns
To Obama and all his rich cronies in the public and private sector, Social Security is a great big cookie jar that they just love dipping their hands in. It's so bad that they have totally forgotten that they're not supposed to be stealing our cookies and publicly admit it all the time.
Hopefully humanity will one day learn to be humane.
Beats Hope and Change as a slogan, don't you think?
“Why would anyone with a functioning brain believe this guy?”
Some guy with an eating disorder
I does if you're into that kind of thing. Can we at least have a safe word?
Hopefully humanity will one day learn to be humane.
I made 2 career choices (automotive and then I.T.) to which those industries collapsed. I had no control over that.
Here I am trying to find a steady job and talking to douche bag recruiters that are not even helping me find steady permanent work. So now back to college I go fearing more debt but somehow determined to make it. I don't know if I am or not to tell the truth. And that is why I have a true hatred of corporations and wall street and am angry as hell at the federal government.
JLN
Here is all I got to say to Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GoZ6ve3zv8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbHJQSM5D44&fe...
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
Debt is the price all Americans pay for Original Sin. Because Reagan jacked up the debt, now all Americans are born with an assload of debt that is theirs to be punished for unless they submit themselves to their Lord and live debtless lives.
All bow before the golden calf!
Hopefully humanity will one day learn to be humane.
back in 84 Mondale ran an ad showing a politician handing a bill for several billion dollars to a crying baby. The Republicans complained and the ad disappeared, but damned if he wasn't telling us the truth.
To them, spreading out the pain to the 85% of us in the middle-working-lower classes is all the sharing they care to do. Really is spread out pretty good, huh? 85% thats A LOT of us! Besides, its those benefactors in the top 15% who allow us to lick boots for our pay. To use Republican logic, the top 15% is sacrificing by paying a few of us our salaries and wages.
I mean, if they had to tight their purse strings a little, they might have to lay a few of us off or relocate to India. We should be grateful! Thanks guys!
Because the banks have racked up $244 trillion in new derivatives just ripe for collapse. Here view the OCC Quarterly Derivatives Report Q1/11 go to page 24, look at the bottom of column 5 for Total Derivatives. There you will see $244 TRILLION in derivatives; financial bets 20x greater than all all the money in the entire world.
In the mean time everyone is worrying about yesterdays news.
Goodnight, Frau Blücher
The amount of total derivatives is a great concern, but not all derivatives are structured for complete implosion.
Some that are CDSs, but even they are routinely offset by of circular bets. At least if the parties are in full function of their senses.
What is of greater concern is who is holding implodable positions that are not offset.
AIG was the ultimate example the last time when they wrote $500 billion that were not offset. Not all of that imploded but 180 some billion did.
They, afterall, were the largest insurance company in the world, they just found it convenient to forget about insurance capital reserves.
This was bailed out by the taxpayers.
This is where the outrage should be, Obama bailed out the crooked banksters.
Yes I know most people claim they were Bush's bailouts but Obama was the opposition candidate speaking for the them on the floor of the Senate.
People were voting for him because he was selling himself as a change agent.
Nothing was further from the truth.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Bush and Obama bailed out the stupid bankers since most of what they did was merely foolish and not illegal. The only people I can think of who are more foolish than those bankers are the ones who think you can allow the banking system to collapse and still have an economy. some people think those failures would have affected only Wall St. What they apparently do not understand is why is needed to be done. Don't be too entranced by the concept of too big to fail. It doesn't matter how big individual cards are if the whole house is collapsing. There were many more and smaller financial institutions before the Great Depression and that didn't stop a wave of failures from generating a liquidity crisis of epic proportions. If Wall St banks had failed, that is to say fallen below their capitalization requirements it would have sent waves of default through the whole system. That means that businesses large and small lose their credit facilities. That means they can't pay their suppliers in a timely fashion nor make payroll. Their deposits are not federally insured. This goes right down the line to farmers who can't borrow money in the spring for seed or fertilizer because the banks they used to be able to deal with can't loan them a nickel. This would have been every bit as bad as never raising the debt ceiling. I think people who haven't grasped those sorts of concepts ought to learn about the wheres and whys before they complain about being rescued. Because everybody was rescued by TARP.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
You are completely consistent.
it is the same bullshit you have been running consistently.
Let me explain what TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) was.
It guaranteed people's debt.
