The Many Faces of US Politics...

[omochain]

PS Mr. T before you ask if I know where California is ... I live there ... in the bit where your water comes from... 

[thejuice]

In light of the news today about those crafty Iranians:

Family Guy: Visiting Ground Zero:

Brian: Peter, this is the site of the 9/11 terrorist attacks!

Peter: Oh, so Saddam Hussein did this?

Brian: No.

Peter: The Iraqi army?

Brian: No.

Peter: Some guys from Iraq?

Brian: No.

Peter: That one lady who visited Iraq that one time?

Brian:
NO! Peter, Iraq had nothing to do with this. It was a bunch of Saudi
Arabians, Lebanese, and Egyptians financed by a Saudi Arabian guy living
in Afghanistan and sheltered by Pakistanis.

Peter: So...you're saying we need to invade Iran?

[muppet]

PS Mr. T before you ask if I know where California is ... I live there ... in the bit where your water comes from... 

Is it true Sarah Palin walks on the stuff.

[Eamonnca1]

As a preface ... I am an old dude who thinks that God gave him 2 ears and one mouth for a reason. So I have limited my engagements on the board for good reason. However my addiction to Mr. T's take on US politics and his ability to make even me feel like even I still have a Christian spirit (compared to MR T) have prompted me to post this rant

As we stand at this time the country is almost impossible to govern because of the myopic greed of a few. The social contract between Main street America and the Financial system is broken and the government has been completely usurped by lobbyists.

Once ( When FRD was in charge) we sent our money to Wall Street and they found a way to invest it in businesses that made things like TV's, Washing machines, steel and clothing in the good ole USA.  Now they can make more money by moving the money we send them into arcane synthesized financial instruments (That's credit default swats) that do nothing for anyone other than create a commission for someone living in the Hamptons.  Unfortunately our F'd up tax code gives us little choice but to keep sending our money to these guys who reward Corporate America for off-shoring real blue collar jobs that pay a decent wage. In the stead of these real jobs we are hiring greeters at Walmart and other minimum wage jobs that leave folks reliant on the Government for healthcare coverage. We rejoice when we create another distribution outfit (Walamrt, Target) that makes it easy for China to feed our voracious appetite for cheap goods while we defend ourselves with (tongue in cheek) Low Tariffs, a crazy currency rate and gift them our technology.


Congress and by extension the Executive branch and Judiciary are bought and paid for. The Republicans and the Democrats are both beholden to wealthy donors (corporate, institutional, private and organizational). The only way to clean the mess up is "campaign finance reform" but no one in any branch of government is voting for that. You saw how McCain (once the great campaigner for campaign finance reform) had to do a 180 degree turn  to get his party's Presidential nomination in 2008 and his co-sponsor Russ Feingold failed to get re-elected in Wisconsin. If you do not join the Lobbyists you get licked.


The notion that Government is not a good thing (Reagan got elected on the back of his derogatory use of  "I'm from the Government and I'm here to help") and the consistent mantra coming from the right that all evil emanates from Washington is a foolhardy populist line that does not serve the national interest of the US. We need a citizenry that is bought into making government work.  Putting good people in place who can do a good job and holding them accountable if they do not. Instead we get Tea-party hypocrites who take government subsidies and free healthcare from the government while lecturing the rest of us that we should look after our own healthcare needs.

In a country where so many people can be conned into voting against their economic self-interest so regularly by clever manipulative mavens I am not holding my breath for any decent things to occur any time soon.

And as long as we have the likes of Mr T. espousing the politics of self interest over Henry Ford's notion of "pay them enough so that they can buy more of my shit" we are in a seriously myopic economic downward cycle that will eventually make Mr. T a less wealthy person than he should be.

Rant over

Quality!

[Tyrones own]

Why anyone would hang on the views of any particular single economist is beyond me anyway. A hard science it is not!

I agree but lord knows he's quoted enough around here ...your good self included

[Tyrones own]

As a preface ... I am an old dude who thinks that God gave him 2 ears and one mouth for a reason. So I have limited my engagements on the board for good reason. However my addiction to Mr. T's take on US politics and his ability to make even me feel like even I still have a Christian spirit (compared to MR T) have prompted me to post this rant

As we stand at this time the country is almost impossible to govern because of the myopic greed of a few. The social contract between Main street America and the Financial system is broken and the government has been completely usurped by lobbyists.

