Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Shop the Truthdig Gift Guide 2014
December 21, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


Loss of Rainforests Is Double Whammy Threat to Climate






Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Report

They Go or Obama Goes

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Aug 24, 2010
White House / Pete Souza

President Barack Obama, in background, talks on the phone in the Oval Office earlier this month as National Economic Council Director Larry Summers listens in.


Q & A - Live Chat with Robert Scheer


A live Q & A session related to this column took place on August 26, 2010 at 11:00 am PT.

We will post a link to the text transcript soon, but in the meantime, you can see the run through version here.


By Robert Scheer

Barack Obama and the Democrats he led to a stunning victory two years ago are going down hard in the face of an economic crisis that he did nothing to create but which he has failed to solve. That is somewhat unfair because the basic blame belongs to his predecessors, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, who let the bulls of Wall Street run wild in the streets where ordinary folks lived. And there was universal Republican support in Congress for the radical deregulation of the financial industry that produced this debacle.

The core issue for the economy is the continued cost of a housing bubble made possible only after what Clinton Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers back then trumpeted as necessary “legal certainty” was provided to derivative packages made up of suspect Alt-A and subprime mortgages. It was the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which Senate Republican Phil Gramm drafted and which Clinton signed into law, that made legal the trafficking in packages of dubious home mortgages. In any decent society the creation of such untenable mortgages and the securitization of risk irrationally associated with it would have been judged a criminal scam. But no such judgment was possible because thanks to Wall Street’s sway under Clinton and Bush the bankers got to rewrite the laws to sanction their treachery.

It is Obama’s continued deference to the sensibilities of the financiers and his relative indifference to the suffering of ordinary people that threaten his legacy, not to mention the nation’s economic well-being. There have been more than 300,000 foreclosure filings every single month that Obama has been president, and as The New York Times editorialized, “Unfortunately, there is no evidence that the Obama administration’s efforts to address the foreclosure problem will make an appreciable dent.” The Times noted that the administration’s main program has been a bust, with only $321 million of the $30 billion allocated to the program having been spent to help folks stay in their homes.

The ugly reality that only 398,198 mortgages have been modified to make the payments more reasonable can be traced to the program being based on the hope that the banks would do the right thing. While Obama continued the Bush practice of showering the banks with bailout money, he did not demand a moratorium on foreclosures or call for increasing the power of bankruptcy courts to force the banks, which created the problem, to now help distressed homeowners. 

The subject of housing foreclosures is inherently boring unless you happen to own a home being foreclosed, in which case your family’s life has just been turned disastrously upside down. But few of the well-paid pundits on television are in such a position, and as a result the tragedy that has hit 4 million families in the past two years has received scant notice. 

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
But even that highly privileged group of commentators must now be aware that those foreclosures are behind Tuesday’s news that U.S. home sales reached their lowest point in 15 years and that there is unlikely to be an economic recovery without a dramatic turnabout in the housing market. The stock market tanked Tuesday on reports that U.S. home sales had dropped 25.5 percent below the year-ago level.

When homes are foreclosed in a neighborhood the equity of those in the area who have faithfully paid their mortgages is slashed. And when the banks dump those foreclosed properties back on the market, prices drop even lower. Yet the administration has offered the most tepid of responses to stanch the fierce bleeding of home equity worth. A paltry $4.1 billion has been committed to efforts by the states to help the unemployed and other distressed borrowers stay in their homes. Compare that with the trillions spent on making the financial industry super-profitable once again.

There is no way that Obama can begin to seriously reverse this course without shedding the economic team led by the Clinton-era “experts” like Summers and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner who got us into this mess in the first place. They are spooked by one overwhelmingly crippling idea—don’t rattle the financial titans whom we must rely on for investment. But when it comes to keeping people in their homes, it is precisely the big banks that must be rattled into doing the right thing.

Obama gained credibility through sacking Gen. Stanley McChrystal for making untoward remarks. Why not sack Summers and Geithner for untoward policies that have inflicted such misery on the general public?

Click here to check out Robert Scheer’s new book, “The Great American Stickup: How Reagan Republicans and Clinton Democrats Enriched Wall Street While Mugging Main Street.”

Click here to check out Robert Scheer’s book,
“The Great American Stickup: How Reagan Republicans and Clinton Democrats Enriched Wall Street While Mugging Main Street.”


Keep up with Robert Scheer’s latest columns, interviews, tour dates and more at www.truthdig.com/robert_scheer.



Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.

Previous item: Boehner’s Bumper-Sticker Politics

Next item: The Primary Differences



New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By ofersince72, August 31, 2010 at 9:12 pm Link to this comment

Kulu,  I have tried and tried to get a forum going

on Truth Dig to come up with ideas on doing this.

Unfortunatly, many still believe that there is a political
process left in our country.

We will figure it out,  and I still believe it can be
done peacefully.  I have not conceded that Evil trumps
Good, nor will I ever, even If I go to my grave while
these greedy people still rule.
The plutocracy, as the Citigroup Memo that was posted
last week showed, believes they are the smartest ones in
the world.  I have found throughout my life that this
belief is usually someones downfall.
Kulu….....GOOD WILL PREVAIL…..MY MOM TOLD ME SO!!!!!!!

Report this
kulu's avatar

By kulu, August 31, 2010 at 8:14 pm Link to this comment

ofersince72,

Yes they will get us in Australia and in Europe as you say, but what are we to do short of putting our lives on the line which would be a waste. Its too late to do much because the power is overwhelmingly on their side. Should we join them and embrace the wars, the corruption and the exploitation?

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 31, 2010 at 11:20 am Link to this comment

Have it your way.

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 31, 2010 at 10:34 am Link to this comment

Shenonymouse
Oh, come now. That brilliant intellect you trumpet must be capable of more than that. Now that your foot is caught in your self-made web of inconsistencies, flawed logic and factual distortions, you seem to have little to say for yourself anymore except to repeat hostile gestures.

Here’s the deal, lady. You attacked me because you thought I was a right-winger attacking Obama. You were wrong from the beginning and just could not admit you handled it badly. Your ego simply wouldn’t let you. For the record, I’m not a right-winger. Far from it. And I voted for Obama. I’d do it again if my choices were the same. But unlike many Dems and Liberals, I never had any illusions about Obama. I reserve the right to criticize Obama and detail his weaknesses and failures. Sure, he’s better than Bush. He’s the best we could get under the circumstances—and I think we deserve better. I don’t need your permission to register my opinion here. If you don’t like what I have to say, feel free to debate me. I respond well to back and forth, so long as it’s reasonably polite and respectful. But don’t come at me with a series of snotty questions and then demand I write an essay for you while you belittle my intelligence and call me names. You should apologize. It would be good for your soul.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 31, 2010 at 9:24 am Link to this comment

I repeat, why are you acting so stupid?  Country lawyer or not.

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 31, 2010 at 9:21 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous,
Tsk, tsk. Again with the hostility. You claim that you asked me ONE simple question, which I refused to answer because, in your interesting mythology, I must not be up to your level of penetrating analysis. Below is your complete post, which you may have forgotten about in your attempt to whitewash your behavior. Allow me to refresh your selective memory. Now, I may be only a humble country lawyer but it seems to me your math is a tad off. Which, of course, begs the question: why don’t you take responsibility for being wrong and just apologize? We’d all think the better of you for it.

* * *

“The problem is as I see it using collective nouns such as Democrat or Republican without defining what they are.  Hence they are simply empty metaphors.  To say Obama is a moderate Republican has no
meaning.  Saying he does not “walk the walk” gives another undefined buzz-phrase metaphor.  Just to say he surrounded himself with ex-Clinton appeasers is not saying anything really (and how do you know
they are that way “by nature”?).

To be more pertinent in your criticism, you might list the serious changes you think he has not made?  I submit that any other president would not have made any further progress with the Congress as it is
composed in this term of office.  Do you think John McCain would have brought this country to any better place economically?  How about with respect to the war(s)?  How about Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Bob Barr?  If you answer any of these names, what do you think they would actually have been able to do with the same Congress? Not what they would have liked to have done, but really able to have done?”

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 31, 2010 at 9:05 am Link to this comment

Why, Peetawonkus, I ask myself, are you acting so stupid?

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 31, 2010 at 9:02 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous,
Interesting. Out an infinite number of possible approaches to my initial post, you take a belligerent and hostile one. And then, when cornered on it, retreat into empty defiance mixed with a curious pose of martyrdom—“Such is the violence that intelligence has suffered since time immemorial.”

Do you actually listen to yourself?

Report this

By truedigger3, August 31, 2010 at 8:22 am Link to this comment

Re: By ofersince72, August 31 at 7:44 am
Re: By ofersince72, August 31 at 7:56 am


Very insightful couple of posts.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 31, 2010 at 7:42 am Link to this comment

Reposting to get the italics right and less distracting.
 
Again, Peetawonkus, you defend yourself with great prevarication, ?
”...Yet you attacked me.”

I did not attack you personally, I questioned your use of certain
collective nouns, and only with one reference.  Why you resort to
gross false statement is obviously to enhance your stature and own
opinion of yourself rather than actually state the truth, thereby
attempting to demean and diminish me.  It is a thug’s strategy and
one that I am often attacked with because of the puny ability to argue
properly.  Such is the violence that intelligence has suffered since time
immemorial. 

I asked you one question, one versus your exaggerated allusion to “a
series of belligerent questions.”  It is your ego that was insulted
(bruised) by your lack of intuition to be able to answer.  You are unable
to make distinctions of using a term ambiguously as a collective noun
and one that is descriptive of a political party’s behavior.  Your ability
of using the fine nuances of language you demonstrate to be seriously
handicapped.