The banks held debt, the debtors could not pay, the taxpayers guaranteed the debt.
TO THE BANKERS.
They did not give the money to the debtors, or cause the debt to be forgiven.
The Bankers were made whole once, and then again when the troubled assets were not as troubled as before.
And the return was very poor contrary to the propaganda of the White House.
Plus no mention is made of the Section 384 tax give away found in the ARRA which amounted to hundreds of billions in tax forgiveness windfall to the banks.
Plus the the Maiden Lane I - II and III from the Federal Reserve which was an end run around the Congress giving the banks even more money.
This, all and all, was the greatest plunder in the history of the world.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
display much knowledge and no understanding. Aside from the fact that most TARP funds of this "greatest plunder" the world has ever seen HAVE BEEN REPAID you always manage to overlook the obvious. Those troubled assets put a lot of the banking system potentially into technical bankruptcy. Cross ownership, inter-bank loans and other fiduciary connections would have taken down a lot of the rest. The consequences would have been exactly what I said and everybody in the banking industry and the people like myself who have to deal with them knows it. It isn't hard to understand. Give it a try.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
We have given up to 14 trillion to the banks. We allowed them to transfer their toxic assets onto the public. We then set the rules so that if the toxic assets went up the banks could take them back, if not the tax payer would eat the loss. Who could possibly defend that?
With that money, you could have bailed out every single under water mortgage if you wanted to. I am not saying that would be the way to go, but it would have been better than giving the money to the rentiers in finance.
The simple fact is that all segments of society, government, households, corporations, have seen an explosion in their debt load. The Fed says that between 1975 and 2005 the household debt load went up twofold. What you are saying is for finance to never see a loss on the debt it owes, thereby keeping the rest of society drowning in debt.
I have news for you. There is no pain free option. There is no option we can choose now that won't harm everyone at least a little. I, personally, would think that IF we are to bail anyone out it should be the real economy of production and working people. Write down or eliminate their debt, because you can't have a functioning economy with the way things are. Create decent paying jobs so working people can pay down their debt, allow the real economy to grow up pay off its debt and if financial capitalists are harmed the government can step in and do what they are doing (AT LEAST in the short term), cheaper and more efficiently.
Yves Smith over at Naked Capitalism argued at one point (when questioning Larry Summers I believe) that finance could and should be viewed as a public utility. I agree. The government could do what the banks to now, with much lower overhead costs, and they could direct investment towards production. Not the casino capitalism of finance, which produces nothing but debt.
I just don't understand why they didn't close that window by putting the Glass–Steagall Act back in place preventing these types of bets. Given the fact that they have bets exceeding 20x all the money in the world, if even a fraction of that collapses... down comes the world economy.
Goodnight, Frau Blücher
we have artificial entities with human rights front-running the market in synthetic financial instruments using machine intelligence and proprietary algorithms. you couldn't make this shit up.
christ, this isn't even capitalism anymore, i don't know what in the hell to call it. the virtual economy? i know one thing, 90% of the people in this country are virtually screwed.
about the financialization of the economy the world over. One of the ideas you hear a lot is that if finance grows bigger, relative to the real economy and GDP, then the government's authority and ability to respond has to grow with it. That hasn't happened, government has been stripped and most of the financialization has happened in the private market, on computer screens, in the shadow banking system and in places like the Eurodollar market.
One thing I see the radicals on the left and right agreeing on is that bailing out finance, socializing their losses, is immoral and horrible economic policy. What we are seeing is governments and paid off politicians refusing to allow financial capitalists to lose their asses on their investments. In the EU the banks are refusing to even write down a relatively small fraction of the debt. They're demanding that the tax payers pay them back for their bad loans, and if it comes at the expense of their economies, the industrial economies or the standard of living of working people, oh well. And these crooks talk about a "free market". Whatever I think of "free markets", socializing the losses of banks is not a "free market" or a socialist policy.
The big issue I think that needs to be discussed is what to do when the whole house of cards comes down, cause it will. Not only governments but households and corporations are drowning in debt, a debt that can never realistically be paid back. If a crash happens you will either see even more consolidation in the financial sector or you will see the government step in to do the services that the private financial interests used to.
If the former happens, and you don't break the big banks and financial interests up, if you don't tax away their fictitious, unearned wealth, then they will have absolute control over the economy. We will have a libertarian and socialist nightmare. Central planning (which the libertarians obviously don't like) by the banks themselves (which the left obviously doesn't like).