Once ( When FRD was in charge) we sent our money to Wall Street and they found a way to invest it in businesses that made things like TV's, Washing machines, steel and clothing in the good ole USA.  Now they can make more money by moving the money we send them into arcane synthesized financial instruments (That's credit default swats) that do nothing for anyone other than create a commission for someone living in the Hamptons.  Unfortunately our F'd up tax code gives us little choice but to keep sending our money to these guys who reward Corporate America for off-shoring real blue collar jobs that pay a decent wage. In the stead of these real jobs we are hiring greeters at Walmart and other minimum wage jobs that leave folks reliant on the Government for healthcare coverage. We rejoice when we create another distribution outfit (Walamrt, Target) that makes it easy for China to feed our voracious appetite for cheap goods while we defend ourselves with (tongue in cheek) Low Tariffs, a crazy currency rate and gift them our technology.


Congress and by extension the Executive branch and Judiciary are bought and paid for. The Republicans and the Democrats are both beholden to wealthy donors (corporate, institutional, private and organizational). The only way to clean the mess up is "campaign finance reform" but no one in any branch of government is voting for that. You saw how McCain (once the great campaigner for campaign finance reform) had to do a 180 degree turn  to get his party's Presidential nomination in 2008 and his co-sponsor Russ Feingold failed to get re-elected in Wisconsin. If you do not join the Lobbyists you get licked.


The notion that Government is not a good thing (Reagan got elected on the back of his derogatory use of  "I'm from the Government and I'm here to help") and the consistent mantra coming from the right that all evil emanates from Washington is a foolhardy populist line that does not serve the national interest of the US. We need a citizenry that is bought into making government work.  Putting good people in place who can do a good job and holding them accountable if they do not. Instead we get Tea-party hypocrites who take government subsidies and free healthcare from the government while lecturing the rest of us that we should look after our own healthcare needs.

In a country where so many people can be conned into voting against their economic self-interest so regularly by clever manipulative mavens I am not holding my breath for any decent things to occur any time soon.

And as long as we have the likes of Mr T. espousing the politics of self interest over Henry Ford's notion of "pay them enough so that they can buy more of my shit" we are in a seriously myopic economic downward cycle that will eventually make Mr. T a less wealthy person than he should be.

Rant over

I agree with quite a lot of that...other parts, not so much 
Whats your take on the con job that was the '08 election then
and how's the economic situation up on the mountain?

[Tyrones own]

PS Mr. T before you ask if I know where California is ... I live there ... in the bit where your water comes from... 

Yes but you haven't brought up the Governor of TEXAS yet 

[Tyrones own]

PS Mr. T before you ask if I know where California is ... I live there ... in the bit where your water comes from... 

Is it true Sarah Palin walks on the stuff.

Not sure she ever tried...it was widely believed here however
that Barrack could, though that turned out to be an urban myth 

[J70]

Why anyone would hang on the views of any particular single economist is beyond me anyway. A hard science it is not!

I agree but lord knows he's quoted enough around here ...your good self included

I don't recall ever quoting Krugman. But perhaps I'm mistaken. Go ahead.... prove it.

[Tyrones own]

Why anyone would hang on the views of any particular single economist is beyond me anyway. A hard science it is not!

I agree but lord knows he's quoted enough around here ...your good self included

I don't recall ever quoting Krugman. But perhaps I'm mistaken. Go ahead.... prove it.

What...go back over 4500 posts just to prove you wrong, nice try though!

Wasn't Krugman an adviser to Enron also or am I mistaken 

[J70]

Why anyone would hang on the views of any particular single economist is beyond me anyway. A hard science it is not!

I agree but lord knows he's quoted enough around here ...your good self included

I don't recall ever quoting Krugman. But perhaps I'm mistaken. Go ahead.... prove it.

What...go back over 4500 posts just to prove you wrong, nice try though!

Wasn't Krugman an adviser to Enron also or am I mistaken 

Sorry, but I've never, from what I recall, quoted Krugman. If you're going to claim otherwise, then either back it up or shut the f**k up.

I have no idea if Krugman advised Enron.