Your space on Truth is completely protected and it shows by all the
posts you have made. Am I rude?  Yes, but I don’t feel I owe you or
anyone any politeness who shows only pretensions to truth.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 31, 2010 at 7:30 am Link to this comment

Ooops…my pretensions to closing italics.  My apologies, this should
fix it

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 31, 2010 at 7:29 am Link to this comment

Again, Peetawonkus, you defend yourself with great prevarication,
”...Yet you attacked me.”  I did not attack you personally, I
questioned your use of certain collective nouns, and only with one
reference.  Why you resort to gross false statement is obviously to
enhance your stature rather than actually state the truth, thereby
attempting to demean and diminish me.  It is a thug’s strategy and
one that I am often attacked with because of the puny ability to
argue properly.  Such is the violence that intelligence has suffered
since time immemorial.  I asked one question, versus your exaggerated
allusion to “a series of belligerent questions.”  It is your ego that was
insulted by your lack of intuition to be able to answer.  You are unable
to make distinctions of using a term as a collective noun and one that
is descriptive of a political party’s behavior.

Your space on Truthdig is completely protected and it shows by all the
posts you have made.  Am I rude?  Yes, but I don’t feel I owe you or
anyone any politeness who shows only pretensions to truth.

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 31, 2010 at 7:11 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous,
Nonsense. I came here to register a brief political opinion, which is as much my right here as yours. This isn’t your private little forum and I don’t need your permission to express my viewpoint. Yet you attacked me. I never did anything to you. You asked a series of ridiculous and belligerent questions and then demanded that I answer them. For someone who fancies themselves very smart those were rather stupid questions, don’t you think? But of course they were simply attack questions and not real questions. When I refused to play your ego trip game, you got nasty. You can squirm and equivocate all you like but you know it and I know it. What’s funny is, you jumped down my throat for using terms like Republican and Democrat—and then later, when it suited your purposes, you used the same terms under the same circumstances. You’re a hypocrite and you’ve been busted. You can bluster all you want. But, hey, I understand the weakness of human nature and I don’t bear you any ill will. No one, especially bright people who relish being thought of as morally superior, likes to be caught behaving badly and then have it pointed out. The problem is that, instead of just admitting it, you keep trying to justify your initial mean-spirited attack by further displays of an increasing empty arrogance. You really need to allow other people the space to express their own opinions without trying to beat them into submission. When you’re rude and attack people without cause, how do you think they’re going to respond? Generally what I advise people to do under these circumstances is to start out with an apology. You don’t have to give me a long and detailed apology, just make it heart-felt.

Report this

By ofersince72, August 31, 2010 at 3:56 am Link to this comment

While they are doing all that , we will be entertained

by a whole lot of side shows,  like tea baggers, Beckers,

arguing generals,  Krugman ecodumbics,  peace activists,

and other crap like that, like mosquedebating,

who is smarter liberals or conservatives…ect…

However, everyone is dumber than rich boss.
He been workin on this scheme many years,  he is done now,
he owns you in Australia, you in Europe, and dumbAmericans

Report this

By ofersince72, August 31, 2010 at 3:44 am Link to this comment

They will get your health care system, and the

Europeans won’t have theirs many more years either.

The International Investors that own and run this world

are very greedy and are going to impose AUSTERITY on

all of us…....

I can’t wait to see what the U.S.  social security is
going to look like five years from now.
Someone needs to write a song called ,

A U S T E R I T Y,...G E T…U S E D…T O…I T….......

Report this
kulu's avatar

By kulu, August 31, 2010 at 3:10 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous,

Yes indeed we have a health care system that is much better than yours and apparently one of the best in the world but bit by bit our governments are sniping at it.

As for gay rights… generally Australians do not treat them as a major issue but they are still not treated equally. Religion for one thing gets in the way a bit as it has been doing with other similar issues such as abortion, euthanasia etc.

Report this
kulu's avatar

By kulu, August 31, 2010 at 2:54 am Link to this comment

Garth,

I do speak for my self but informed by the incontrovertible evidence. Of course my values are not the same as the bulk of Australians seem to have, but to be fair most are not engaged and so have probably not really explored their values and how the country or world may or may be at odds with them.

You say you don’t know much about climate change except it isn’t happening. Well how do you know that its not happening if you have not considered the evidence. That is unless you mean mitigation efforts are not happening in which case in so far as the US, Australian and Canadian governments are concerned it is not.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2010 at 4:39 pm Link to this comment

” I am a little embarrassed that I fell for your schtick.  Especially the
part where you extolled the virtues of Critical and Creative Thinking by
saying that if a terrorost attack or bomb were palnned on wouldn’t get
a parapsychological the seer, or something to that effect.”

garth, first of all this is incoherent.  And I did not say that.  Please cite
exactly where you saw that I did.  I would be happy to discuss it.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2010 at 4:35 pm Link to this comment

I don’t mind you attempting to pick me apart Peetawonkus, it has
become a pastime for some egotists on TD. I’m rather used to it.
Do I have a massive ego?  Well I don’t know about massive, but I do
have a big one. And it might be possible that I have some enjoyment
pointing out the flaws and hypocrisies in the opinions of others. 
Especially their hypocrisies.  I rarely see real bona fide arguments. 
I don’t mind being corrected either, if it can be shown where I have
erred.  But usually, as you do, I am berated for pointing out flaws
and hypocrisies because it is felt these ought to be just accepted,
as chickens accept the corn that is thrown to them.  As a matter
of fact I often invite corrections.  But folks like you think you can
make unsupported fallacious generalized criticisms and get away with
the obvious denigration.  So here is my middle finger to that kind of
behavior. 

Do show where I called you a name and please be explicit, what name
did I call you?  If I was wrong about you, I will apologize.  If you feel
beat down that could be because your opinion contained something I
found ambiguous and you obviously do not like to be shown that you
have been less than clear in your expressed opinion, as you do not
provide any reference for your personal opinions.  Just like quite a few
do on these forums.  I expect adults not adolescent reactions.  And I
expect to understand what is written as opinion.  I was pointing out that
at times collective nouns do not do the commenter any service by
offering a description that is doubtful and uncertain regarding
interpretation.  I was specific and you still took it as an insult.  I think
it shows a very thin skin bordering on an authoritarian perspective.  If
you think we “have more in common politically than I might think” I
should like to see that.  I always enjoy finding a like mind out there.
Especially politically.  As a left leaning centrist, I don’t find many on TD
like that.  It becomes a personal fight when someone makes it personal
by attacking my person rather than exactly what I said.

Report this

By garth, August 30, 2010 at 4:26 pm Link to this comment

I didn’t write this.

“I think it’s more like kulu who supports a the US, its wars, its neo-liberal policies and its stance on global warming among other things.”

I don’t know a thing about global warming other than it’s hot here.

And kulu’s ‘neo-liberal policies’  I say what?

I have had trouble today actually getting what I want to say posted.  Maybe, online editing?  Who’s is watching the incoming comments?

A child at play?

All I said was that kulu should speak for himself or herself, not Australia.

Shenonymous,

Talk to Peetawonkus.

I am a little embarrassed that I fell for your schtick.  Especially the part where you extolled the virtues of Critical and Creative Thinking by saying that if a terrorost attack or bomb were palnned on wouldn’t get a parapsychological the seer, or something to that effect.

I read that and I said to myself, “Now, i did not know that?”

If you teach Critical and Creative Thinking, you should first take a remedial course on just plain thinking, in the real world.

What does it mean to be placed in this situation?  Where does one get reliable information?  What is at stake?  And where do you stand right now?  and are you willing to change your opinion in the light of the preponderance of information.

If there’s bomb about to explode, you might be the last to know?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2010 at 4:03 pm Link to this comment

Maybe…garth…you should stop wondering and do some real thinking
again. It really saddens me that you have decided to take sniper shots
at me recently implying I have a certain poor character, which is
without foundation, and that you have better-than-thee qualities.  It
really shows one relegated to the minor league of the pantheon of the
sour and disgruntled on Truthdig whose only joy appears to be
wounding others.  You might give more thought to your set of values,
if you have a set.

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 30, 2010 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous
Ok, since you’re dying to know, here’s what I think. I think you like to correct others—but you don’t like to be corrected. I think you enjoy pointing out the flaws and hypocrisies in the arguments of others. But you don’t really like to hear about your own, and you weasel and resort to bluster when you’ve been caught. You talk about fairness and allowing others to express their opinions—but beat down anyone who dares to disagree with you. And you make it personal. In other words, you can dish it out but you can’t take it. You celebrate intelligence, especially your own, even as you call others names and denigrate their intelligence. But you are bright. That’s obvious. Sadly, it’s an intelligence hardwired to a massive ego, which tends to subvert your core themes. I’ve read through your posts and we actually have more in common politically than you might think. But you have to quit picking fights with people and turning them into personal vendettas. Where do you think that’s going to go?

Report this

By garth, August 30, 2010 at 2:04 pm Link to this comment

I think it’s more like kulu who supports a the US, its wars, its neo-liberal policies and its stance on global warming among other things.

Maybe Shenonymous supports the same.

But you’ll be left by the wayside according to a Mr. Florida who appeared on the Fareed Zakaria show.


It’s time for pipsqueaks to stop speaking for others, especially nations.

At least have the balls to say: “This is what I think.”

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2010 at 12:01 pm Link to this comment

kulu, I have a dear aged Australian friend who tells me the same
thing you have just said.  I’ve always thought it interesting how
much Australia wished to emulate the US.  And that there were a
number of Aussies who posted on TD (and Canadians).  Seems like
the USA is the standard.  I think the myth of its Constitution must be
the flame for the moth of imagined liberty.  While I firmly believe in
the Constitution, it seems to have been prostituted by many factions
in this country for their own self-serving purposes as interpretations
are as numerous as there are those who would use it that way.  The
Aussie’s, my friend says has a superior public health care system. 
And they have a very broad acceptance of homosexuality.  While I am
not gay, I have a kid who is and is one of the brightest minds around
and completely accepted and respected where employed in the
predominantly straight society (I only say that because I don’t know if
there are any other gays in the organization, …”national election in
Australia on Saturday left the country with its first hung parliament
since World War II, the two main candidates are looking to four
representatives — including a pro-gay independent and a pro-gay
Green Party member — to decide which party will form a minority
government.”
My gawd, seems like the USA could take some lessons
from the Australians!