What a mess. Thanks conservatives, centrists and liberals. Thanks Republicans and Democrats.
don't forget the bill from HALF of America that have DECLARED BANCRUPCY ... somebody have to FILL that HOLE too ...
Get your lemonade, watch the traitors hang
Congress' TREASON have no boundaries, so does M$M's brainwashing/sidetracking
Republicans for Voldemort
Government does work, just not for YOU. Government work ONLY on the behalf of the Tycoons
Repeal stupid
of additional revenue if the House Republicans let 'em but I doubt they will. I think, from the administration's point of view, progressives are the least of the problem.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
"from the administration's point of view, progressives are the least of the problem." , obviously so , in fact it appears they don't consider the left and the Democratic voter a problem , after all , who and what is their alternative ? When the mob is in the White House running the show and 99 % of the politicians are completely corrupted just about everything is legal . They all knew what was going on , they all knew the inevitable consequences and it's likely they all knew there'd be a massive transfer of wealth to the wealthy via the bail out , no one goes to jail , only the pensioners and little guys lose ,the robbers not only keep their bounty but are rewarded . As if that wasn't enough they put the stimulus money into the robbers hands , no strings attached , no rules what so ever , so they could invest it over seas and horde it . And now it looks like we'll pay for it all with our social security and medicare . The middle class in under attack ? Nah .
Insanity , it is what it is , there is no understanding it .
Those spineless Democrats and the Republican President Obama simply don't consider the Left at all. They're sitting back, estimating their votes, thinking "yeah, those pussee peon liberals, they don't have the BALLS to vote for anyone else".
could you explain to me why opening closed or protected markets to American goods is a bad thing? Even the God Krugman thinks they are a good thing.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Inflict Pain Beats Hope and Change as a slogan, don't you think?
Aaaah...even Ricky is coming around to my way of thinking.
"Ironic, isn't it Smithers? This anonymous clan of slack-jawed troglodytes has cost me the election, and yet if I were to have them killed, I would be the one to go to jail. That's democracy for you." --Mr. Burns
?
He didn't endorse the plan he just congratulated them for working together.
I too long for the days of REAL Democrats that would give Presidents like FDR 80% majorities so that he could say whatever he wanted without having to worry too much about it because he had progressives backing him and bringing people to the polls rather than threatening to primary him. You've rendered yourself useless by failing to back him in 2010, Kerry in 2004 and Gore in 2000. And you're SHOCKED when Presidents court independents rather than you?
And if you're going to compare Barack Obama to FDR in terms of capitulating let's look at the whole picture:
1. FDR capitulated to Southern Democrats when he didn't let farmworkers or household workers have Social Security because 98% of those workers were blacks and Southern Democrats didn't want them to have it.
2. FDR capitulated to Southern Democrats on anti lynching laws
3. FDR capitulated to fear mongering when he opened up Japanese internment camps.
4. FDR capitulated to anti-immigration fear mongering again when he refused to let the Jews from the S.S. St. Louis come in from Germany and sent them back to their deaths. Sending Hitler the message that the Holocaust could go full-steam ahead.
5. FDR capitulated to anti-jewish extremists in not letting the public know about the holocaust
6. He capitulated to the military who refused to bomb the railroad lines to the death camps and the death camps themeselves because they cynically thought that it is best that the Nazi's waste resources killing Jews then killing soldiers.
But.... But.... Obama is talking nice to Republicans (even though he said during the campaign he would)! And...And...he didn't close Gitmo (althoug he signed an order and such luminaries like Russ Feingold didn't support him on it) and he didn't get us the Public Option (though he got us a lot of other stuff that will matter more to most people than the public option would of) and... he's torturing Bradley Manning (though he isn't) and...he's doing arial bombing (of course he's killed far more terrorists than bush ever has in his 8 years).
The fact is Susie, in a side by side comparison to FDR Obama holds up VERY well if not better. In fact he holds up better than just about any President. In terms of accomplishments to the % of Congress he controls and in terms of opposition faced and in terms of how fast he's fixing the economy (something he's also doing at a faster rate than Roosevelt).
Yet some hold this President to a different standard than they do any other president frankly because they only voted for him because they expected him to do what they told him to do and now that he's not they feel he's being all uppity. It has nothing to do with him or his policies it has everything to do with their sense of power. And racism.