[Tyrones own]

Jaysus such a temper...finding it harder and harder to swallow this
epic failure of a president or is it that your demands aren't being met
at Zuccotti park 

[Tyrones own]

Heritage;

When President Barack Obama began his Midwest "jobs tour" in August, he set out to campaign for the passage of a yet-to-be-released plan to turn around the country's stagnant economy. But after the details of that plan emerged–more stimulus spending and higher taxes–and when the Democrat-controlled Senate put the measure up for a vote this week, the President's plan was defeated. Even members of the President's own party opposed more taxing and spending as a way of pulling America out of its unemployment ditch. Take Senator Jim Webb (D-VA), for example. The Hill reports that he opposes raising taxes on ordinary income during a time of recession and that the federal government should encourage people to invest in the economy instead of raising their income taxes. In Webb's own words: I strongly believe that the way to bring good jobs back is to improve our economy in the private sector, and that means more capital investment. Winston Churchill once said something to the effect that you can't tax your way out of an economic downturn any more than you can pick up a bucket if you're standing in it. Others from the left, too, staked out opposition to the bill. Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) took issue with the new spending the President proposed. "The bottom line here is that I don't believe the potential in this act for creating jobs justifies adding another $500 billion to our almost $15 trillion national debt." There's good reason to stand against the President's plan. For one thing, it is hundreds of billions of dollars in new spending on more of the same "stimulus" that has left America with virtually zero job growth and continued economic stagnation. And it's paid for with a massive tax increase on job creators–the very people who would be investing their money to expand businesses and put more Americans back to work. The President proposed permanently raising taxes by $1.5 trillion over 10 years, with most of the burden falling on families and businesses earning more than $250,000 per year, all in the name of "fairness." In a new paper, Heritage's Curtis Dubay explains that the supposed "fairness" of the new rule is anything but fair: To President Obama, it is 'fair' to raise taxes on families and businesses earning more than $250,000 a year by raising their income tax rates and limiting their deductions. That must also mean he believes that they currently pay too little in taxes. Yet the data show the highest-earning families and businesses already pay the lion's share of the federal income tax burden. According to the IRS, the top 1 percent of income earners–those earning more than $380,000 in 2008–paid more than 38 percent of all federal income taxes while earning 20 percent of all income. The top 10 percent ($114,000 and above) earned 45 percent of income and paid 70 percent of all taxes. At the same time, the bottom 50 percent of income earners–those earning less than $33,000–earned 13 percent of all income and paid less than 3 percent of federal income taxes. Then there was Majority Leader Harry Reid's (D-NV) plan to impose a millionaire tax–a 5.6 percent surtax on incomes of married filers earning over $1 million starting on January 1, 2013, pushing the average top U.S. income rate to 55 percent, higher than all but two of the 30 most economically developed countries in the world. Dubay explains how the tax would negatively impact job creation: Taxpayers earning more than $1 million a year are investors and businesses that are directly responsible for creating jobs. Investors provide the capital to existing businesses and startups so they can expand and add new workers. Raising their taxes would deprive them of resources they could invest in promising businesses that are looking to add employees. Raising their tax rate would deter them from taking the risk to invest. It's this philosophy of soaking the rich to pay for more wasteful government spending that has ginned up opposition to the President's jobs plan. The White House, though, isn't getting the message, and it's totally glazing over the bipartisan opposition. White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer laid the blame squarely on Republicans and wrote, "We can't take 'no' for an answer." The President, too, lashed out at the GOP, painting them as a minority that "got together as a group and blocked this jobs bill from passing the Senate." The New York Times got in on the act, too, lambasting the right for its opposition, without acknowledging opposition on the left. Instead of playing the blame game, the President should take a step back and understand why Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle oppose his plan. Raising taxes to pay for stimulus spending that has proven to be a failure simply will not get the economy back on track.

[J70]

Jaysus such a temper...finding it harder and harder to swallow this
epic failure of a president or is it that your demands aren't being met
at Zuccotti park 

Nothing to do with Obama or the Wall St protests or any other political issue.  If I quoted Krugman, I'd say so and defend why and where I did so. I'm certainly not going to be basically called a liar by someone like you.

[Eamonnca1]

Wasn't Krugman an adviser to Enron also or am I mistaken 

Just so we're clear, do you have a problem with anyone associated with Enron?