I agree that third parties have a place and that if a firestorm could ever
get going, it is my view that Americans are very lemming like and
would easily fall over the cliff into emotionally charged actions. Mass
hysteria is not unknown.  There are reasons why third partiers do not
get too far off the ground here.  Nader did get about 20% off the
ground but of course that is not anywhere near what was needed. 
Kucinich had the same problem.  Analyses of their failures to win the
majority of the voters abound.  My pet one is they lacked the charisma
and charm it takes, such as a Jack Kennedy or Bill Clinton, regardless of
the latter two’s immorality (well immorality according to common
standards).  They both had the best of ideas and the best explanations
of what would take this country in the right direction.  Yes, money did
also keep them from success.  The Republicans and the Democrats use
their immensely fat purses to elect one of their own.  Money talks and
there is no way around it.  I think third party candidates have their best
chance at the local level, maybe even at the state.  Bernie Sanders an
admitted communist is a very successful Vermont senator and he is not
a “scarey” fellow.  He makes more sense than most of those lawmakers. 

I have a question for anybody to answer.  And please excuse my
ignorance.  But I keep hearing how much money is spent on elections,
especially recently in the mid term elections by congressional and
gubernatorial candidates.  An enormous amount of money. Almost an
unimaginable amount.  Now who the f’ gets it?  Advertising companies?
Yeah, media corporations?  Yeah.  So of course they are reporting all
this serendipitous income aren’t they? They are paying taxes on it,
aren’t they?  Shouldn’t that fill the treasury somewhat?  Then the next
question I have, is if there is so much f’n money available for political
candidates, why in the f is this country in such a financial hell hole?  I
mean, there is at least a billion that has been floated on the surface of
the political toilet in the last few years.  Seem like this country is
desperate for campaign reform and these items need to be publicized
over and over and over until the public gets it in their heads enough to
do something! No?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2010 at 11:17 am Link to this comment

In what way have I used Democrat or Republican as empty metaphors?
Peetawonkus.  You are grabbing at holey straws to take a pot shot at
me.  What, are you still feeling the sting?  If your memory can serve
your correctly, you would recall I also said it was a matter of context.
And even said exactly where it was used collectively ambiguous. Save
your breath, or computer typing fingers and try to get a life.

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 30, 2010 at 10:48 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous
“As an observer from afar, you should know that there
are in reality only two choices when it comes to POTUS.  A Democrat or a Republican.”

Aren’t you the one who said, and I quote, “The problem is as I see it using collective nouns such as Democrat or Republican without defining what they are.  Hence they are simply empty metaphors.”

Funny how you don’t like to follow your own rules. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander?

Report this

By garth, August 30, 2010 at 10:37 am Link to this comment

It’s amazing how Obama has saved us.

He stopped the war in Iraq, and soon he will stop the war in Afghansitan (2011).

He passed the Health Insurance Reform, while hiding in the White House.

When push comes to shove though, he stands for one thing and one thing only: to hold the hands of his wife and children, and perhaps the occasional drug deal with a homosexual cocaine seller.  After that, maybe nothing else.

When the pols talk about them and us, they are referring to card-carrying members of the Democratic or Republican Party.  Nothing more.  You my dear sir and madam are givers.


I would still vote for Obama though, if the option were only Obama and any Republican.

I want a third party candidate with some balls.

Some one with the willingness to go down swinging. Not a schmuck who uses artful ploys to make him and his family including his children and their grandchilderen rich. 

I want someone to denounce the Capitalist’s dream of ‘Generational Wealth’.

In America, you make it on merit, not DNA.

Report this
kulu's avatar

By kulu, August 30, 2010 at 9:27 am Link to this comment

It’s Australia Shenonymous-a strong and basically uncritical supporter of the US, its wars, its neo-liberal policies and its stance on global warming among other things.

It also is bedeviled by a two party political system that makes it very hard for other voices to be heard. The two parties, like those in the US have been corrupted by big business, their contributions to campaign funding and the good old revolving door affliction.

Having said all this there is still some room for smaller players to have an influence. The Greens have managed to achieve enough support this time round to have the balance of power in the Senate. The election has just been held and the two dinosaur parties are busy negotiating with independents to see who will run the country.

Unlike in the US if you are a member of one of the political parties you toe the line set by their leaders. So it is quite pointless trying to exert influence on backbenchers.

That’s a short summary of the situation here as I see it but we are a very minor actor on the world scene. I am really more interested on what is going on in America as it has a bearing on the future of our civilization.

Which doesn’t look too rosy I think (the future that is).

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 30, 2010 at 8:26 am Link to this comment

Business as usual in politics, is…..well business as usual!  This means one thing in the grand scheme of things, politics represent very little to support the Leefeller daily life, and I do not expect a change in the near or far future!  Though one thing I have noticed, the price of Tequila has gone up and Glenn Beck has had a million Beck March.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 30, 2010 at 4:12 am Link to this comment

You’re welcome kulu.  I appreciate differences of opinions and it is
not only allowed here in America without recrimination (well not
counting the smelly fishy dogmatic tyrannical political absolutists),
but encouraged.  I think it is healthy and good to have egalitarian
and divergent political views as fascism and autocracy ascends to
be the ruling principle regardless of how limited our government
seems to be.  As an observer from afar, you should know that there
are in reality only two choices when it comes to POTUS.  A Democrat
or a Republican.  A third party might be able to win at the
congressional level, and a few have, some good and some not
so good in my opinion, but the word few says it all. 

Perhaps you would be brave enough to say what is your country so that
we may be able to assess its political flavor?

Report this
kulu's avatar

By kulu, August 30, 2010 at 12:08 am Link to this comment

Thanks for the compliment Shenonymous.

Just to clarify though, in case you misunderstood me or I have misunderstood you, I am no fan of Obama who I think started off on the wrong foot by appointing the old, discredited guard to his administration. He has continued on that wrong foot right up to now in just about every possible way.

If I were American I would certainly not vote for Obama but for Nader or similar and if that alternative were not possible I would not vote at all.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 29, 2010 at 9:46 am Link to this comment

kulu, you are most perceptive and I wholeheartedly agree with you
although I know you do not seek such agreement.  These forums
need folks like you to keep sober observations on the floor, uh…
the electronic floor that is.

Report this
kulu's avatar

By kulu, August 29, 2010 at 9:30 am Link to this comment

Obama is a raving success, you’ve all just missed the obvious.

GDP has gone up, am I right? The fact that unemployment and foreclosures (and military spending) have gone up at the same time is just unfortunate. The man is only human, he can’t do everything. And anyhow who cares about these people? There’s enough of them so surely they can band together and help each other out?

There’s something fishy going on!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2010 at 1:20 pm Link to this comment

I am glad he lived to his natural end.  I’m afraid it was me,
Aug 28 9:55 am, who misunderstood and mentioned the word
suicide with respect to Fritz’s death.  I apologize to everyone. 
He was a feisty old geezer, wasn’t he?

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, August 28, 2010 at 1:00 pm Link to this comment

Fritz?
Suicide?
How did the idea of suicide get introduced?
At the tender age of 87, Fritz´s body had worn out. He
became incapacitated, required bed-care for three
months, then died.

NO. He received death assistance from neither the CIA,
MOSSAD, MI6 nor STASI.
He died naturally, age 87.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 28, 2010 at 10:23 am Link to this comment

Re:By Shenonymous, August 28 at 9:55 am


Shenonymous wrote :


“I wonder why Fritz resorted to suicide to solve his conflicts with this world?  He had withstood so much prior to that something must have dawned on him of the absolute futility of life?  That is the hardest part of being a conscious human being, I think.  Coming to terms with our mortality and the absurdity of being a conscious organism in this world. 
Ergo, religion and all the insanity it brings with it. But it does assuage the fearful of mind.”
____________________________________________
Shenonymous,
That was very good. It is insightful, simple and understandable.
About JudywisemongerPHD, she is one of those clueless cruel far Right Wingers who blame poverty on people themselves, which sometimes is true, but ignores the tricks, shenanigans and greed of Wall St. and the big banks that ruined, unrepairably, millions of lives, the effect of outsourcing millions of good living wage jobs, the regressive tax system etc etc… . Her posts exprss her callous cruel attitude perfectly.
In the richest country in the planet, there is no justification, whatsoever, that many people have to work two and sometimes three jobs just to provide the necessities for their families and still are poor.!

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 28, 2010 at 7:27 am Link to this comment

Simply put, I would be proud to place AH after me name,....... except if they made it mandintory, then I would most probably commit suicide like Fritz, once I saw the large number of company I was associated with.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2010 at 5:55 am Link to this comment

”Fritz stood up and shouted, “ALL NORMAL ?PEOPLE HAVE TWO
THINGS IN COMMON,“ sat down and ?quietly said, “an asshole and
an opinion.””
  My gawd, Fritz is a Siamese twin to our very own
Leefeller!  The Leefeller might rest contented to know he was not
alone in this world.

I wonder why Fritz resorted to suicide to solve his conflicts with this
world?  He had withstood so much prior to that something must have
dawned on him of the absolute futility of life?  That is the hardest part
of being a conscious human being, I think.  Coming to terms with our
mortality and the absurdity of being a conscious organism in this world. 
Ergo, religion and all the insanity it brings with it. But it does assuage
the fearful of mind.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, August 28, 2010 at 5:39 am Link to this comment

Whether PhD or no H.S. diploma, a comment reflects
the person who wrote it.  Comments sometimes remind
me of a former friend, Fritz, and an exclamation he
made one evening when we were drinking fresh German
coffee and home-baked cake that Erna did so well. 
Fritz was a WWII German veteran who took a Russian
round in the hip, and was released after one year in
captivity, a cripple. He hobbled around with the
three-inch shorter hip-leg, with no self-
consciousness, until a couple months before his
death. Fritz had turned into an alcoholic, and that
evening he was loaded.  We were discussing opinions
of various German politicians at that time. All of a
sudden,  Fritz stood up and shouted, “ALL NORMAL
PEOPLE HAVE TWO THINGS IN COMMON,“ sat down and
quietly said, “an asshole and an opinion.” 