Here's a fighting Democrat right here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb6gp5Ga5q8
Unfortunately Susie, you bear some responsibility for letting them get the keys back
Hahahahahaha.
I noticed how neither one of you refuted anything i had to say. Did he or did he not do the compromises i laid out? Did he or did he not have majorities far, far greater than Obama? Did FDR make those compromises that i mentioned or not? Even if you want to compare FDR in terms of hiring FDR picked financial wizard Joseph Kennedy to be the first head of the SEC. Yes, he did a good job, but could you IMAGINE the hay FDL would make of THAT appointment? Not to mention hiring William H. Woodin, a milllionaire industrialist to be his fucking treasury secretary? I mean Geitner never worked in the private sector and you guys decided he's a wall street fat cat. This guy really WAS a wall street fat cat.
Then there's Roosevelts C. Average in Harvard,and Obama's top class performance, his signing up to be a Wall Street lawyer to Obama's shunning Wall Street in favor of helping the community. If you want to make comparisons let's compare the REAL FDR and not your fantasy.
Obama, like FDR will be regarded in later years as the liberal other liberals should strive to be like. History will prove me right and Susie wrong on this.
he had a higher grade point average in school. Seriously?
Damn, look what's happening to our country, look who's presiding. look who's compromising (except he just advancing his own positions), look who's getting sold out.
I don't understand why you don't get it. It's not difficult. Really, it isn't.
in today's world?
Is pushing hard for three horribly failed "free trade" deals "liberal"? They will cost jobs, decimate labor, increase inequality and make the decades long wage stagnation even worse. Obama himself in the past admitted this.
Is it progressive to push for savage austerity at a time of economic crisis, when the only thing keeping the economy afloat is government spending? It WILL, no doubt, cause the economy to contract again. It will do nothing but make Wall Street happy. How about 100% adopting the right wing's arguments and framing of the issue? Or allowing Geithner to implement QE2, which was nothing more than an international financial rescue package at the expense of the domestic economy.
Does a "liberal" do nothing about wealth inequality, especially when the wealthy have been bailed out with trillions in tax payer money and wealth inequality was already going up sharply in recent decades (it was already higher in the US than other developed countries)?
Is it "liberal" to aggressively push for the privatization of the educational system like Obama and Duncan are doing?
What does "liberal", "progressive" or even "socialist" (since most socialist and labor parties are pushing for far right wing economic policies in Europe these days) mean in today's world?
FDR ran on a pretty centrist platform the first time around. He was pushed by the left, by the far more powerful unions, by other left of center parties (ie every day working people) towards more radical positions. None of that exists now and most on the left want to provide cover for Obama and his reactionary economic policies.
It is one thing to argue that you should vote for Obama because he is better than the other right winger he will run against, or the Supreme Court. Why do so many "liberals" feel the need to defend these policies? They're basically turning themselves into the same tools of moneyed interests as the tea party. They're no better.
"History will prove me right and Susie wrong on this."
There is no chance in hell this will happen. The socialist and labor parties (along with the more honest right wingers and conservatives) in Europe will go down in history as selling off the public domain, increasing wealth inequality, financializing their economies and destroying their democracies. Obama will as well.
Given the structural problems in the economy (which are huge and decades in the making) he is doing nothing but making a very, very bad situation worse. The Republicans would be just as bad on economic issues. The only way people can fail to see this is if they don't know what the structural problems are.
Until the left rallies around a coherent alternative to this neoliberal mess, until they can unite around concrete policy alternatives and institutions, this situation will not change and it will get worse.
If what Obama is doing is "liberal" or "progressive" then you can keep it. From my, and increasing amounts of working people the world over, perspective there is no difference between this and what was called right wing economic policy during the early and mid 20th century.
During the Reagan years, Republicans never had 60 votes in the Senate and Democrats controlled the House for the entire 8 years. This never prevented Reagan from passing his agenda through Congress. Your entire assertion is destroyed by the example of Reagan. Even if we were to assume you're right that GOP obstructionism is responsible for Obama not being able to do what he wants to do, then by the same logic, Reagan and George W. Bush shouldn't have been able to do what they wanted to do. Either you have to admit it isn't the GOP that's preventing Obama from pushing a progressive agenda, or else you have to admit that the Democrats are working for the GOP. No other conclusion is logically possible.