It saddens me to know that some folk are not allowed
to express their own opinion, but must pursue the
dictates of their “handlers.”  They are “captives”
and must repeat the “party line,” whether CIA,
AIPAC, MOSSAD, FEMA, US Army or whatever. If they
know information that could reveal the truth about
a criminal “leader,” and they try to “quit” their
company, they will have a drowning, an overdose, a
heart-attack, or wrist-slitting experience, or stab
themselves 22 times, resulting in death. Meanwhile,
the Chronicles of Chip Tatum, who “quit” the CIA
when GHWBSr tasked him to “quieten” a U.S.
politician, are online.  Then there is Ted Gunderson, former
California Area Supervisor of the FBI, who tells it
all. With documentation, also on-line.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, August 28, 2010 at 5:06 am Link to this comment

(Though if I recall correctly, you did say once you were
formally educated to some degree.  I can’t imagine your brilliant wife
would marry a guy just for his brawn, laugh laugh…I laugh cause I
would!  Naw, just kidding).

********************

Well, she’s far-sighted so at a distance I look pretty good and up close I’m a blur…

“With the way she sees and the way he looks they’re a perfect match!” (Fiddler on the Roof).

ITW, A.D. (Just can’t resist.  Now I have something to match Judy Phud.)

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, August 28, 2010 at 5:03 am Link to this comment

truedigger3, August 28 at 7:33 am Link to this comment

Re: By Inherit The Wind, August 28 at 12:37 am

ITW wrote:
“Hi She!

Why are you wasting your time on TD3 when he says something inanely offensive and stupid, showing he doesn’t have A CLUE what you were talking about?”
__________________________________________________

And you know it all!! Huh!!
Report this

By truedigger3, August 28 at 7:26 am Link to this comment

Re: By drbhelthi, August 28 at 4:35 am

drbhelthi wrote:
“At the doctoral level, it is standard practice to
place the abbreviation of ones academic degree after
ones name. “
——————————————————————-

But “JudyWeismonger” is not a real name, and the person behind it could be anyone, so, what you said doesn’t apply here.
The attacks on JudyWeismongerPhD, stem from that: this is not an academic context here, and then comes a character and claims, that he/she has a PhD, which translates to: “hey, I have a PhD and I am smarter than all of you, so, don’t argue with me, you bunch of ignorants.
Besides, many of her opinions were extremely biased, false, arrogant and cruel.

*************************************

That you can write a sharp, insightful and accurate post followed by a stupid, childish one demonstrates my point perfectly.

ITW, A.D.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2010 at 3:57 am Link to this comment

Hey ITW!  My computer delayed several posts and I just caught your
greeting.  It has been a while, you were missed.  Yeah, I know, but
sometimes I let my emotions run away with the spoon.  Hahaha I
think of you as one of those autodidactics who is a higher authority
Watch me get flamed for that one! LOL ‘sallright, you know I won’t
care anyway.  (Though if I recall correctly, you did say once you were
formally educated to some degree.  I can’t imagine your brilliant wife
would marry a guy just for his brawn, laugh laugh…I laugh cause I
would!  Naw, just kidding).  We all know TD3 is a wannabe flamer
crank. 

By the way TD3, you could be right but exactly in what way do you
think Dr. JudyW is extremely biased, false, arrogant and cruel?

Report this

By truedigger3, August 28, 2010 at 3:33 am Link to this comment

Re: By Inherit The Wind, August 28 at 12:37 am

ITW wrote:
“Hi She!

Why are you wasting your time on TD3 when he says something inanely offensive and stupid, showing he doesn’t have A CLUE what you were talking about?”
__________________________________________________

And you know it all!! Huh!!

Report this

By truedigger3, August 28, 2010 at 3:26 am Link to this comment

Re: By drbhelthi, August 28 at 4:35 am

drbhelthi wrote:
“At the doctoral level, it is standard practice to
place the abbreviation of ones academic degree after
ones name. “
——————————————————————-

But “JudyWeismonger” is not a real name, and the person behind it could be anyone, so, what you said doesn’t apply here.
The attacks on JudyWeismongerPhD, stem from that: this is not an academic context here, and then comes a character and claims, that he/she has a PhD, which translates to: “hey, I have a PhD and I am smarter than all of you, so, don’t argue with me, you bunch of ignorants.
Besides, many of her opinions were extremely biased, false, arrogant and cruel.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 28, 2010 at 3:24 am Link to this comment

There are many of us on TD who hold Ph.D.s and even more.  For
instance I have two undergraduate degrees, one graduate degree
and a post-graduate degree. So what?  The fact that a poster
advertises their “expertise” in something in their forum ID name is
a personal pride thing.  But it is immaterial whether one does or not.
It is possible that it appears to some that it is supposed to represent
some higher level of authority… in something.  And more than a
smidgen of jealousy and guilt forces a bad-mouthing comment. 
I know lots of authorities who have no academic degrees at all!  A
boatload of autodidactics, but it would look funny to put a comma
after their name and the letter A.  But I suppose as long as they don’t
put an AH after their name it won’t hurt.  Advertising one is an
arsehole might be perceptive but is probably not a good idea.

It is what is said with the self-perception of a higher level of authority
that really counts.  Isn’t that right?  Checking that out, which is really
why we are here, right?  To check out and evaluate what is said, or no? 
Am I wrong?  And isn’t that why many of us, heavily educated or not,
ask for references to back up what is said?  And that is done at the risk
of raising some pontificator’s ire, making them irrationally incensed. 
Maybe some are here to just see their name in print, a lot.  Oooorrr, to
run someone into the ground, which is the perverted practice of flamers
and trolls who have nothing better to do with their lives!  5 Yups for
that one.

By the way, if it is only a “wee bit shallow” it would be hugely
negligible.

Report this

By ofersince72, August 28, 2010 at 1:08 am Link to this comment

I have not a problem with Judy displaying her
PH.D…....she should be displaying it.

but to me, her analysis of America was a Jr. High level.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, August 28, 2010 at 12:35 am Link to this comment

The tirade against the comments of a person who
holds a Ph.D. is a wee bit shallow.
At the doctoral level, it is standard practice to
place the abbreviation of ones academic degree after
ones name. Folk who made it thru the masters level,
and decided to stop, understand.  Those who made it
thru the coursework at the doctoral level, yet never
completed requirements for the diploma, understand
best of all.

Favoritism and brown-nosing exist at
all levels of education, and is responsible for much
academic failure – and success !  Politics does not
have the corner on brown-nosing or favoritism.  As I
understand it, Truthdig allows all to submit comments,
regardless of academic degree(s).

Bad-mouthing a commentor on the basis of an
advertised PhD, instead of the content of the
comment ?  Displays the same type of character trait
as a non-American politician, who in pre-election
speeches promises “everything the poor folk
fantasize,” yet after election delivers the same
sack of soiled goods as the predecessor.  Only
worse. . . A Hitler-type similarity.

Of course, pimps of the CIA and AIPAC, owing
allegiance to their “handler,” are rewarded for
killing the messenger, distracting from
accurate, worthwhile comments,
generally supporting the
“disinformation program.”  Such folk have no
choice.  They are captives.  Sad, sad.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 27, 2010 at 10:52 pm Link to this comment

When my brother Clyde’s new girlfriend told him she had Phds, Clyde thought about it for a while and said;...... “Well, thats Okay because I have herpies”.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, August 27, 2010 at 8:37 pm Link to this comment

Hi She!

Why are you wasting your time on TD3 when he says something inanely offensive and stupid, showing he doesn’t have A CLUE what you were talking about?  And after he JUST let Judy Phud have it very nicely!

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, August 27, 2010 at 8:35 pm Link to this comment

Judy Phud:

What’s your PhD in: Sanscrit? Social Psychology? Medieval Literature? How does being an expert on Beowulf qualify you to sneer and look down your nose at people who are actually productive? What have you actually produced?  A paper on why the poor deserve to be poor.

I’m not jealous of PhDs, nor do I hate them. I even love one so much I married her and hope to die married to her—so don’t use that BS on me.

When someone like you tosses his/her indeterminate PhD around like it’s a license to abuse others, I’m reminded that PhD is sometimes said to stand for:

Piled Higher and Deeper!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 27, 2010 at 3:10 pm Link to this comment

truedigger3, why don’t you go back to f’n yourself

Report this

By truedigger3, August 27, 2010 at 2:58 pm Link to this comment

shenonymous wrote:
“Fat Freddy – The desire for freedom is such an ambiguous slogan. What do you mean by desire and freedom…..”
__________________________________________________

WTF you are talking about. You are asking about the meaning of “desire” and “freedom”???!! This is not a thread about Greek philosophy! You are wasting our time with your obvious pedantry.  Why don’t you keep simple things simple and cut out that showing up of yours. Do you have an inferiority complex??

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 27, 2010 at 2:33 pm Link to this comment

Peetawonkus, I am an angry white man pretending to be a woman
while sitting in a basement hiding out as a tall slender broad with
flaming red hair, stiletto high heels and a set of pistolas that are
usually kept holstered unless I run in to a runt like yourself. 
Everybody on TD knows me, ‘cept you I guess.  But you’re
mistaken about my eating Cheetohs, ahs hates Cheetos, ahs
love unsalted roasted peanuts up the wazoo!  I am addicted.
With some dried cranberries thrown in for extra delight.  Ooooh,
excuse my calling you a runt, it was the computer’s fault.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 27, 2010 at 12:37 pm Link to this comment

Fat Freddy – The desire for freedom is such an ambiguous slogan.
What do you mean by desire and freedom?  Self-absorption
means concerned with only oneself.  Freedom for the libertarian,
according to all definitions I’ve run across, means Merriam-
Webster and about 25 other dictionaries:
Libertarianism
1: an advocate of the doctrine of free will (especially in Theology)
2a: lower case: a person who upholds the principles of individual
liberty especially of thought and action (conduct).
2b capitalized: Libertarian: a member of a political party advocating
libertarian principles
In general, libertarians retain a distinct regard for individual freedom
of thought and action, and a strong opposition to coercive authority,
such as that of the state, meaning the common people as the world
state means polity which further means an organized political
community, living under a government.

Free will is the putative ability of agents, (actors of action) to make
choices free from constraints. 

There is a wide range of libertarians that is true.  Left-libertarianism
and right libertarianism.  And also includes various degress of
anarchism, such as minarchism, libertarian socialists, and anarcho-
capitalist views (which are closer to my own views than any of the
others) as I said, I am a neophyte socialized capitalist. 

I definitely believe in self-reliance and have advocated such on these
forums as well several other websites.  But for me that does not mean
self-absorpstion to the degree where other people’s welfare is at stake. 

Now because libertarianism gets involved with determinism, we could
get into the metaphysical constraints of determinism but I think that
would be carrying this forum interaction far afield.  But of course if you
insist I would be happy to accommodate.

Your declaration that I hate freedom or people is absurd.  I do question
unconstrained freedom of those who choose to live within the confines
of a society that has ethical rules, meaning rules of conduct and rules
of behavior (the behavior of agents of action).  Do I know human
nature?  Or do I think I can control human nature are two more
absurdities put in an interrogative form (uh, questions, but really are
rhetorical questions).  It is implied by the form of your statement that
you have already judged my position.  I’m genuinely glad you feel you
“serve” your fellow Man and that you state you run a business where
you do not charge excessive amounts for the products/services you
sell.  That strikes me as too altruistic for a pure libertarian.  Perhaps
you are a hybrid of some sort?  Or just a realist enough to know that if
you want to survive to the degree that you do, you are compelled to fit
your business practice to the public you serve in order to make the kind
of profit that you do.  I do not criticize you for wanting to make a
profit.  I may have socialist leanings, I am a developing socialized
capitalist and wholly support free enterprise endeavors.

You seem to have a narrow view of what is self-absorption.  I am not
confusing self-reliance with government.  But you have not said much
about either of those two ideas so I have no idea what you are talking
about.

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 27, 2010 at 11:02 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous,
So you’re saying you’re a woman? Really? Wow. Excuse me a second (.....). There, I’m better now. I’m sorry, I thought you were a fat, angry white man pretending to be a woman while sitting in a basement eating Cheetohs. My mistake.

Report this
Fat Freddy's avatar

By Fat Freddy, August 27, 2010 at 4:56 am Link to this comment

Well everybody who has a brain knows the KISS theory and the Golden
Rule.  Can you put them in application as simply declaring them is
useless rhetoric.

Well, that’s a great comeback. The desire for freedom is self-absorption, huh? Why do you hate freedom? Why must you force your beliefs on others? Do you really hate people that much, or do you really think you know, and can control human nature?

I choose to serve my fellow Man, by operating a business which offers a quality product/service, at a reasonable price. I must balance the needs of my workers with the needs of my clients, while competing with other companies, in order to make a profit, to pay my bills, and reasonably expand my business. If that’s self-absorption, I must have the wrong definition. Perhaps you are confusing it with reliance on government.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, August 27, 2010 at 1:53 am Link to this comment

“- - - … but the GOP has never promoted
overpopulation, massive pollution, illegal
immigrations, or breeding dumb people. Judy
Weismonger PhD”

O.K.
Accurately, factually viewed, what are “they”
currently engaged in, or rather, what are they
engaging the world in ?

And why has comrade Obama elevated his attack on
Arizona to the UN ? Constitutional lawyers have
clearly explained that the “US Government” is
required to assist individual states to
protect their borders from violations by hordes
of illegal immigrants.

U.S. rulers waste billions on places like Kosovo,
and demand its recognition as a sovereign “state”
while beating up on its own constituency ?

Report this

By truedigger3, August 26, 2010 at 11:44 pm Link to this comment

JudyWeismongerPhD,

You got a PhD in what? I assume in Nonsense and Bullshit.
The super-rich pay an average about 4% of their income in taxes because most of their income is an investment income which has a very low tax rate and lot of loopholes. The working people pays about 28% of their income in taxes because most of their income is from wages which has a very high tax rate and no loopholes.
Now they are talking about a National Sales Tax, which is very regressive tax that will hit the poor and middle class the hardest.

Report this

By truedigger3, August 26, 2010 at 11:24 pm Link to this comment

Re:By Leefeller, August 27 at 1:27 am

Lefeller,

I am extremely surprised. You write seriously and you make a lot of sense. Are you having a fever or got hit by lightening??!!
I completely agree with you.

Report this

By Amon Drool, August 26, 2010 at 11:05 pm Link to this comment

geez…i guess it is true.  someone once told me that the Phd. Josef Mengele sired a daughter in 70’s

Report this

By JudyWeismongerPhD, August 26, 2010 at 10:39 pm Link to this comment

Tesla says: We need to evolve past capitalism quickly.

As is so obvious by the uneducated, mindless, dreamy Marxists…Tesla does not state what we should evolve to?

Tesla…wanna give up a hint as to what we should evolve to? There are only a couple of answers, and about 100% of the answers involve a Marxist utopian neoreligious magical world….which always ends up with “state slavery.”

Tesla…I have a little experiment for you. Why don’t you get someone to take every single thing away from you including your pay check…and then give you back a few things at a time…and just enough money to live on a subsistance diet. This will be a world without capitalism…you so aspire to.

Then after about three months of this “egalitarian” socialist workers of the world utopia…get back to us and see how much you liked it.

Gee…no choice in videos (state control of all that you see, read, and play with)...no freedom of speech (state control of course)...state control of where and how you work…and state control of your income.

Oh! You make $75,000 a year, but the god-state gets to take $60,000 of it and give it to people who don’t work and who didn’t earn it? Oh well….you are such a good little state socialist that I’m sure you won’t mind it.

I’ve seen fools like you before…and usually you twits live in your mother’s basement and attend some Left Wing university…and hate everyone who has more money than you. Then…you get a degree, get a job, make some money, and you are the first to scream and whine about paying more than 50% of your income in all kinds of taxes and fees.

So enjoy living off mommy and daddy while you can….it will end.

Report this

By JudyWeismongerPhD, August 26, 2010 at 10:24 pm Link to this comment

And those who are jealous of those with PhDs…wish they could live on welfare…and not have to learn anything.

You are a mindless insect and a parasite and should be sterilized so that your inferior genetics cannot further pollute this world.

What kind of mindless, guilt-driven religious/socialist drivel is it…to actually engage in “dysgenics” (paying those with low IQs and lacking self-sustaining life skills) to breed.

What should have been done as far back as LBJ Great Society (NOT)...is pay people who can’t take care of themselves…to NOT Breed like mindless barn animals.

It has become increasingly clear however, that those who engaged in paid dysgenics…breeding low IQed, uneducated, drug addicted poor people…did so to increase the number of government, welfare dependent voters…who all turned out to be Democrats.

It is really time for American culture to “grow up” and stop expecting to be given everything without working for it…and worse, paying such people to breed and breed, and breed.

The poor are not saints…poverty is not enobling, and having a low IQ does empower people to do anything, including being able to take care of themselves.

And just “why” the Democrats would engage in paying low-IQed people to increase in population…is a study in pathology and self-victimization. In the future, when people finaly grow up and become honest about human motives…this kind of bizarre, self destructive psychology will be studied with honesty…and corrections made…if its not too late.

Democrats will be the first to claim they are pro-Abortion, and population control…and then like the slimey hipocrites they are…pay such parasites to breed and breed, thus contributing to over population and massive pollution. Democrats are not intelligent…they are far too emotional and silly.

As if paying these low-IQ parasites to breed…then the dummy Dems…encourage massive illegal immigration into the US…to assault this country some more.

Democrats are not just suicidal, they are homocidal and have done nothing to save this country…I am not a fan of the GOP either…but the GOP has never promoted overpopulation, massive pollution, illegal immigrations, or breeding dumb people.

Judy Weismonger PhD

Report this

By ofersince72, August 26, 2010 at 10:05 pm Link to this comment

Get this….. it has a PH.D….........

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, August 26, 2010 at 9:27 pm Link to this comment

Nothing has changed since the beginning of time, except whining on the web!  Differences between Democrats and Republicans are superficial, sort of like the difference between a Chevy and a Ford. Two parties who create contrived differences for show and effect. 

As George Carlin stated, why vote, they do what they want anyway!..... I would only add under direction!

Report this

By JudyWeismongerPhD, August 26, 2010 at 9:24 pm Link to this comment

These are the facts:

Big government does not work. The US would be better served by “state governments” having to live within their own budgets. If they go broke….then no one is to blame but themselves. And in under no circumstance…should state bankruptcy be rewarded by bailouts and the theft of tax monies from other states.

When rewards, punishments, freedom, and initiatives are taken away from human beings….they become slobs and parasites. More than half of the US population do not pay taxes…and are even given a $6000 “tax refund” at the end of the year. This is theft of other people’s hard earned money by government thugs.

Unearned tax refunds, welfare programs, and other special project funding by the US Govt…is nothing more than bribery and payoffs to continue voting for the Democrat parasites.

Welfare does not work. Welfare increases poverty.

Paying poor, dumb, crack-addicted women to breed more children on welfare…does not work. Breeding by unmarried women creates more welfare parasites and is a “cottage industry” in the US among those who don’t want to work.

Socialism, i.e. theft, and redistribution of other people’s hard earned money and giving it to the “poor” does not work.

Relgion does not work. Religion of all kinds is a belief in magic whereby either an individual or a “collective” believes it can “get something for nothing” and not work for it.

Once a person “believes” in supernaturalism and religion…then they can be trained to believe in anything, regardless of how stupid or irrational it is.

Faith…demands that you stop thinking, ignore cause and effect, learn nothing, and become numb to reality and science.

Socialism is a religion…whereby the state is god, and the Democrats are the New Priests of Enlightenment…and you had better obey them or the state-god will punish.

Democrats live in a bizarre, arrogant, narcisscistic and utopian neo-religious world that has nothing to do with reality, or accurate human psychology, or genetics…

Democrats are wrongly influenced by the worst of Marxian pseudo-psychology and junk science, that says that all human beings can be “trained” to quack like a duck on command…and obey the state…because its “good for them”...and worse, because Democrats know more than you. Democrats think you are stupid. And, maybe you are.