Clearly what you want is for progressives to believe that the Democrats are a real alternative to the GOP even though Democrats never do anything to block the GOP or press a progressive agenda. It's sort of like political alchemy; i.e., like an alchemist who tries to get something in return for for nothing, you want progressives to give Democratic politicians votes in return for nothing.
You sir/madam, are an Obamabot.
Obama is seeking compromise between his own conservative position and that of the ultra conservatives.
In the name of bipartisanship.
Watch the must see
here
You can download it.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
I no longer am under the Obama spell.
The film was just the icing on my sceptic cake -as far as Obama is concerned.
First they ignore us..then they ridicule us..now they are feeding us chicken crap- sign my petition:
https://www.change.org/petitions/usda-stop-th...
www.ickenittlepost.com
I gotta give him that.
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
. . . as Obamabots maneuver themselves into yet another Colbert Report punchline.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
He is the greatestmost bestest president ever. Duh...
Given how New Dems spend way more time explaining why they can't than they do actually doing, I am starting to assume the whole "Yes We Can" slogan was being ironic in a hipster kind of way...
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
that pushed him over the top.
he's doing arial bombing (of course he's killed far more terrorists than bush ever has in his 8 years).
he's doing arial bombing (of course he's killed far more terrorists than bush ever has in his 8 years).
he's doing arial bombing (of course he's killed far more terrorists than bush ever has in his 8 years).
Source?
It's called using drones to fly over other countries and kill anyone who looks even a little suspect. I suppose that's nice if you are American, but what gives you the right? How would you feel if drones from another nation were flying over your neighbourhood and killing your neighbours?
far left loon >.<
Freudian slip?
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
enough with the mealy mouthed traitors in the democratic party. what is going on is textbook class warfare. obomber is not our man, never will be, look at his prosecution of the wars, no change. barack hussein obama is a harvard educated technocrat, he needs to be out of office. talk about the alternative doesn't matter, what matters are the facts on the ground.
this country has conducted an overt and covert war against socialist thought for a hundred years, now look where we are. karl marx called it in 1848, nothing basic has changed. i am glad to see "class warfare" used in a post.
the situation has been chewed over on this blog a thousand times, the bourgeoisie no longer needs the proles in this country, they have found others to do the labor. have you ever thought that if the working people in this country had been paid more of the value their labor produced over a lifetime then we wouldn't need no stinkin' social security? social security was developed to ameliorate the effects of an unjust system, the system never changed.
the tactics and beliefs of the democrats will never, never, produce what we need. any candidate that challenges the status-quo is destroyed.
the far right got a mouthpiece with ronnie rayguns, they have been on the offense for thirty years and we are losing. we can longer longer avoid the rhetoric of marxism, the analysis of marxism, to avoid the real issues, to shirk the fight, will mean destruction.
The President was pretty vague about the revenue side of things.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
The republican policies are job killing, economy killing policies.
Democrats, STOP imitating the republican madness.
STOP mimicking the republicans.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
That FDR clip was awesum.
It should be used right now, in a Democratic TV ad.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
this was pointed out to me by i guy i met a while back, he called it like it is, i hadn't thought of it, but he's right. the aristocracy (a nice name for the bourgeois) doesn't give a damn if people live or die, they no longer need us. they know the planet is approaching it's limits, and figure to get rid of the surplus population.
this whole question boils down to whether the human species can ever be civilized. we must get real, capitalism is nothing other than the law of the jungle with a bunch of fancy window-dressing; if the people in power (government and business) really want the law of the jungle they just might get it. obomber, the bushes, cantor, ryan, slick willie, all of them that have enabled the oppressors, the oppressors themselves, they are playing a very dangerous game, eventually the masses will get wise. i am not advocating anything here, my function is analysis (a weak analysis) but the truth, is the truth.
we need to tell it like it is, this is genocide, be careful what you wish for ladies and gentlemen of the aristocracy and intelligentsia, you just might get it.
to those who still support this president, do you think emperor obomber (peace be upon him), the most wise and munificent, will treat you any better than the "brown people" that get killed in our wars as "collateral damage"? how about you white folk out there who support the teabag regime? do you think if push comes to shove that any one of the puke candidates would hesitate for a second to sic the troops on you? jesus christ, both sides of this debate better wake the hell up.
i swear if there is anything that is infinite, it is human beings capacity to delude themselves.
Re: derekthered
Prisons and work houses. Let them die and decrease the surplus population. Yep.
Want to let it happen. Just do nothing.
It will happen.
https://services.myngp.com/ngponlineservices/...
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
WILL take care of the "bill" that Wall Street COKEHEADS have ran ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOLNWF5QMxY ... you know THAT bill that they call "Economic Downturn" aka Economic BUBBLE !!!
Get your lemonade, watch the traitors hang
Congress' TREASON have no boundaries, so does M$M's brainwashing/sidetracking
Republicans for Voldemort
Government does work, just not for YOU. Government work ONLY on the behalf of the Tycoons
Repeal stupid
Let's see , do I have this right ? Eliminate a few subsidies and tax loopholes then turn around and lower the tax rate yet more ( to counter the beneficial affects of doing so ) , manipulate the numbers , do some fancy accounting , then tell us it's actually a revenue increase and that the Reich have compromised , then since they compromised , in return they get at SS and Medicare . So the Republicans get the taxes lowered even more and they get at SS and Medicare ! We the people ? We get absolutely fucked once again , only in a major way this time ! JC ! Who needs the Democratic party ? They may as well merge into one .
Insanity , it is what it is , there is no understanding it .
and just briefly heard about lowering tax rates for the wealthy. I kind of let it go thinking that can't be right. So this is the grand deal, cut benefits and decrease taxes for the wealthy?
Obama's not like FDR he's more like Nero (with apologies to Nero).
Nero was the anti Christ the bible was based on, right? You can say what you want but Obama is not Nero.
Bite my shiny metal ass.
http://www.startalkradio.net/
"fiddled" while Rome burned. Whereas Obama's policies actively work towards the destruction of the U.S. I didn't know Nero was the antichrist - if so, then I guess we've got nothing to worry about.
Copy paste http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero
"The Sibylline Oracles, Book 5 and 8, written in the 2nd century, speak of Nero returning and bringing destruction.[189] Within Christian communities, these writings, along with others,[190] fueled the belief that Nero would return as the Antichrist. In 310, Lactantius wrote that Nero suddenly disappeared, and even the burial-place of that noxious wild beast was nowhere to be seen. This has led some persons of extravagant imagination to suppose that, having been conveyed to a distant region, he is still reserved alive; and to him they apply the Sibylline verses.[180]
In 422, Augustine of Hippo wrote about 2 Thessalonians 2:1–11, where he believed Paul mentioned the coming of the Antichrist. Though he rejects the theory, Augustine mentions that many Christians believed that Nero was the Antichrist or would return as the Antichrist. He wrote, so that in saying, "For the mystery of iniquity doth already work,"[191] he alluded to Nero, whose deeds already seemed to be as the deeds of Antichrist.[159]
Some modern biblical scholars [192][193] such as Delbert Hillers (Johns Hopkins University) of the American Schools of Oriental Research and the editors of the Oxford & Harper Collins Study Bibles, contend that the number 666 in the Book of Revelation is a code for Nero,"
I'm not a schoolar on the bible tho. :)
Bite my shiny metal ass.
http://www.startalkradio.net/
That's what I get being raised Unitarian Universalist - they didn't teach us too much about hell and damnation.
"How Nero saved Rome" ... it's mind bogling - they claim that Nero did actualy the opposite and the Talantless pricks just HATED on him.
Get your lemonade, watch the traitors hang
Congress' TREASON have no boundaries, so does M$M's brainwashing/sidetracking
Republicans for Voldemort
Government does work, just not for YOU. Government work ONLY on the behalf of the Tycoons
Repeal stupid
FalseNero was the anti Christ the bible was based on, right?
There is no individual Anti-Christ. The Anti-Christ John spoke of is a class of people. Anti = Against, Christ = Messiah = Anointed or approved of God. The antichrist is a very large group of people who are against what Jesus Christ is for. True, Nero was just one in a mega-multitude of Antichrists. True, Obama is not Nero.
Ah, ok, that sounds plausible. But like i said i do not know a lot about the bible. I remember a story that the bible was basicly based on Nero as the anti Christ. But it was ages ago so i don't know. :)
(i'm also an Atheist, so what do i know? :p )
Bite my shiny metal ass.
http://www.startalkradio.net/
ask everyone else to share their sacrifice.
keep profits for themselves.
CTHULHU 2012 "Why vote for a lesser evil?"