Democrats are idiots…and the GOP are mindless fools who don’t have the testicals to confront such bad psychology and are far too busy being “good ladies and gentlemen” while the Marxists and Hussein Obama’s thugs kill this nation and create an even greater dangerous world.

Impeach them all…..

Report this

By Texas Aggie, August 26, 2010 at 9:21 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

For more on why Geithner and Summers have to go yesterday or the day before,
see the following article.  It just adds more evidence that these two are completely
in the pockets of the banksters and don’t have any regard or concern whatsoever
for the people who have been victimized.

http://www.alternet.org/story/147955/

I am somewhat conflicted as to whether it is better to continue the slow bleeding
that our country is now going through by electing more Democrats or to get it
over with quickly by electing Republicans.  It’s sort of like Alcoholics Anonymous. 
You can’t begin to turn things around til you hit the very bottom.  Once the US is
at the level of the third world, maybe then people will try to get things back on
track.  Who knows?

Report this

By DHFabian, August 26, 2010 at 9:01 pm Link to this comment

Eh. “Led to a stunning victory” in large part because the poor turned out in droves to vote for Obama, hoping he would extend a lifeline until there were finally enough jobs. What we got was another round of “trickle down economics,” even though the well ran dry; nothing is trickling down, and in fact, we are seeing more trickle up as the scraps of remaining aid programs are shredded. I don’t know if Obama will protect Social Security retirement and disability. It took a Democrat to wipe welfare aid, and it will surely take another Democrat to wipe out Social Security.

For whom should the poor vote?  Re-elect Obama, which might help our more fortunate citizens?  No point to it. Regardless of the purest idealism, a Third Party candidate has no chance of winning under current conditions. Our political system is owned by the two parties, which have essentially the same agenda. 

The pragmatic Obama.  That is correct, and it is this pragmatism that makes it expedient to disregard the poor while giving lip service to the more fortunate. The masses of poor people who voted in the last election see no point in bothering with the next one.

Report this
Tesla's avatar

By Tesla, August 26, 2010 at 8:14 pm Link to this comment

Please everyone, vote strictly republic party line so
this rotting government can finally collapse. The dims
are only bleeding us more slowly and far less honestly
than the fascist republic party ever did.

Then the wProletariat will be free to eliminate Bourgeoisie who eliminated the petit-bourgeoisie.

We need to evolve beyond capitalism quickly.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, August 26, 2010 at 7:55 pm Link to this comment

“Die Hard” Wannabee:
What I understand is that you understand nothing, and clog threads here repeating the crap you get from Fox Noise.  Like all good ditto heads you see a problem YOUR HEROES created, that President Obama is stuck with, and then claim he caused it.

The Big Lie lives!  Just ask a tea-bagger to explain current affairs. 

You like made-up parables? Here’s one:
A Republican and a Democrat came upon a tent city of homeless people.
The Democrat said: “We have to do something! Look at all the homeless unemployed people! And many are sick too!”
The Republican said: “Wow! Look at all those people we were able to get off the welfare roles!  And THANK GOD we were able to stop socialized medicine or we’d have to PAY to treat the sick ones!”

Report this

By call me roy, August 26, 2010 at 7:45 pm Link to this comment

A Republican and a Democrat were walking down the street when they came to a homeless person. The Republican gave the homeless person his business card and told him to come to his business for a job. He then took twenty dollars out of his pocket and gave it to the homeless person.
The Democrat was very impressed, and when they came to another homeless person, he decided to help. He walked over to the homeless person and gave him directions to the welfare office. He then reached into the Republican’s pocket and got out twenty dollars. He kept $15 for administrative fees and gave the homeless person five. Now you understand the difference between Republicans & Democrats.

Tax Cuts – As Explained By A Democrat
If you don’t understand the Democrats’ version of tax cuts (and you are not alone), maybe this will help explain it:
50,000 people go to a baseball game, but the game was rained out. A refund was then due. The team was about to mail refunds when the Congressional Democrats stopped them and suggested that they send out refund amounts based on the Democrat National Committee’s interpretation of fairness. After all, if the refunds were made based on the price each person paid for the tickets, most of the money would go to the ticket holders of the most expensive tickets. That would be unfair and unconscionable.
People in the $10 seats will get back $15, because they have less money to spend. Call it an “Earned Income Ticket Credit.” Persons “earn” it by demonstrating few skills and poor work habits, thus keeping them at entry-level wages.
People in the $25 seats will get back $25, because that’s only fair.
People in the $50 seats will get back $1, because they already make a lot of money and don’t need a refund. After all, if they can afford a $50 ticket, then they must not be paying enough taxes.
People in the $75 luxury seats will have to pay another $50, because they have way too much to spend.
The people driving (or walking) by the stadium who couldn’t afford to watch the game will get $10 each, even though they didn’t pay anything in, because they need the most help (sometimes known as Affirmative Action!).
Now do you understand?

Report this

By call me roy, August 26, 2010 at 7:37 pm Link to this comment

What’s Barry Hussein going to do about California (it’s going to file bankrupsy soon.
He is going to do: squat.
California to become America’s first failed state?
Their unemployment is at 12 percent, and government staff workers are being paid with IOUs. None other than Professor Kevin Starr, University of Southern California, State Librarian Emeritus, one of California’s greatest historians, pronounced that “We are on the verge of becoming a failed state because we can’t agree on anything.” The California Senate has been in Democratic hands since 1970, and likewise, the Assembly — The reason California may be our first failed state is because the Democratic recipe for success in California is the same as in every other liberal state — more spending —– particularly on social programs and public employee sector benefits. Spending is the public policy that gets Democrats re-elected. (Their state budget went from $56 billion in 1998 to an eye popping $131 billion in 2009.) What nobody on the left is willing to admit is that blue states are in meltdown. Michigan, New York, New Jersey, Illinois (Obamaland), Pennsylvania, Oregon and, of course, California, are in debtors prison. High levels of taxation, a love affair with regulations — the more the merrier — and the unremitting expansion of public sector employment have made public sector unions a political powerhouse. It’s hard to imagine that the debates in the primary elections will not focus on job creation in the private sector, and stemming the tide of businesses and high-income residents fleeing the state. So will California’s elections move them right of center as we saw with Europe’s large social democracies, or will their fascination for Obama-like left-leaning economic policies remain intact — no jobs, increased spending and bigger government. Lastly, Los Angeles voted to Arizona boycott over immigration law. Who cares? Many states are now looking at passing the same law. LA and San Francisco have just hurt there on own economy’s which according to all the top economists won’t last long anyway. This is bad news, who wants to be like California Not Arizona. Many experts agree that after the November elections the Democrats will lose the Congress and Obama’s rating will drop 20% to the lowest ever recorded for any US President.

Report this

By call me roy, August 26, 2010 at 7:34 pm Link to this comment

Barry Hussein’s Economic Policy?

Thirty-four states already cut higher education aid and twenty-five states already reduced grade school aid. Twenty-Seven states have reduced health care benefits for low-income people. Twenty-six states have hiring freezes. Twenty-two states have lowered employee’‘s wages. Thirteen states have announced layoffs. Federal aid to the states has already being reduced. The worst is yet to come. 2010 will bring the loss of many jobs in public sector as well as the private sector. Experts say any chance of a turn around will not happen now. The US is broke and has the worst debt in the world.
The bankruptcies should happen in 2010 and many of the other problems have already begun. In 2010, 37 Governors face re-election and 46 states will chose their legislatures. The reality is to keep the states spending budgets up; taxes will have to be increased. When you have a lot of people out of work and a lot of failed businesses this means big tax hikes and raising taxes for those able to survive in a down economy is just going to make it harder for them to make it in the long run. Of course out of work people are short term oriented and can care less about down the road.
Things look like the politicians are going to try and run with upside down budgets but they will run out of money and then have to make some hard choices when they are up against the wall. In a state with high unemployment, who is going to vote for a politician who says we need to pull our belts in and run with a balanced budget and a sound economic policy and this will mean spending cuts and job cuts. Now the politician who says well we need to make jobs, extend unemployment benefits, send the kids to school and college, keep the medical aid coming, and keep the spending up is going to get elected. Then when the spenders get elected what are they going to do?
A study, conducted by the Pew Center on the States, found that California, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island and Wisconsin are among the most bankrupt states in the country. The only ones not run top-to-bottom by Democrats were Arizona, Florida and Nevada…all of which have huge illegal immigration problems.

Report this

By Morpheus, August 26, 2010 at 7:30 pm Link to this comment

Wake up People!  “SAVE YOURSELVES”
         
http://www.DeathByTechnology.us
http://SaveTheWorldNow.osixs.org 

Join the Revolution!

IF you really think you know what’s wrong with the world, then why don’t you do something about it?

Report this

By call me roy, August 26, 2010 at 7:29 pm Link to this comment

President Omama says he is a Christian?
The President covered up a white cross and a symbol for the name of Jesus at a Georgetown University speech.
President Obama did not publicly celebrate the National Day of Prayer at the White House yet
celebrated Gay and Lesbian Pride Month as well as Islamic religious observations at the White House.
For the first time in 43 years, the Obama Administration banned a military flyover at a “God and
Country Rally” in Nampa, Idaho. On a White House Christmas tree, the President asked that no religious
ornaments be sent it, yet they displayed an ornament with the image of the brutal dictator, Mao Zedong,
a leader who oversaw the deaths of over 50,000,000 million of his own people. The President issued strong
support for a Senate Health Care Bill which included public monies to fund abortions. In the midst of the worst
economic downturn in decades, Team Obama spent $150, 000,000 on the Presidential Inauguration ignoring
the needs of the poor and struggling across the country.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 26, 2010 at 3:45 pm Link to this comment

That is much better Peetawonkus, almost… you still reduce yourself
to namecalling, which is a completely defensive act from a feeling
of inadequacy to deal mano-a-mano, meaning on an equal basis, in
fear of whoever is perceived to be on the high ground. I’d much
rather have a ‘civil’ discussion than the ugly food fights that get
going sometimes under the heat of the moment. NFR-No forgiveness
required. There will be things I say that it is almost guaranteed you
will not like. I often show common fallacies that hallmark
Truthdippers often ignorantly fall into, like uncovered manholes.

If you would review “our” posts you would see that it was you who
started the name-calling.  Giving a list of those names from your post
at Aug. 26 at 3:04 pm:  You called me a time waster, acting like a
Doberman (a vicious throat-ripping dog), snotty, victimizer, a bully, a
mind fed on angry donuts and romance novels, an attacker of turning
others into straw men and burning them down, lashing out, desperate
need to feel superior, delusional.  Hmmm.  You did compliment my
“razor keen mind.”  My sin in your eyes was to ask you questions, and I
had to withstand that kind of a verbal assault.  Many men on these
forums have tried the same kind of crap, and have never ever in the
years I have been a Truthdigger ever got away with it. 

So well…first fallacy:  “hundreds of people on TruthDig use these so-
called poorly defined collective nouns on a daily basis.”
 

I dare say, they take poops on a daily basis too but that doesn’t mean
using poorly defined collective nouns is a good idea or even rational
when special cases are involved.  But because it is possible all of the
people could be wrong some of the time (as per Abraham Lincoln), it is
appealing to the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization (the famous
argumentum ad populum, the fallacious appeal to a majority) that your
point is true solely because many people believe it to be true) as a
defense. It does matter in what context collective nouns are used. To
recap: you said Obama was a moderate Republican masquerading as a
Liberal Democrat. That was the only sentence I thought needed
elucidation of the words Republican and Democrat.  The other uses in
your post seemed correct. Fallacy #2, walk the walk is proverbial and
obviously ambiguously has an idiosyncratic meaning for you regarding
Obama’s abilities, since it could mean something different for each
person who says it.  I was trying to understand what you were saying,
so I could assess it for coherence with the truth, whatever that could
mean, your adage was not clear in its reference.  But if you are saying
anything substantial then you ought to easily be able to explain it
without “getting hot under the collar” (meaning insulted for being
questioned).

Now it is a fact that Obama has indeed got much done so far but it is
in some people’s habit of mind to be hypercritical of anything Obama
does because of a personal agenda to do so, either out of a subliminal
racism or other prejudicial bias, or pretense of knowing what is the
reality. It is called demagoguery.

He has done a lot of important things already in spite of being accused
by the media of “not making a connection with the population.”  I think
that is sheer fabrication and plenty of people not only like him but will
thank their lucky stars he pushed through a health care bill as skimpy
as it was, it was never done before. It makes a good headline. Then, he
and his crew saved the financial ass of this country as horrible as it was
and still is. America did not tank which it was headed for from the
previous Republican administrations beginning with Ronald Reagan’s
policies up through George W. Bush’s.

Do we wonder at Obama’s tepid leadership, one that had to wade
through the hottest of financial shit swamp of a disaster ever had since
the big Depression in 1930, like 80 years ago?

Report this

By ofersince72, August 26, 2010 at 3:00 pm Link to this comment

Our economic structure and financial system is one big
ponzi scheme. It gets enabling from Capitol Hill, so until
we address this,  we can’t begin to straighten out the
financial system.
  I believe as soon as we get leaders that puts priorities
and an agenda in place,  the financial mess wil straighten
out, even if there are some rich big losers.

Report this

By Amon Drool, August 26, 2010 at 1:54 pm Link to this comment

paulo: “The most important aspect of freeing up the economic system is to take away the government’s monopoly on the creation of ‘money.’ “

huh? i’ve been wrestling with the idea of money/money creation for about a year and a half now and from what i can gather, the government only creates about 5% of the money supply.  when it needs money, it sells treasuries to wealth holders and to banks.  the banks actually don’t have this money, but they can go to the fed discount window and borrow at a .5% interest rate.  they can then turn around and buy treasuries at 2.5% with their borrowed money.  why this scam is allowed to go on is beyond me.  (well, with the best and the brightest—summers and geithner—pulling obama’s strings, maybe i can)  i’m probably in agreement with u about fractional reserve banking being essentially a ponzi scheme, but i just don’t see that the government has a monopoly on money creation.  private banks create most of our money supply out of thin air and have become unproductive rent-seeking vampire squids.  tell me what i’m not seeing clearly.

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 26, 2010 at 1:02 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous
Easy there. You’re going to break a blood vessel and then what would happen to that keen, analytical mind?

You clearly feel the need to lash out, threaten and attempt to bully. That’s understandable and I forgive you. Most people who are insecure about their intellect often insult and denigrate the intelligence of anyone who might even remotely disagree with them. This, too, is the hallmark of the TruthDig thug, who takes the attitude “There shall be no opinion but mine own.”

But we can work through that. Let’s just take the very first part of your previous post: “The problem is as I see it using collective nouns such as Democrat or Republican without defining what they are.” Your words. Let’s just break that down. I dare say hundreds of people on TruthDig use these so-called poorly defined collective nouns on a daily basis. Do you take your hickory switch to each and every one of them for their lack of definition? You don’t, do you? But then there are the millions of people who use Democrat or Republican as terms in discussion every day as well. And what’s funny is, most of us understand these terms relatively well, at least enough to use them in everyday conversation and while stating a brief opinion on a political blog. It’s only you, apparently, that need further clarification. Let me put it this way for you. It’s as if someone had a problem with the words “herd” or “colony” and demanded everyone define them before use. That might be fine if you didn’t live anywhere near cows or bees. But if you do, that’s simply an obnoxious person wasting everyone’s time trying to show how clever they are. Why should I, or anyone, have to redefine these terms simply because you demand it? Who, if I might ask, died and made you the Madonna of belligerent interrogation?

So, since you’re the one having the problem with the “collective nouns” Republican and Democrat, why don’t you give us the benefit of that linguistic insight and tell us how you see the terms. That might help us all get on the same page. I’m sure the other posters on TruthDig would be as overjoyed as me to hear how wrong they’ve been.

Report this

By ofersince72, August 26, 2010 at 12:51 pm Link to this comment

It is called the Power of the Veto…...


and if Congress doesn’t send be the budget requests that
I ask for,  then we will be operating the government
under emergency funding until.

And in the meantime,  I am going to be using the
B U L L Y   P U L P I T….....of the presidency
to get the American Public behind my budget, and it is
going to be so sweet, that both libertarians AND
progressives will support me my and my agenda.
THATS THE FUCK HOW YOU DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this

By ofersince72, August 26, 2010 at 12:26 pm Link to this comment

It must be contagious, they are

  M O S Q U E D E B A T I N G

  in Kentucky now…...oh my god,

  we are all going to grow hair around our lips.

Report this

By garth, August 26, 2010 at 11:33 am Link to this comment

“Barack Obama and the Democrats he led to a stunning victory two years ago ..”

I don’t think it was stunning:  A young black ‘Sydney Poitier in ‘Look Who’s Coming To Dinner’ versus and grumpy-old man, John Mc Cain.

Who’ da guessed that Obama would win?

As a self respecting American, if you were paid to write this crap, would you?

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 26, 2010 at 11:04 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous
No, The problem is, as I see it, is that people like you are time wasters. I think you’re one these faux intellectuals who believe they own the Truth Dig forums and guard them like a Doberman does his bowl. You rip into me in full attack mode and demand that I answer your ridiculous and snotty questions. Should I or any of your potential victims refuse to be bullied into writing an essay for you, then you get to say,“See, see! They can’t take the heat!” Ah, yes, so intimidated by that razor keen mind—fed as it is on angry donuts and romance novels. Like much in your life, it backfires on you, doesn’t it? But you just don’t know how to stop. I’m sorry that your sense of self worth is generated only by attacking others, turning them into straw men and then attempting to burn them down. You were probably bullied by authority figures when young and so picking fights with people is the only way you can relate to them. Sure, it’s easy to lash out at others from behind a desperate need to feel superior but you don’t have to take the easy road. Obviously you fancy yourself as quite the towering intellect. You hang onto that. I would never take away a delusional person’s imaginary friend.

Report this

By garth, August 26, 2010 at 9:52 am Link to this comment

The photo is great.  Look at these two bozos, on fat the other thin, and both on the phone. 

Larry’s ordering lunch and Oh Boy Obama’s phone is disconnected.

A jerk for the Housing Whatever-they-call-it, an admitted Libertarian, said on C-SPAN that he’s amazed how docile Americans are.  The greeks are in the streets.  The French were long ago.  Bolivians drove the Bechtels out.  Yet, we are doclie.

Their investment paid off.  The research was to reveal how can you fool 300 million?  The South, easy.  The Northeast, well a little finesse would be invoved.  The Mid-west, that might be up for grabs. They’ve got a history.  The West: Hit ‘em with illegal immigrants, lower their standard of living (1/4 of Californians have no health insurance), flood the advertising with fear and bravado.

Now, you’ve got it.

One. Two, Three.  What are we fighting for?

Don’t ask me I don’t give a damn.

Next stop, Afghanistan.

AARP this month featured five places where Americans to move to.

I smell it.

My eyes have seen it.

As an old Italian woman said after I ran an errand for her, “AMF!”  She spelled it out, “Adios, mother fucker.”

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 26, 2010 at 9:33 am Link to this comment

Are you trying to wiggle out of answering, Peetawonkus?  As I am
considerably interested in your or anybody else’s answers.  So glad
you found my questions so intimidating as to disarm you.

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 26, 2010 at 8:55 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous
You sure do ask a lot of questions for somebody who isn’t interested in anybody’s answers.

Report this

By Anthony, August 26, 2010 at 8:52 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Why not sack Summers and Geithner for untoward policies that have inflicted such misery on the general public?”

Not likely.
Biden and Boehner have politicized this option to a
standstill.  We shouldn’t be waiting for these guys to chance upon a correct decision.  We should be outside organizing non-violent insurrection.  Otherwise, we’re wasting our breath.

Report this
Paolo's avatar

By Paolo, August 26, 2010 at 8:29 am Link to this comment

It’s interesting being a libertarian on the outside, seeing both Democrats and Republicans fluster and bluster about economic problems they both created, and are unwilling to solve.