"Fuck you, I STOLE mine ..."
Get your lemonade, watch the traitors hang
Congress' TREASON have no boundaries, so does M$M's brainwashing/sidetracking
Republicans for Voldemort
Government does work, just not for YOU. Government work ONLY on the behalf of the Tycoons
Repeal stupid
Aind Rand?
Yeah, he was a plonker alright.
Wait, who?
Bite my shiny metal ass.
http://www.startalkradio.net/
Rand Paul's mother
Get your lemonade, watch the traitors hang
Congress' TREASON have no boundaries, so does M$M's brainwashing/sidetracking
Republicans for Voldemort
Government does work, just not for YOU. Government work ONLY on the behalf of the Tycoons
Repeal stupid
Austerity for the rich! Let's try that out. Maybe they will be more careful in the future.
Yep. Otherwise we are headed for much worse in the near future.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
Someone pointed out today that:
When Americans pay more than any other country for Medicare and get less for it, then cuts in Medicare costs should be able to be made, without actual cuts to Medicare services to citizens.
So, we need to look very carefully at any Democratic plan that involves adjustments to social services, to be sure they don't actually make sense. If they squeeze the providers without squeezing the recipients of health care, then it might make sense in a balanced deal that forces the rich and major corporations to sacrifice their share.
The danger is that tampering with Medicare might leave open the possibility of slipping in a little recipient squeezing 'between the lines'. This is a likely scenario and would have to be anticipated and prevented from happening.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
O'Donnell thinks that all of this talk by the administration about putting SS and Medicare on the table is a bluff / a gamble by Obama that the Republicans will never accept a deal that raises revenue ( taxes ) in any way and Obama comes out looking like the reasonable one getting a simple bill that raises the debt ceiling , never having to touch either program . I hope he's guessed right , he may be giving Obama way too much credit .We shall see.
Insanity , it is what it is , there is no understanding it .
for thought. Thats the most reasonable and plausible "giving-Obama-the-benefit-of-the-doubt...for-now" explanation I've heard yet. Hope its true. It would change my mind about him. Betting on the Republitards acting like total spoiled children is usually a safe bet.
Below is the text of a letter I sent last week to Senator Gillibrand (similar letters were sent to Senator
Schumer and Rep. Nadler) about the President's calls to embrace "shared sacrifice."
Mark P. Kessinger
New York, New York
laid out, but over three paragraphs. I'm not sure anyone in Washington has the attention span. Other than that, well done.
It's me again Big John. I have just come back to tell you once again I told you so...
I am sorry for rubbing it in but I was not treated all that well here when I suggested before and after the election that nothing was going to change.
Here's another tip for you. I can explain this whole debt thing really easily for you, anyone can understand it, it's so simple. Okay, ready?
It used to be called "pork barreling" but that phrase went out of fashion because it was too obviously understood so new euphemisms were created. What you are experiencing is simply the end game of politicians who have borrowed as much money as fast as possible in order to payoff the cronies who got them elected and re-elected at the expense of taxpayers. They all do it and always have throughout history.
Here is the only explanation that makes sense to me and explains what is being done, the way it is done and the timing in the form of this "deadline" that has been dealt with year after year since about 1918 as a routine deal to be grumbled about and passed. This deadline is somebody else's deadline; it is a figment of somebody's financial accounting system, not in our government. Either that or they have judged that the time is right for a final kill thrust in their battle to exterminate all vestiges of progressive or liberal government and take total power for the corporations.
I think it has something to do with what is going on in Europe with the sudden enormous deadline pressure being put on the little countries one after another. The banks are threatening to foreclose if these governments do not accept "austerity", which means cutting social insurance, public subsidies, taxes and selling off public property and utilities. This is exactly the same program being forced on us, except it is being done by our own government instead of the international banks. At this point, I am not sure that there is any meaningful separation between elements of the political parties, the government and the banks and corporations. The IMF and World Bank can't do it to us, because we ARE the IMF and World Bank.
I am not a "New World Order" or "Bilderberger" conspiracy guy, but I have to look at the situation and do the best I can to imagine the mechanism inside the thing that is making it work the way it does, and there is clearly something here outside the formal constitutional systems. Otherwise Obama;s behavior makes no sense; it just does not add up. He must be responding to something we are not allowed to see and that he will not account for.
Comments are closed on this entry