The solution to economic stagnation is economic freedom (I know folks on this website often don’t like hearing this, but many do eventually come around).

The most important aspect of freeing up an economic system is to take away the government’s monopoly on the creation of “money.” (Nb—ironic quotes around “money” because what they are creating by the trillions is certainly not “money”, but rapidly-depreciating scraps of paper.)

There is a role for government to play in money, which is simply definition of units of measure by weight of precious metals (for example, a dollar used to be—and should be again—defined as a one-ounce silver coin of 90 percent or higher purity), and prosecution of counterfeiters (those who mint coins of less than legal weight or purity).

What we commonly call the “business cycle” is in fact not a “business cycle” at all—but a government fiat money cycle of boom and bust. 

The result of such a coin standard is a stable money supply, which creates an environment in which economic growth is steady, consistent, and well-reasoned—as opposed to the “boom and bust” cycles created by wildly whipsawing fluctuations in money and credit that can only be created by fiat money.

An important corollary power would be the government’s role in outlawing and prosecuting the specific form of counterfeiting known as Fractional Reserve Banking, in which banks lend out “money” (ironic quotes) that is deposited in a demand deposit. That is, the create new “money” out of thin air, just like their big brothers in the biggest crime organization of all—the Federal Reserve.

Would this change solve all economic problems? Of course not, but it is an essential part of moving to a system of sustained prosperity.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 26, 2010 at 8:26 am Link to this comment

The problem is as I see it using collective nouns such as Democrat or
Republican without defining what they are.  Hence they are simply
empty metaphors.  To say Obama is a moderate Republican has no
meaning.  Saying he does not “walk the walk” gives another undefined
buzz-phrase metaphor.  Just to say he surrounded himself with ex-
Clinton appeasers is not saying anything really (and how do you know
they are that way “by nature”?). 

To be more pertinent in your criticism, you might list the serious
changes you think he has not made?  I submit that any other president
would not have made any further progress with the Congress as it is
composed in this term of office.  Do you think John McCain would have
brought this country to any better place economically?  How about with
respect to the war(s)?  How about Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Bob Barr?  If
you answer any of these names, what do you think they would actually
have been able to do with the same Congress? Not what they would
have liked to have done, but really able to have done?

Report this
Peetawonkus's avatar

By Peetawonkus, August 26, 2010 at 8:12 am Link to this comment

Unlike dry drunks and knuckle draggers who couldn’t finish a sentence (Georgie “Puddin’head” Bush) Obama is smart and articulate. He can speechify with the best of ‘em. He can talk the talk but…the walk isn’t there. Obama is basically, like Bill Clinton, a moderate Republican masquerading as a Liberal Democrat. Instead of taking the advice of Progressives, who got him elected, he surrounded himself with ex-Clinton people who are appeasers and betrayers by nature. The Democratic Party is overwhelmingly stocked with Beltway career politicians too invested in the Corporate Empire to make the serious changes we so desperately need. Is it any wonder that Obama’s tepid leadership has brought us to a place where even with a majority the Democrats can’t get anything done?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 26, 2010 at 7:43 am Link to this comment

While I believe Kropotkin had the right idea, which I think is a vastly
and immeasurably better “social” system than Libertarian self-
obsession, he was romantically utopian and not quite accurate in his
assessment of human nature.  Focus on the word “social.”  Were his
ideas tweaked to reality more, his ideology is for me the best of all
possible worlds that can exist here on earth.  But no one has been
able to pull that one off.  So humanity is stuck with the
thumb-sucking self-absorption of libertarians, and other egotistical
anarchists until the intelligence comes along who can put the right
equation together.

Well everybody who has a brain knows the KISS theory and the Golden
Rule.  Can you put them in application as simply declaring them is
useless rhetoric.

A tax revolt?  Hell yes, let the Bush tax cuts run out!  The argument
that it will handicap economic recovery is a red herring that serves only
the rich who shelters all the wealth they can and do not put it into
public use in any form whatsoever!

Report this

By whole2th, August 26, 2010 at 6:51 am Link to this comment

http://SueTheFed.com  Pass it on.  Is it time for a tax revolt?

Report this

By PeteG2, August 26, 2010 at 6:37 am Link to this comment

Does the favored tax treatment of investment over work distort the market
such that it predisposes our economy to investment bubbles and the recessions
they trigger?

Background: A millionaire family can easily pay a 4% total tax rate on its
investment income and gains. In 2006 Warren Buffett paid 0.2%. A typical
working class family pays 28% of its wages in total taxes
(http://fairsharetaxes.org). I think the favored tax treatment for investment and
the wealth condensation it produces result in the demand for investments
outstripping the supply of worthy investments. Therefore Investment prices rise
to unsustainable levels (Bubble). The vast overtaxed middle class cannot
consume enough to support the investment prices so the Bubble Bursts. The
result is a Recession in which all but the very wealth risk losing their jobs,
homes, and retirement savings. The empiric evidence: The dotcom and housing
bubbles/recessions followed Clinton and then Bush giving investing ever more
favored tax treatment.

Report this
Fat Freddy's avatar

By Fat Freddy, August 26, 2010 at 5:19 am Link to this comment

By Shenonymous,

And here I was sure Libertarians, in any form, only want to protect
their own asses!

Who doesn’t want to protect their own ass? Libertarians want a world free from coercion, whether it be religious, political, or economic. However, we support the prohibition of fraud, trespass, misrepresentation, and robbery.

But that’s too simple of a concept for such a complicated world.

Keep
It
Simple,
Stupid

The Golden Rule is another one of those simple concepts.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, August 26, 2010 at 4:51 am Link to this comment

And here I was sure Libertarians, in any form, only want to protect
their own asses!

Report this
Fat Freddy's avatar

By Fat Freddy, August 26, 2010 at 3:58 am Link to this comment

So, now, now you all think Geithner should go. Wonderful. It’s funny though, no one mentioned what Geithner did before he was Treasury Secretary.

Timmaaaaaaay, was President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRNY). Jaimie Dimon was, and still is, on the Board of FRBNY. Anybody remember Bear Stearns? They were absorbed by JP Morgan, where Jamie Dimon was/is the CEO. But JPM didn’t just absorb Bear, they got to pick and choose which assets they wanted, and which toxic assets went into a zombie company set up by FRBNY called Maiden Lane I.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/maidenlane.html

Can anybody say “conflict of interest”? Can anybody say “crooked bastards”? But hey, we need Elizabeth Warren, she’ll fix everything.

Forget about Elizabeth Warren, we’re far beyond any “help” she could offer. What we need, is William K. Black.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-HTylLzXu8

Listen very carefully to what Mr Black says at about 7:40. He is talking about changes made to FASB (157) (mark-to-market) here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sA_MkJB84VA&feature=related

He is talking about what is referred to by bloggers as “Extend and Pretend”. But hey, Libertarians, like myself, want to protect the rich.

Report this
drbhelthi's avatar

By drbhelthi, August 26, 2010 at 2:28 am Link to this comment

“Obama gained credibility through sacking Gen.
Stanley McChrystal for making untoward remarks. Why
not sack Summers and Geithner for untoward policies
that have inflicted such misery on the general
public?”

“Gained credibility”?
Some of us do not see a change in policy that would
accrue credibility. Swapping out puppetry, as a
means of distraction from U.S. Forces genocide,
accrues credibility?
Not hardly.

Barack Hussein Obama Barry Soweto carries out the
instructions handed down to him precisely, as an
operative of the CIA, since “quitting” is not
allowed. Former CIA operative and assassin, Chip
Tatum, declined to assassinate an American
politician in 1992, sparking his decision to quit
the CIA. The “official” chief of the CIA, William
Colby, explained to him that one can´t just walk
away. He walked away, disappeared a few years later,
until the remains of his body washed up on a
Caribbean beach.

“Mister Obama” cannot replace Summers and Geithner
unless he is told to do so by the NAZI/Zionist
leadership of the CIA.
These derelicts instructed him to appoint
the two puppets, which he obediently did.

He would not want his remains to wash up on a
beach where his wife were vacationing, would he.

Report this

By ofersince72, August 25, 2010 at 11:49 pm Link to this comment

It’s appropiate isn’t it??

T H E   R O T T O N   E G G S

millions and millions of rotton eggs. everywhere rotton
eggs.

Report this

By ofersince72, August 25, 2010 at 9:34 pm Link to this comment

Is Kendrick Meek about ready to become
a Senator?  He will fit right in on the Senate Floor.

He is another one that can run his mouth for ever and
ever and not say a word.

He stands for nothing…...except da bosses.
Oh well, we need a black to replace Obama in the Senate.
Especially one who rode family coat tails to Congress.

Report this

By gerard, August 25, 2010 at 8:53 pm Link to this comment

I think at the time Obama took their advice he thought it would succeed, and probably they at heast hoped so, along with a number of other financial manipulators, based on their pastperiences with “playing” the market. It proved out that they were wrong.

But McChrystal’s case was insubordination—the same thing we now see with what’s-his-name, the Marine General who says setting a date for leaving Afghanistan is encouraging the enemy, or words to that effect. This is a case of influencing military orders over the head of the Commander in Chief and questioning civilian authority over the armed forces.  More than a mistake—a military offense.

It is questionable whether Geitner and Summers deserve to be punished when nobody else knew clearly a better alternative, apparently. About the best that can be done now is to stop taking their advice and putting other opinions into the mix from now on.
Am I wrong?

(One thing that argues against “punishment” in this case is the lack of any semblance of retribution for the many suspiciously-illegal and atrocious Bush/Cheney offenses.)

Report this
RayLan's avatar

By RayLan, August 25, 2010 at 7:11 pm Link to this comment

It’s not about the economy - nobody can fairly blame Obama for that - it’s certainly hasn’t become worse -I do blame Obama for not getting out of the two stupid expensive wars in Muslim countries ASAP.
We will not win those wars - the right with a hardon for beating brown people need to get over it.

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Zuade Kaufman, Publisher   Robert Scheer, Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook