Mitt Romney believes that his best line of attack is making the claim that he has not spent a moment as a D.C. politician while his two main opponents, Newt ...
No two ways about it, Rick Santorum had a good night. Not only did he sweep Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri but he also got off the best line of the ...
Few would argue the fact that Citizens United has been a major player in the Republican primary...and many if not most would concede that none of it has been healthy ...
As if you needed another reason to not vote Romney.
Celebrity business magnate Donald Trump endorsed Mitt Romney for president Thursday, telling reporters he will not mount an independent campaign if ...
In a perfect world, the Republican contest to find a nominee to face Barack Obama would go on forever...or at least until August. You cannot attach a number to the ...
I suspect there are a ton of conservatives secretly agreeing with Begala and while it's too early in the game for Dems to get cocky, it's difficult to not smile ...
Quotes don't get much better than this one by Bob Dole.
"Why do people take such an instant dislike to me?" asked a perplexed Gingrich, to whom Dole bluntly ...
After the beating Gingrich took last night, it's hard to imagine under what scenario he can make a comeback. Florida is going to Romney and for Gingrich to regain the ...
There's a lot out there on the President's SOTU, so I'll keep my thoughts short and sweet.
The speech did what it had to do which was target liberals and independents ...
The highlights from last night's debate.
- Newt Gingrich can't wait to become president so he can revisit the early 60s and overthrow Castro in Cuba. War, baby, war.
- Santorum, who ...
It appears that the South Carolina verdict is forcing Romney to start taking Gingrich seriously.
“We’re not choosing a talk show host, we’re choosing a leader,” Romney said, saying that their ...
Mike Huckabee offers advice to Mitt Romney concerning his unreleased tax returns.
Let him [Romney] make this challenge: "I'll release my tax returns when Barack Obama releases his college transcripts and ...
Via Political Humor...
"Mitt Romney is coming under fire because even though he is a multimillionaire, he only paid 15 percent in taxes. That's not a tax, that's barely a tip." ...
Good line.
My guess is that after Romney fails to beat Obama in the general, Huntsman will be back in 2016. The most electable guy in the field and he could ...
I found this pretty funny...and accurate. It comes from a reader over at Balloon Juice.
So, let’s review. The contenders for the GOP nomination are
A vulture capitalist who believes that any ...
Lively little debate going on at one of last week's posts with Libertarianism put under the microscope.
ocLiberal:
I know I am in sketchy territory here, (start the indignant shouting now) but ...
In the contest to determine the winner of the Far-Right Politics gold medal, rack up a few more points for Newt Gingrich.
“I think an intelligent conservative wants the right federal ...
Via Political Humor...
"Congratulations to Mitt Romney. He won the New Hampshire primary last night. See, this is proof that even the multimillionaire son of a multimillionaire can beat the odds ...
Story 1:
North Korea punishing those who 'didn't display enough sadness over Kim Jong Il's death'
North Korean authorities are reportedly punishing citizens who did not display enough sadness over the death ...
If the swiftboating of John Kerry taught Democrats anything, it was that you can’t sit back and let the opposition define the argument. President Obama’s team effectively used the hate filled McCain and Palin rallies as a weapon against them. And time and time again since the inauguration, the DNC has been able to define Republicans by the radical element of their party which has grown more vocal with each passing day.
Republicans and conservative’s latest tactic is to stage artificial protests at Democratic town hall meetings. People are actually being bussed in to take part in these protests. Democrats are fighting back. The DNC has released the following ad to show how far the GOP has allowed right-wing extremists to control much of the party’s agenda.
.
.
___
To receive email notifications of new posts from MarioPiperniDotCom, click on Subscribe.
The White House is asking for our help. I sent them 3 emails I recieved today as requested in this message from the White House below.
Here is a portion of what the request is on the White House site.
“There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov. ”
The GOP has reached my bottom line so its Katie Bar the Gates (am I aging myself?) GOP said this email the Dems are sending out is like turning your neighbors in. Ghaaaa? What do they call bringing the Democratic Town Hall meetings to a complete Halt? Interference with Democracy I would guess. Your Free speech should not suppress My free speech.
Your right! Enough is enough. We can’t be like the citizens of Germany to busy dancing at the Cabaret to question their Government’s propaganda.
Ok. My jaw is off the floor and back in place. I can think now.
The people’s expression of anger IS their free speech. The notice put out by the Whitehouse is an attempt to END that free speech. That is the truly scary thing here. The DNC attempting to rally the troops to stop a perceived GOP campaign is just a sideshow, a distraction. This isn’t about a lost election; this is about a consolidation of power. This appears to be an attempt to use “Mob rule” as an excuse to limit free speech “for the good of the country”. That is vintage 1930′s Germany.
Please, please everyone, wake up and see what’s really happening here. Read some history.
Ah, give it a break Tommy. You can pick up your jaw and set it back in place.
Your free speech and Constitution rants have no basis in fact. These protesters are a lot organized by GOP types in what has become known as astroturf protests. These people are not interested in dialog. Their goal is to shut down debate and are being used as pawns by Republicans in their bid to stop all health care reform with their eye on retaking Congress in 2010.
Screaming ‘FREE SPEECH VIOLATION!!’ and ‘THEY’RE ABUSING THE CONSTITUTION’ each time it doesn’t go the way you believe it should is the equivalent of crying ‘WOLF!’ every 20 seconds.
Disclaiming something as a “rant” is another classic style of ending debate. So is using belittling comments toward someone with whom you disagree. Accusing screaming people of simply wanting to stop debate on an issue, is a distraction, used while the dems try to push a bill through without it being fully vetted.
No, I will not stop pointing out abuses of the Constitution. The difference between us, is that while doing it, I won’t attack you personally.
Dahl and Mario look at this and see something bad. They see “Interference with Democracy” and Mob Rule.
I look at it and see Democracy at work. The Politicians have sallied forth with their talking points. The Public is letting them know what they think and in no uncertain terms. How can you get more “Democracy” than that?
Dahl’s comparison is specious at best. Which side would be more like Nazi Germany? Those loudly protesting their disagreement with the President’s (Fuhrer’s) schemes for us? Or those blindly following his every step, eyes spiraling like mindless zombies, repeating, “Yes we can. Yes we can.” (Think “Heil Hitler. Heil Hitler”)
A perfect example of two people looking at the exact same thing and reaching diametrically opposite conclusions.
Has anyone seen or heard any “PROOF” that people were being “bused” in by Insurance Companies, or is it just another unfounded accusation?
And the DNC has tried to take the worst examples and mainstream them. That was made very evident in the CNN Reporter debacle at the Tea Parties.
Both sides, GOP and DNC suck if you ask me. Neither one of them give a flying frig about you or me. That’s why I’m a firm proponent of get the Government out of this and most other processes and let me figure out what is best for me and go about achieving it.
I’ll tell you what a classic way of stopping debate is. It’s crying out that you’ve been attacked personally when in fact it is your ideas that are being attacked. But that’s another story and let’s not detract from the thread here.
So if I’m reading you correctly, you find it acceptable for a political party to bus in people to attend Democrat town hall meetings and have them scream out “JUST SAY NO!” therefore preventing the others attending the meeting from hearing anything else?
Mario and Tommy….Okay. Wait a minute here! I’m all eyes for this one.
When any person measures the activities of the Government against the Constitution of the United States for comparison and inspection, how in any manner does that, “..have no basis in fact.”?
One thing at a time. Let Tommy answer my question above and once he’s done that, he can inform us on exactly what parts of the Constitution have been violated. Or if you think you know, why don’t you tell us.
“So if I’m reading you correctly, you find it acceptable for a political party to bus in people to attend Democrat town hall meetings and have them scream out “JUST SAY NO!” therefore preventing the others attending the meeting from hearing anything else?”
No one said that. And no one has (to the best of my knowledge) supported the accusation that people were being bused in by anyone. I may be wrong and if so, could someone please furnish me substantiation. But even if it’s true, is it any different than busing in people to vote or register to vote?
“Astroturf protests.” Must be getting pretty bad when you have to start quoting Pelosi!! ;-)
Mario…you’re changing the subject and the discussion altogether. You said that, “…free speech and Constitution rants have no basis in fact.” Identifying parts of the Constitution that have been violated is another discussion.
I say that is wrong. The Constitution is the “Fact”. So holding an action up against the measure of the Constitution is an effort in Factual Circumspection.
The conclusions you reach may or may not be “Factual” but devoid of any interfering Ideological persuasion, they should be. You hold something against the dictates of the “Constitution” and it should be Constitutional or not.
Mario….I’m not wrong about the Straw Man you created. You know you did. I know you did. Anybody not blinded by bias knows you did. I won’t argue that point with you. So “whatever” on that one.
I said I may be wrong about Insurance Companies or the DNC busing in people to protest. If you are saying I AM wrong, could you please furnish me with any information you have to support that accusation?
Tommy has been been bringing up the Constitution in every discussion claiming that it is under attack. Simply saying it is does not make it so. I’m simply asking him to point out exactly where the Constitution is being violated.
“Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov. ”
If the Bush Whitehouse had issued a statement like that, you would be all over his and Cheney’s ass.
The issue in question is the First Amendment:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The attempt by the Whitehouse to find evidence of conspiracy by those who would oppose them, is in my mind, a clear violation of this amendment. My guess is that most of the meetings are less vocal than the ones broadcast by the State Media.
And how is it Ok in your mind, for Obama to set up “townhall meetings” that are filled only with people who support him, asking him pre-arranged softball questions that make his agendas sound like gifts from Heaven?
You can’t simply ridicule people for debating whether or not an action by Congress is Constitutional. If the power to take that action is not enumerated in the Constitution, then the debate is on and open and legitimate.
Thanks Hank. The constitution is very clear about the powers enumerated to the federal government. Per the Tenth Amendment:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Sorry guys, but I’m busy so I can’t debate this as fully as I’d like to. But briefly, what the hell are you talking about? You quote the Constitution but have not shown in any way how it has been violated. Why not? How has it been violated. Just state it.
@Tommy. You strike me as one who genuinely does care about the Constitution. Unless you tell me differently, I’ll assume you were as concerned over the last 8 years while Bush and Company made a mockery of it.
@Hank. You strike me as one who yells out about protecting the Constitution only while Democrats are in power. If I’m mistaken, I apologize but nothing you have written on these pages so far would lead me to believe otherwise. Did President Bush violate the Constitution of the country and/or were you in the least concerned about it from 2000 to 2008?
The GOPPers here are just pushing the meme. Mario, you need to come down on them a little harder – if they’re going to smear you and try to defend this childish tantrum-throwing, then they need to be punished for it like the spoiled-brat children they are.
Quit giving them a platform – they want to shout people down and stifle free speech while babbling platitudes about freedom, they deserve to pay for it.
What part of “It starts with an attitude, an acceptance of certain lowered standards by citizens who have taken their eye off the ball.” don’t you understand?
My last comment to the Ann Coulter post is a snapshot of how I feel about both dems and repubs willingness to defend the Constitution.
When you have time, maybe you can respond to the couple of questions I’ve asked you.
I understand that YOU have a perception that the Constitution is being violated but have given me no evidence as to how this is so. “It starts with an attitude” is meaningless in that attitude is subjective. The way we interpret ‘attitude’ is based on our beliefs…different for all of us. Give me something I can take into a courtroom and then we’re talking.
As for your questions.
1. Bush/Cheney. If my argument for Bush/Cheney was as weak as yours, then I’d have nothing to say. But as we all know, there are REAL violations of the Constitution by those two criminals.
2. I have not heard about Obama packing townhall meetings. But if he has, then I disapprove and would fault him for that.
@VP you say “If they’re going to smear you and try to defend this childish tantrum-throwing, then they need to be punished for it like the spoiled-brat children they are.
Quit giving them a platform – they want to shout people down and stifle free speech while babbling platitudes about freedom, they deserve to pay for it”
I read this string and the Only Takes One string and I didn’t see anybody throwing tantrums or being childish. If Mario quits giving ‘them’ a platform then isn’t that stifling their free speech????
I didn’t see anyone being abusive here and as long as folks are not abusive in their commentary I don’t know why it would be okay to disinvite them from expressing their opinions.
Speaking only for myself of course, I like to hear the dissenting opinions as they provide, for me, a wider view on a particular issue. This wider view serves to either solidify my opinion or sometimes modify my thinking.
@VP if only liberals were allowed to post here that would make a lot of us redundant.
janine, iut’s that thinking that leads to the trolls taking over. When you start the “stifling freedom/only liberals would be dull” line, you make their troll arguments for them. The trolls here do the same thing in every thread: Lie, whine, lie, accuse us of being mean and stifling them, and then they sit back and watch as peopel liek you do their dirty work.
If they can’t play nice, they suffer the consequences. A lot of weblog authors/admins forget this: It’s THEIR site, not the trolls’. There is no right to free speech on someone else’s site, and that’s that.
As long as it’s not abusive dissenting views allow us and THEM to test their own beliefs and pre conceptions. Even liberals disagree wtih each other in matters of policy as do conservatives…
@VP in my view ‘they’ are playing nice. I’m not making any argument for them VP just stating my viewpoint that I’d rather have a wider perspective presented. Not having or not listening to varying viewpoints leads to close mindedness.
@Maxene, I agree completely with your statements, this time (LOL)
How can you have free speech when you are continually interrupted. Town hall meetings are not just for democrats although a Democrat ordered one. He is there to communicate the health care plan but is continually interrupted by screaming maniacs. I do not believe you have free speech when conversations do not flow. On this blog we can read each others comments and appreciate the idea of the message but if each of us had availability of your writing on this blog and interrupted you while writing,then you would not have free speech.
Give me a congressman who can have his say and then have citizens come up to the microphone,put up their question and have it answered by the congressman, then you have free speech. Does anybody believe that Democrats would have shown up at any Town Hall meeting requested by a Democrat and slaughter him the way they have done ? I would have liked to have the names of these hecklers on TV. I would put my hand on the bible and swear they weren’t Democrats. By shouting incoherently and interrupting continually,they did not encourage free speech. They may be passionate in what they believe but they did not go there to listen to free speech.
Although Hank and Tommy seem to be independents,they do sound like conservatives or they are here to be the devil’s advocate. But do you actually believe that constitutionally,this health care plan has belligerent policies that affect the constitution ? When the Blue Dogs settle in and pass this legislation on better serving the sick and the poor,do you actually think that all these legal minds ( most are lawyers ) will have infringed on the constitution ? If health care passes,tell me then where they intruded and get a lawyer to explain how you are wrong.
The USA is on the brink of upheaval because our attitudes on success turned into greed. We are in trouble today because of profit and profit is on our mind on the backs on the less fortunate. It is time to rethink about our united independent states and get on another journey of sharing profits. YES WE CAN
“The USA is on the brink of upheaval because our attitudes on success turned into greed. We are in trouble today because of profit and profit is on our mind on the backs on the less fortunate. It is time to rethink about our united independent states and get on another journey of sharing profits.”
That is a classic socialist mantra. Since our Constitution was based on a representative republic, not a socialist one, this sort of talk advocates for a rethinking of the Constitution. That is precisely what Hank and I don’t want to see happen. If you do, please be honest and just say it. Let’s get the real debate started.
The Tenth Amendment reserves all power not specifically given to the federal government, to the states and to the people. The federal governemt doesn’t have the authority to administer a nationwide health care plan. That’s why when Medicaid was established in 1965, each state was given autonomity to establish and administer it’s own version.
Don’t get me wrong here; health care is too expensive and is driven by greed. You and I agree on that. Where we differ is on the solution. Right now, the solution isn’t very clear because the real problem isn’t being discussed honestly. People with greedy vested interested are steering the debate. It comes from both sides. Don’t think that altruistism is the driving force behind the desire for change. The money will still flow; it will just flow to a different pool. Redirection of the flow is really what’s behind this current push. Always follow the money.
Then the real debate is about the state and the people. For you to continue on the constitutional front,you advocate a system as is and the heck with people who can’t afford it. God gave you some talent and you are doing very well thank you but because you are doing well you can’t help the people that are less fortunate. We did it the constittuional way and what did the state and their residents do ? They limited their access to health care insurance out of state to reduce costs. And why are we in a state of crisis ? Because we let the state dictate these policies under the lobby group umbrella that bring these fat cats to holidays in Hawai and Fiji. We followed the money and it ended up in the insurance company pocket.They have money going out of their ying-yang. Aren’t you tired of this crap ? Is it a socialist mantra to look after your brother or reducing your costs? Why are you so against poorer people having access ? Your suggestions of past articles have been mulled over by the best marketing and management teams of this country and success is for naught. Why would you argue to prevent a high purchasing power federal fund to reduce cost but have state access on a per capita basis. It does not affect the constitution if the states still administer the fund with a controlling federal administrater.
Whichever way we get all 40 some million insured,it is for and of the people. So don’t stand in the way because the people will vote it in without the fallacies and confusion caused by the neocons (another definition offered elsewhere ). The people are smarter than politicians think and they can read thru the screams and the allegations and writings. They want this to happen and YES THEY CAN
“Is it a socialist mantra to look after your brother…”
Frankly, yes. It’s compassionate to help, and I do whatever I can, whenever I’m asked. That’s true of most people in this country. The difference between what you advocate (Socialism) and what I live, is that you would force me to be compassionate by taking from me that which I’ve earned, and giving it to people who have earned less than me, because gosh, they deserve to have it too.
You’re probably saying to yourself right now “Yeah, what’s wrong with that?”
Show me an example on God’s green Earth where that happens in nature. In nature, if an adult plant or animal doesn’t earn it’s own way, it dies. That sounds cruel to you, I know. You’re having a hard time accepting that. Socialists do. But it’s the reality.
As humans, we’ve evolved to show compassion for our fellow man, but not at the expense of natural law, and especially not when the compassion for one individual hurts another individual. Nature has balance. When you say that someone has a greater “right” to something, you’re saying that someone else has a lesser “right” to something.
Now that’s probably all well and good if you’re the guy making the decisions. Maybe that’s where you see yourself. You think your smarter than me, don’t you? You think you’re more compassionate than me, don’t you? With the right structure in place, you get to make the calls. Sounds like you just want to take the power from those who you think have it now, and hold it for yourself.
You would like to see a level playing field. We had one before the rules of government gave advantages to one group at the expense of another. The role of government (and yes, the Constitution) is to protect the rights of the INDIVIDUAL, not a group. When individuals have freedom to grow wealth, they are usually charitable with what they gain. There are exceptions, but most wealthy people are very generous.
I’m not going to write anymore about this Jovial. You’re absolutely convinced that the rights of individuals are subordinate to the rights of “the down trodden”. I don’t believe you will ever change your viewpoint. At least not until someone knocks at your door demanding your stuff because someone else needs it more than you. I’d pay to see the expression on your face that day.
Tommy…you cold hearted bast–d!! How DARE you think you deserve the fruits of your labor more than some lifelong recipient of Government entitlements! You Capitalist Scum!!! ;-)
I saw this on another site somewhere:
“The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single mother sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check?
Obviously, government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country. Time for me to close up shop and move out of this country.”
And don’t forget these two wise observations:
“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples’ money.” ~ Margaret Thatcher
“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.” ~ Winston Churchill
I don’t think that what you have described is the american way. People who follow that philosophy are shameless and selfish and don’t deserve the talents that were granted to them. People pontificate and express themselves on blogs but don’t put up because they love the very greed that destroyed the economy of this country. What has put us above the natural animal and plant life is our ability to take care of our own just like a wounded marine is not left behind. According to your philosophy,it’s too bad but I am healthy,no bullet in me and let that marine die.People talk a lot but when they need to walk the plank,they come out with expressions like ” Most wealthy people are generous” If that was so,would we have the state of health care and poverty that we have today?
Since you don’t know me and I never stated that I am smarter than anyone, I can tell you that people are demanding my stuff every week and my face glitters when they do so because as a christian we are pleased to help as long as we don’t go in debt.As long as the Lord provides,I will share.
Tommy,I wish you well but the power of the people and every vote will dominate this debate and you may not need to contribute more but if you do,I hope you will accept the democracy that you live in and be generous . I am sure that your face will radiate with the satisfaction of giving to your fellow man or woman.
“The report found that wealthy individuals have largely retained their focus on philanthropy despite the recession. Many wealthy individuals reported that they consider philanthropy a “key expense” and would sooner cut back on comforts than reduce donations – 77 percent said they would not decrease their level of giving as a result of the recession.”
and Tommy…We’re sick of you and your kind. The sooner you relocate to Galt’s Gulch, the BETTER!!!!!!! ;-) ;-)
You won’t have to worry that Jovial may follow you there.
Mario….given these developments and your obvious political bias, I think it’s prudent some of us should seek some assurances from you.
I would hope you will assure us you will not have a pang of conscious, and submit our email addresses to the White House Site.
I for one think this is a sickening development and a gross violation of our rights and I have no desire to be referred to the administration as a mal-content.
Tommy and Hank,
How you two seem like such “peas in a pod.” Nice double-teaming guys, I would suggest though that in your next efforts, you try something more than the obvious free speech canard. You follow that up with a protest about the fascism coming from the White House, and then throw in socialism for good measure. However, after your introduction of these straw men into the argument, you then accuse those disagreeing with you as creating straw men. Good game guys, though fairly unskillful and inept. You two do seem to be graduates of the School of Rovian Rhetoric, though far from A students and here is why.
The “free speech” clause of the Bill of rights was limited by SCOTUS early in the 20th Century by this phrase “One does not have the right to yell fire in a crowded theatre, if there is no fire.”
What this means is that the right to “free speech” is not absolute if it produces a direct public harm. These organized protestors have already physically attacked one Congressman and have also disrupted lawful public gatherings. In this instance their motivation must also be looked at and factually these are the equivalent of paid thugs, bussed in by lobbying groups, specifically trained to disrupt these meetings. This makes the issue not about free speech, but about attempts to limit free speech.
The hypocrisy that you two show in this is par for the course for people of your ilk. For you two it is totally about partisanship for your silly little political conceptions. How much protesting did you do when GW Bush, a man whose behind you’ve rhetorically licked, set up “free speech” zones to keep aways protesters and had people coming to his speeches arrested for the tee shirts they wore, or the bumper stickers on their cars. Neither one of you said a word I’ll bet, or protested then about free speech. Now I notice on another thread that Tommy would like to throw Bush under the bus because his conservative economic and foreign policies were such failures and he has become hated in general by the public. So you try to make him into not being a conservative, when the truth is he is a more of a conservative than either of you. The proof is in his quote: “My base is the haves and the have mores.” The most pathetic thing is that given the standard of your writing neither of you qualifies, but your slavish devotion to your “betters.”
Finally, just reading through your stuff I can see that you probably are readers of Ayn Rand. You know who she was don’t you boys? She was that hack writer, who made ridiculously plotted bestsellers of the torn bodice genre, quoted Aristotle to give herself intellectual heft she didn’t have even though Aristotle thought women too stupid for philosophy and produced an unworkable philosophy that appeals merely to peoples greed. I guess though greed is good for you, even if both of you don’t have the proverbial pot to pee in.
Finally, when you call people either communists, socialists or fascists it would help to have the intellectual knowledge to back up those charges. By your use of those terms it is obvious that neither of you even know what you’re talking about. That would make sense though coming from men who thinks poorly written novels, with ludicrous plots make good economics and philosophy.
Although I admire the generosity of the rich and they can certainly give some. But it is not fair. I prefer the power and generosity of all than the few. I am a child of twelve in my family and love the spirit of sharing.
Trouble is, Galt’s Gulch is an illusion and does not exist—and appears to be impossible to create, under the existing notions of national sovereignty. I deal with reality and we must deal with actual problems. We live in a world full of different gifted people as well as not so well gifted people. When you make all kinds of money on the backs of the poor,you have a Boston Tea party and revolutionize.Why would we come to that when we are supposedly the richest people in the world? Will we fall from grace if we pursue this kind of thinking ? Let’s find a great solution….. YES WE CAN
miconoclast…too much self infatuation here to try to respond to much. I’ll just touch on your more egregious errors.
1. Peas in a pod – Tommy appears much brighter, more articulate and better informed than I. So I don’t think so.
2. Your “Free Speech” comparisons don’t hold water. People expressing their opinion doesn’t equal up to the “Fire” in the theater example. If it did, then you have set up a basis for banning all dissenting opinion. You want me to elaborate on that, or can you figure it out?
3. “..factually these are the equivalent of paid thugs, bussed in by lobbying groups..” I’ve asked for and have received nor discovered no evidence that this is more than an accusation. Do you have any sort of support that PROVES this to be a fact?
4. Continuously falling back on “Did you complain when Bush…” is an intellectually bankrupt argument.
5. I don’t know about Tommy, but I have read Ayn Rand. Your opinion of her as a “hack writer” is most likely an unqualified one, kinda like your speculation about my pot or where I urinate. It seems she is more highly regarded than you would have us believe. But for what it’s worth, I believe in strength of self over most everything else. I don’t believe in asking for anything. I try my best to stand on my own and take care of myself and my own. And I don’t ask for anything from the Miconoclasts or Jovials of the world.
6. You should pay closer attention. I don’t think I called anyone any kind of “ist”. Nor have I expressed an opinion that I thought any novel, whether poorly or exquisitely written was a basis for good economics or philosophy.
Nest time, please try using smaller words. I like to be able to understand the insults.
You say ” I don’t believe in asking for anything. I try my best to stand on my own and take care of myself and my own”.
To me,responsibility is a great part of being american and it is this enterprise that helps us build a great country like the USA. But life is hard and we never wish that one loses one’s job or wealth on the first strike of misfortune. Having to sell your home because of an unpredicted disease in a family member. But if anything happens to you because of no fault of your own and your family becomes unprotected because of failure to pay premiums,wouldn’t it be nice for your family to have this help until something else comes along ? Come on tough guy ! You got to admit it would be nice !!!
“miconoclast…too much self infatuation here to try to respond to much. I’ll just touch on your more egregious errors.”
Hank,
So that means you don’t like your smug tone of writing used back at you?
“1. Peas in a pod – Tommy appears much brighter, more articulate and better informed than I. So I don’t think so.”
Well you said it, but let me say your taste does you little credit.
“2. Your “Free Speech” comparisons don’t hold water. People expressing their opinion doesn’t equal up to the “Fire” in the theater example.”
Saying no doesn’t make you correct, only ignorant of logic. My point about these people was they were hired to start the equivalent of riots and drown out others free speech, bringing it right into line with SCOTUS views on the limits of free speech. That you are ignorant of, or ignore it doesn’t win you points.
“3. “..factually these are the equivalent of paid thugs, bussed in by lobbying groups..” I’ve asked for and have received nor discovered no evidence that this is more than an accusation. Do you have any sort of support that PROVES this to be a fact?”
The facts and citations have been reported all over, including FOX. Typical rove tactic, request the cites of something factually true and in you next post argue. Everything to avoid taking the responsibility for your own views.
“4. Continuously falling back on “Did you complain when Bush…” is an intellectually bankrupt argument.”
That sounds like the “magical thinking of a 5 year old,” deny it and call names and it will go away. Your adherence to Bush is perfectly germane to your current line of argument and by your answer you didn’t deny the truth of what I said.
“Your opinion of her as a “hack writer” is most likely an unqualified one”
Nothing “unqualified” about it. That you can’t recognize the truth is more a discredit on your taste and reading comprehension. By the way only an intellectual lightweight would use Wiki to quote anything, when googling actually can give you the real stuff. Your use of the link also says much about how much depth you lack, but then again you said it about yourself.
“It seems she is more highly regarded than you would have us believe.”
Now if you really knew anything more about the subject you would know that she did influence University of Chicago Economist Milton Friedman and his disciple Alan Greenspan. Friedman was an adviser to horrible dictators like Pinochet and Greenspan admitted that as head of the Fed his use of “free market” policies didn’t work and criticized himself for being naive. Also what you don’t know is that she went to bed with both these guys and that cemented them to her, since both were so ugly.
“Nor have I expressed an opinion that I thought any novel, whether poorly or exquisitely written was a basis for good economics or philosophy.”
You haven’t had to because your words give you away. You can play the Rove game decently, but I’m not biting. Your aim is not a debate per se, or even an exchange of honest intellectual differences, you’re just another wannabe playing the “let’s make them libruls mad” game and as such your whole manner and method reek with intellectual dishonesty.
Miconoclast….My, my my…aren’t WE just full of ourselves.
Maybe when I grow up I’ll be a smug little sesquipedalian like you. I’m just not quite there as yet. Oh well. Leaves me something to shoot for.
1. So, you are saying YOU don’t like Tommy so I should dislike him also. Typical. It’ll be a much better world when we all think alike.
2. Well, to quote my favorite sesquipedalian, “Saying no (so?) doesn’t make you correct” First, I have yet to see any evidence any of these people were “hired”. I didn’t think you’d understand so…If you are going to broaden the definition of your “Fire in the theater” example to cover loud or raucous dissenting opinion, how far is it to just banning dissenting opinion altogether. That’s the thing about people of “your ilk”. When you’re shouting down and threatening some conservative speaker or protesting some conservative event, it’s perfectly alright. But when it happens to you, you run crying like a little girl. Basically, you and your ilk are simply cowards. But you already realize that. That’s why you go so hard on the attack.
3. No connection has been established or substantiated. Your “ilk” do what they always do. They publicize one instance then try to broaden the umbrella to cover all dissent. Who’s avoiding responsibility for establishing what they allege is true?
4. About as magical as the empty lament of, “Did you complain when Bush…..” That is a weak, intellectually bankrupt argument and usually used by your “ilk” when you have nothing else to say. “Were you frightened when the fire was in the neighboring county? No? Then you shouldn’t be frightened now that the fire is burning down your next door neighbor’s house.”
5. So, would you mind sharing with us your credentials as a literary critic? For what it’s worth, I’m not a big fan of Wikipedia either. But it was quick. Typical diversionary tactics though. The point is that your opinion of Rand as a hack writer is not widely shared. Perhaps this source is more up to your standards:
Here is the survey’s list of the most influential books:
1. The Bible.
2. “Atlas Shrugged,” by Ayn Rand.
3. “The Road Less Traveled,” by M. Scott Peck.
Number 2 behind the Bible!! And 40 years after it was written!!So, I think it’s safe to say her writings are a bit more influential than you would have us believe. But don’t let facts stand in your way.
So, I won’t bother with the balance of your childish little word tantrum. I just find it a little pretentious that you present yourself as some sort of expert on what I think and feel.
Perhaps you should stick to getting your facts straight and spend less time trying to disparage others.
By the way, what in the flip is a “Miconoclast”? Let me guess. A one-eyed, bull headed person who just goes around attacking other’s beliefs?? (Figure that one out and get back to me.)
I close by saying you’re delusional if you think I care if you’re mad or not. Honestly, I don’t even care if you’re a “librul” or not. But statements like that are pretty indicative of the low level of your thinking.
“Maybe when I grow up I’ll be a smug little sesquipedalian like you.”
Hank,
Good dictionary use, but don’t you think mentioning the rather large size of my penis, sesquipedalian, is a little gross and you know I’m not quite that large.
“1. So, you are saying YOU don’t like Tommy so I should dislike him also. Typical. It’ll be a much better world when we all think alike.’
So besides being able to use a dictionary, you’re also adept with non sequitur’s, which I’ll allow you to look up since you like dictionary’s and seem to need them.
“First, I have yet to see any evidence any of these people were “hired”.
“When you’re shouting down and threatening some conservative speaker or protesting some conservative event, it’s perfectly alright.”
As I explained previously, I know reading comprehension is hard on you, that isn’t going to happen. Not because I can’t but because I don’t play with your ball in your ballpark, like some other liberals you might like to confuse with your Karl Rove games. You know what Henry, you have not proffered any evidence of your charge either. Again a typical Karl rove tactic.
“Your “ilk” do what they always do. They publicize one instance then try to broaden the umbrella to cover all dissent.”
Nice word “ilk” isn’t it, it seems I’ve already broadened your vocabulary, as you make another statement with no backup. You don’t debate, Henry, because you lack the skills. so you argue with all the intensity and lack of skill of a ten year old on the playground.
“5. So, would you mind sharing with us your credentials as a literary critic? For what it’s worth, I’m not a big fan of Wikipedia either. But it was quick.”
That’s the problem with you Henry, everything you do is quick and shallow. not only do you lack perception but you lack depth. One merely could google the appropriate book reviews to see what most literary critic think of her. however, unlike you I can think originally and am well read and well educated enough to come to my own opinions, unlike you who needs to be led, be it tommy, Bush, Rand or Rove.
“Number 2 behind the Bible!! And 40 years after it was written!!”
Very impressive were it not a fact that over 60% of Americans believe in the Book of Genesis and don’t believe in evolution.
“I just find it a little pretentious that you present yourself as some sort of expert on what I think and feel.”
Pretension has nothing to do with it. It’s your writing that gives you away. I knew I hit paydirt with Rand for instance and you prove it with the amount of time you spend on her. she’s hooked you and she didn’t even have to sleep with you. I think it’s just your innate greed.
“By the way, what in the flip is a “Miconoclast”
Some one is smarter than you and doesn’t fall for your stupid arguing tactics. In the alternative, someone who doesn’t take your intellect seriously.
“A one-eyed, bull headed person who just goes around attacking other’s beliefs?”
Now Henry this is known psychologically as projection. That’s where you take you secretly held feeling about yourself, which are so painful, that you accuse the other person of being what you know you are.
Okay. I guess that’s about enough for you. Your mommy is probably going to take your computer away in a moment, so I leave you with this. I’ll pretend to be as smart as you, and evaluate you on your last post.
Let’s see, you’re a dirty little man that uses a whole lot of words to basically say nothing.
You can’t support or substantiate anything you say so you essentially stick your thumbs in your ears, waggle your tongue and fingers at us and probably say something inane like, nah, nah, nah, boo, boo, I’m smarter than you so I don’t have to answer. Or my Daddy’s bigger than your Daddy or something equally immature.
You parrot some unknown critic’s review and that proves how smart you are. Yet you accuse me of following….oh heck….whoever, and that renders me easily led. Gotcha!!
You throw out baseless, incorrect statistics. I mention an integral part of Rand’s book and you brilliantly use that to deduce that I may have read one of her books. WOW!! A real Kreskin moment there!! (Hey. I can quote you both Clintons, Franken, Pelosi and Obama. What can you divine from that??)
But I do appreciate you explaining to me what a Miconoclast really is. I figured it was a combination of a Minotaur and an iconoclast. Thanks for setting me straight.
Now. Why don’t you project yourself to bed before you make your Mommy mad.
“Now Henry this is known psychologically as projection. That’s where you take you secretly held feeling about yourself, which are so painful, that you accuse the other person of being what you know you are.”
Henry,
Just nailing you and who you are. I’m so glad you’re ROLFMAO, because after being made into such a fool, you at least have a sense of humor. I’m off now, you are far too easy a target and have so little ammunition in your clip.
Tommy,
Happy to be of service. While I really do enjoy serious discussion I see some people here like to engage in Karl Rove type games, which have gotten so tiresome after all these long years of conservative failure.
The White House is asking for our help. I sent them 3 emails I recieved today as requested in this message from the White House below.
Here is a portion of what the request is on the White House site.
“There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov. ”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/
The GOP has reached my bottom line so its Katie Bar the Gates (am I aging myself?) GOP said this email the Dems are sending out is like turning your neighbors in. Ghaaaa? What do they call bringing the Democratic Town Hall meetings to a complete Halt? Interference with Democracy I would guess. Your Free speech should not suppress My free speech.
Your right! Enough is enough. We can’t be like the citizens of Germany to busy dancing at the Cabaret to question their Government’s propaganda.
Oh I do get a bit dramatic at times :->
@dahl
“We can’t be like the citizens of Germany to busy dancing at the Cabaret to question their Government’s propaganda”
It’s sad how, as I was reading your comment, I was also thinking “Gestapo”.
Ok. My jaw is off the floor and back in place. I can think now.
The people’s expression of anger IS their free speech. The notice put out by the Whitehouse is an attempt to END that free speech. That is the truly scary thing here. The DNC attempting to rally the troops to stop a perceived GOP campaign is just a sideshow, a distraction. This isn’t about a lost election; this is about a consolidation of power. This appears to be an attempt to use “Mob rule” as an excuse to limit free speech “for the good of the country”. That is vintage 1930′s Germany.
Please, please everyone, wake up and see what’s really happening here. Read some history.
Ah, give it a break Tommy. You can pick up your jaw and set it back in place.
Your free speech and Constitution rants have no basis in fact. These protesters are a lot organized by GOP types in what has become known as astroturf protests. These people are not interested in dialog. Their goal is to shut down debate and are being used as pawns by Republicans in their bid to stop all health care reform with their eye on retaking Congress in 2010.
Screaming ‘FREE SPEECH VIOLATION!!’ and ‘THEY’RE ABUSING THE CONSTITUTION’ each time it doesn’t go the way you believe it should is the equivalent of crying ‘WOLF!’ every 20 seconds.
Disclaiming something as a “rant” is another classic style of ending debate. So is using belittling comments toward someone with whom you disagree. Accusing screaming people of simply wanting to stop debate on an issue, is a distraction, used while the dems try to push a bill through without it being fully vetted.
No, I will not stop pointing out abuses of the Constitution. The difference between us, is that while doing it, I won’t attack you personally.
Tommy and Janine…This is a perfect example.
Dahl and Mario look at this and see something bad. They see “Interference with Democracy” and Mob Rule.
I look at it and see Democracy at work. The Politicians have sallied forth with their talking points. The Public is letting them know what they think and in no uncertain terms. How can you get more “Democracy” than that?
Dahl’s comparison is specious at best. Which side would be more like Nazi Germany? Those loudly protesting their disagreement with the President’s (Fuhrer’s) schemes for us? Or those blindly following his every step, eyes spiraling like mindless zombies, repeating, “Yes we can. Yes we can.” (Think “Heil Hitler. Heil Hitler”)
A perfect example of two people looking at the exact same thing and reaching diametrically opposite conclusions.
Has anyone seen or heard any “PROOF” that people were being “bused” in by Insurance Companies, or is it just another unfounded accusation?
And the DNC has tried to take the worst examples and mainstream them. That was made very evident in the CNN Reporter debacle at the Tea Parties.
Both sides, GOP and DNC suck if you ask me. Neither one of them give a flying frig about you or me. That’s why I’m a firm proponent of get the Government out of this and most other processes and let me figure out what is best for me and go about achieving it.
@Tommy
I’ll tell you what a classic way of stopping debate is. It’s crying out that you’ve been attacked personally when in fact it is your ideas that are being attacked. But that’s another story and let’s not detract from the thread here.
So if I’m reading you correctly, you find it acceptable for a political party to bus in people to attend Democrat town hall meetings and have them scream out “JUST SAY NO!” therefore preventing the others attending the meeting from hearing anything else?
Mario and Tommy….Okay. Wait a minute here! I’m all eyes for this one.
When any person measures the activities of the Government against the Constitution of the United States for comparison and inspection, how in any manner does that, “..have no basis in fact.”?
@Hank
One thing at a time. Let Tommy answer my question above and once he’s done that, he can inform us on exactly what parts of the Constitution have been violated. Or if you think you know, why don’t you tell us.
STRAW MAN ALERT!! STRAW MAN ALERT!!
“So if I’m reading you correctly, you find it acceptable for a political party to bus in people to attend Democrat town hall meetings and have them scream out “JUST SAY NO!” therefore preventing the others attending the meeting from hearing anything else?”
No one said that. And no one has (to the best of my knowledge) supported the accusation that people were being bused in by anyone. I may be wrong and if so, could someone please furnish me substantiation. But even if it’s true, is it any different than busing in people to vote or register to vote?
“Astroturf protests.” Must be getting pretty bad when you have to start quoting Pelosi!! ;-)
Try reading Tommy’s post above.
“I may be wrong” Yes, you are…again.
Mario…you’re changing the subject and the discussion altogether. You said that, “…free speech and Constitution rants have no basis in fact.” Identifying parts of the Constitution that have been violated is another discussion.
I say that is wrong. The Constitution is the “Fact”. So holding an action up against the measure of the Constitution is an effort in Factual Circumspection.
The conclusions you reach may or may not be “Factual” but devoid of any interfering Ideological persuasion, they should be. You hold something against the dictates of the “Constitution” and it should be Constitutional or not.
Mario….I’m not wrong about the Straw Man you created. You know you did. I know you did. Anybody not blinded by bias knows you did. I won’t argue that point with you. So “whatever” on that one.
I said I may be wrong about Insurance Companies or the DNC busing in people to protest. If you are saying I AM wrong, could you please furnish me with any information you have to support that accusation?
Tommy has been been bringing up the Constitution in every discussion claiming that it is under attack. Simply saying it is does not make it so. I’m simply asking him to point out exactly where the Constitution is being violated.
“Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov. ”
If the Bush Whitehouse had issued a statement like that, you would be all over his and Cheney’s ass.
The issue in question is the First Amendment:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The attempt by the Whitehouse to find evidence of conspiracy by those who would oppose them, is in my mind, a clear violation of this amendment. My guess is that most of the meetings are less vocal than the ones broadcast by the State Media.
And how is it Ok in your mind, for Obama to set up “townhall meetings” that are filled only with people who support him, asking him pre-arranged softball questions that make his agendas sound like gifts from Heaven?
Sorry Tommy, I just have missed something. Which law exactly has been passed by Congress which contravenes the First Amendment?
It starts with an attitude, an acceptance of certain lowered standards by citizens who have taken their eye off the ball.
What’s your response to my comment of Bush/Cheney? And please answer my question about Obama’s “townhall meetings”.
Mario…you can start here. And if an action taken by Congress isn’t listed here, then the debate is open as to it’s Constitutionality:
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html
(I used the kids version!!) ;-)
You can’t simply ridicule people for debating whether or not an action by Congress is Constitutional. If the power to take that action is not enumerated in the Constitution, then the debate is on and open and legitimate.
Thanks Hank. The constitution is very clear about the powers enumerated to the federal government. Per the Tenth Amendment:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
@Tommy and Hank
Sorry guys, but I’m busy so I can’t debate this as fully as I’d like to. But briefly, what the hell are you talking about? You quote the Constitution but have not shown in any way how it has been violated. Why not? How has it been violated. Just state it.
@Tommy. You strike me as one who genuinely does care about the Constitution. Unless you tell me differently, I’ll assume you were as concerned over the last 8 years while Bush and Company made a mockery of it.
@Hank. You strike me as one who yells out about protecting the Constitution only while Democrats are in power. If I’m mistaken, I apologize but nothing you have written on these pages so far would lead me to believe otherwise. Did President Bush violate the Constitution of the country and/or were you in the least concerned about it from 2000 to 2008?
Mario…You answer no questions but demand answers for yours. You say you’re too busy to engage in intelligent, courteous and respectful discourse.
I believe you. Let’s leave it at that.
(Sorry. I obviously posted that last comment to the wrong thread. When you are less busy, maybe you can staighten it out for me.)
The GOPPers here are just pushing the meme. Mario, you need to come down on them a little harder – if they’re going to smear you and try to defend this childish tantrum-throwing, then they need to be punished for it like the spoiled-brat children they are.
Quit giving them a platform – they want to shout people down and stifle free speech while babbling platitudes about freedom, they deserve to pay for it.
It’s YOUR SITE, Mario – think about that.
@Mario
What part of “It starts with an attitude, an acceptance of certain lowered standards by citizens who have taken their eye off the ball.” don’t you understand?
My last comment to the Ann Coulter post is a snapshot of how I feel about both dems and repubs willingness to defend the Constitution.
When you have time, maybe you can respond to the couple of questions I’ve asked you.
@Tommy
I understand that YOU have a perception that the Constitution is being violated but have given me no evidence as to how this is so. “It starts with an attitude” is meaningless in that attitude is subjective. The way we interpret ‘attitude’ is based on our beliefs…different for all of us. Give me something I can take into a courtroom and then we’re talking.
As for your questions.
1. Bush/Cheney. If my argument for Bush/Cheney was as weak as yours, then I’d have nothing to say. But as we all know, there are REAL violations of the Constitution by those two criminals.
2. I have not heard about Obama packing townhall meetings. But if he has, then I disapprove and would fault him for that.
@VP you say “If they’re going to smear you and try to defend this childish tantrum-throwing, then they need to be punished for it like the spoiled-brat children they are.
Quit giving them a platform – they want to shout people down and stifle free speech while babbling platitudes about freedom, they deserve to pay for it”
I read this string and the Only Takes One string and I didn’t see anybody throwing tantrums or being childish. If Mario quits giving ‘them’ a platform then isn’t that stifling their free speech????
I didn’t see anyone being abusive here and as long as folks are not abusive in their commentary I don’t know why it would be okay to disinvite them from expressing their opinions.
Speaking only for myself of course, I like to hear the dissenting opinions as they provide, for me, a wider view on a particular issue. This wider view serves to either solidify my opinion or sometimes modify my thinking.
@VP if only liberals were allowed to post here that would make a lot of us redundant.
janine, iut’s that thinking that leads to the trolls taking over. When you start the “stifling freedom/only liberals would be dull” line, you make their troll arguments for them. The trolls here do the same thing in every thread: Lie, whine, lie, accuse us of being mean and stifling them, and then they sit back and watch as peopel liek you do their dirty work.
If they can’t play nice, they suffer the consequences. A lot of weblog authors/admins forget this: It’s THEIR site, not the trolls’. There is no right to free speech on someone else’s site, and that’s that.
@VP – You’ve made my point about people’s attitudes about freedom of speech being the real danger.
@Mario – Here’s a link to Helen Thomas’ outrage about a month ago.
http://www.politicalbyline.com/2009/07/01/helen-thomas-goes-nuclear-over-the-obama-administrations-controlled-townhall-meetings-and-controlled-press/
There a thing called free speech.
As long as it’s not abusive dissenting views allow us and THEM to test their own beliefs and pre conceptions. Even liberals disagree wtih each other in matters of policy as do conservatives…
@VP in my view ‘they’ are playing nice. I’m not making any argument for them VP just stating my viewpoint that I’d rather have a wider perspective presented. Not having or not listening to varying viewpoints leads to close mindedness.
@Maxene, I agree completely with your statements, this time (LOL)
My link got messed up.
Anyway @Janine, my liberal friend, this time, indeed. Better watch it.
How can you have free speech when you are continually interrupted. Town hall meetings are not just for democrats although a Democrat ordered one. He is there to communicate the health care plan but is continually interrupted by screaming maniacs. I do not believe you have free speech when conversations do not flow. On this blog we can read each others comments and appreciate the idea of the message but if each of us had availability of your writing on this blog and interrupted you while writing,then you would not have free speech.
Give me a congressman who can have his say and then have citizens come up to the microphone,put up their question and have it answered by the congressman, then you have free speech. Does anybody believe that Democrats would have shown up at any Town Hall meeting requested by a Democrat and slaughter him the way they have done ? I would have liked to have the names of these hecklers on TV. I would put my hand on the bible and swear they weren’t Democrats. By shouting incoherently and interrupting continually,they did not encourage free speech. They may be passionate in what they believe but they did not go there to listen to free speech.
Although Hank and Tommy seem to be independents,they do sound like conservatives or they are here to be the devil’s advocate. But do you actually believe that constitutionally,this health care plan has belligerent policies that affect the constitution ? When the Blue Dogs settle in and pass this legislation on better serving the sick and the poor,do you actually think that all these legal minds ( most are lawyers ) will have infringed on the constitution ? If health care passes,tell me then where they intruded and get a lawyer to explain how you are wrong.
The USA is on the brink of upheaval because our attitudes on success turned into greed. We are in trouble today because of profit and profit is on our mind on the backs on the less fortunate. It is time to rethink about our united independent states and get on another journey of sharing profits. YES WE CAN
Jovial
“The USA is on the brink of upheaval because our attitudes on success turned into greed. We are in trouble today because of profit and profit is on our mind on the backs on the less fortunate. It is time to rethink about our united independent states and get on another journey of sharing profits.”
That is a classic socialist mantra. Since our Constitution was based on a representative republic, not a socialist one, this sort of talk advocates for a rethinking of the Constitution. That is precisely what Hank and I don’t want to see happen. If you do, please be honest and just say it. Let’s get the real debate started.
The Tenth Amendment reserves all power not specifically given to the federal government, to the states and to the people. The federal governemt doesn’t have the authority to administer a nationwide health care plan. That’s why when Medicaid was established in 1965, each state was given autonomity to establish and administer it’s own version.
Don’t get me wrong here; health care is too expensive and is driven by greed. You and I agree on that. Where we differ is on the solution. Right now, the solution isn’t very clear because the real problem isn’t being discussed honestly. People with greedy vested interested are steering the debate. It comes from both sides. Don’t think that altruistism is the driving force behind the desire for change. The money will still flow; it will just flow to a different pool. Redirection of the flow is really what’s behind this current push. Always follow the money.
@Tommy
Then the real debate is about the state and the people. For you to continue on the constitutional front,you advocate a system as is and the heck with people who can’t afford it. God gave you some talent and you are doing very well thank you but because you are doing well you can’t help the people that are less fortunate. We did it the constittuional way and what did the state and their residents do ? They limited their access to health care insurance out of state to reduce costs. And why are we in a state of crisis ? Because we let the state dictate these policies under the lobby group umbrella that bring these fat cats to holidays in Hawai and Fiji. We followed the money and it ended up in the insurance company pocket.They have money going out of their ying-yang. Aren’t you tired of this crap ? Is it a socialist mantra to look after your brother or reducing your costs? Why are you so against poorer people having access ? Your suggestions of past articles have been mulled over by the best marketing and management teams of this country and success is for naught. Why would you argue to prevent a high purchasing power federal fund to reduce cost but have state access on a per capita basis. It does not affect the constitution if the states still administer the fund with a controlling federal administrater.
Whichever way we get all 40 some million insured,it is for and of the people. So don’t stand in the way because the people will vote it in without the fallacies and confusion caused by the neocons (another definition offered elsewhere ). The people are smarter than politicians think and they can read thru the screams and the allegations and writings. They want this to happen and YES THEY CAN
Jovial
“Is it a socialist mantra to look after your brother…”
Frankly, yes. It’s compassionate to help, and I do whatever I can, whenever I’m asked. That’s true of most people in this country. The difference between what you advocate (Socialism) and what I live, is that you would force me to be compassionate by taking from me that which I’ve earned, and giving it to people who have earned less than me, because gosh, they deserve to have it too.
You’re probably saying to yourself right now “Yeah, what’s wrong with that?”
Show me an example on God’s green Earth where that happens in nature. In nature, if an adult plant or animal doesn’t earn it’s own way, it dies. That sounds cruel to you, I know. You’re having a hard time accepting that. Socialists do. But it’s the reality.
As humans, we’ve evolved to show compassion for our fellow man, but not at the expense of natural law, and especially not when the compassion for one individual hurts another individual. Nature has balance. When you say that someone has a greater “right” to something, you’re saying that someone else has a lesser “right” to something.
Now that’s probably all well and good if you’re the guy making the decisions. Maybe that’s where you see yourself. You think your smarter than me, don’t you? You think you’re more compassionate than me, don’t you? With the right structure in place, you get to make the calls. Sounds like you just want to take the power from those who you think have it now, and hold it for yourself.
You would like to see a level playing field. We had one before the rules of government gave advantages to one group at the expense of another. The role of government (and yes, the Constitution) is to protect the rights of the INDIVIDUAL, not a group. When individuals have freedom to grow wealth, they are usually charitable with what they gain. There are exceptions, but most wealthy people are very generous.
I’m not going to write anymore about this Jovial. You’re absolutely convinced that the rights of individuals are subordinate to the rights of “the down trodden”. I don’t believe you will ever change your viewpoint. At least not until someone knocks at your door demanding your stuff because someone else needs it more than you. I’d pay to see the expression on your face that day.
Tommy…you cold hearted bast–d!! How DARE you think you deserve the fruits of your labor more than some lifelong recipient of Government entitlements! You Capitalist Scum!!! ;-)
I saw this on another site somewhere:
“The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single mother sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check?
Obviously, government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country. Time for me to close up shop and move out of this country.”
And don’t forget these two wise observations:
“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples’ money.” ~ Margaret Thatcher
“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.” ~ Winston Churchill
@ Tommy
I don’t think that what you have described is the american way. People who follow that philosophy are shameless and selfish and don’t deserve the talents that were granted to them. People pontificate and express themselves on blogs but don’t put up because they love the very greed that destroyed the economy of this country. What has put us above the natural animal and plant life is our ability to take care of our own just like a wounded marine is not left behind. According to your philosophy,it’s too bad but I am healthy,no bullet in me and let that marine die.People talk a lot but when they need to walk the plank,they come out with expressions like ” Most wealthy people are generous” If that was so,would we have the state of health care and poverty that we have today?
Since you don’t know me and I never stated that I am smarter than anyone, I can tell you that people are demanding my stuff every week and my face glitters when they do so because as a christian we are pleased to help as long as we don’t go in debt.As long as the Lord provides,I will share.
Tommy,I wish you well but the power of the people and every vote will dominate this debate and you may not need to contribute more but if you do,I hope you will accept the democracy that you live in and be generous . I am sure that your face will radiate with the satisfaction of giving to your fellow man or woman.
Jovial…Here’s a little contradictory information for you:
http://www.thedailytell.com/2009/07/wealthy-philanthropists-undeterred-by-recession-look-for-charitable-impact/
“The report found that wealthy individuals have largely retained their focus on philanthropy despite the recession. Many wealthy individuals reported that they consider philanthropy a “key expense” and would sooner cut back on comforts than reduce donations – 77 percent said they would not decrease their level of giving as a result of the recession.”
and Tommy…We’re sick of you and your kind. The sooner you relocate to Galt’s Gulch, the BETTER!!!!!!! ;-) ;-)
You won’t have to worry that Jovial may follow you there.
Mario….given these developments and your obvious political bias, I think it’s prudent some of us should seek some assurances from you.
I would hope you will assure us you will not have a pang of conscious, and submit our email addresses to the White House Site.
I for one think this is a sickening development and a gross violation of our rights and I have no desire to be referred to the administration as a mal-content.
Tommy and Hank,
How you two seem like such “peas in a pod.” Nice double-teaming guys, I would suggest though that in your next efforts, you try something more than the obvious free speech canard. You follow that up with a protest about the fascism coming from the White House, and then throw in socialism for good measure. However, after your introduction of these straw men into the argument, you then accuse those disagreeing with you as creating straw men. Good game guys, though fairly unskillful and inept. You two do seem to be graduates of the School of Rovian Rhetoric, though far from A students and here is why.
The “free speech” clause of the Bill of rights was limited by SCOTUS early in the 20th Century by this phrase “One does not have the right to yell fire in a crowded theatre, if there is no fire.”
What this means is that the right to “free speech” is not absolute if it produces a direct public harm. These organized protestors have already physically attacked one Congressman and have also disrupted lawful public gatherings. In this instance their motivation must also be looked at and factually these are the equivalent of paid thugs, bussed in by lobbying groups, specifically trained to disrupt these meetings. This makes the issue not about free speech, but about attempts to limit free speech.
The hypocrisy that you two show in this is par for the course for people of your ilk. For you two it is totally about partisanship for your silly little political conceptions. How much protesting did you do when GW Bush, a man whose behind you’ve rhetorically licked, set up “free speech” zones to keep aways protesters and had people coming to his speeches arrested for the tee shirts they wore, or the bumper stickers on their cars. Neither one of you said a word I’ll bet, or protested then about free speech. Now I notice on another thread that Tommy would like to throw Bush under the bus because his conservative economic and foreign policies were such failures and he has become hated in general by the public. So you try to make him into not being a conservative, when the truth is he is a more of a conservative than either of you. The proof is in his quote: “My base is the haves and the have mores.” The most pathetic thing is that given the standard of your writing neither of you qualifies, but your slavish devotion to your “betters.”
Finally, just reading through your stuff I can see that you probably are readers of Ayn Rand. You know who she was don’t you boys? She was that hack writer, who made ridiculously plotted bestsellers of the torn bodice genre, quoted Aristotle to give herself intellectual heft she didn’t have even though Aristotle thought women too stupid for philosophy and produced an unworkable philosophy that appeals merely to peoples greed. I guess though greed is good for you, even if both of you don’t have the proverbial pot to pee in.
Finally, when you call people either communists, socialists or fascists it would help to have the intellectual knowledge to back up those charges. By your use of those terms it is obvious that neither of you even know what you’re talking about. That would make sense though coming from men who thinks poorly written novels, with ludicrous plots make good economics and philosophy.
Hank,
Although I admire the generosity of the rich and they can certainly give some. But it is not fair. I prefer the power and generosity of all than the few. I am a child of twelve in my family and love the spirit of sharing.
Trouble is, Galt’s Gulch is an illusion and does not exist—and appears to be impossible to create, under the existing notions of national sovereignty. I deal with reality and we must deal with actual problems. We live in a world full of different gifted people as well as not so well gifted people. When you make all kinds of money on the backs of the poor,you have a Boston Tea party and revolutionize.Why would we come to that when we are supposedly the richest people in the world? Will we fall from grace if we pursue this kind of thinking ? Let’s find a great solution….. YES WE CAN
miconoclast…too much self infatuation here to try to respond to much. I’ll just touch on your more egregious errors.
1. Peas in a pod – Tommy appears much brighter, more articulate and better informed than I. So I don’t think so.
2. Your “Free Speech” comparisons don’t hold water. People expressing their opinion doesn’t equal up to the “Fire” in the theater example. If it did, then you have set up a basis for banning all dissenting opinion. You want me to elaborate on that, or can you figure it out?
3. “..factually these are the equivalent of paid thugs, bussed in by lobbying groups..” I’ve asked for and have received nor discovered no evidence that this is more than an accusation. Do you have any sort of support that PROVES this to be a fact?
4. Continuously falling back on “Did you complain when Bush…” is an intellectually bankrupt argument.
5. I don’t know about Tommy, but I have read Ayn Rand. Your opinion of her as a “hack writer” is most likely an unqualified one, kinda like your speculation about my pot or where I urinate. It seems she is more highly regarded than you would have us believe. But for what it’s worth, I believe in strength of self over most everything else. I don’t believe in asking for anything. I try my best to stand on my own and take care of myself and my own. And I don’t ask for anything from the Miconoclasts or Jovials of the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand
6. You should pay closer attention. I don’t think I called anyone any kind of “ist”. Nor have I expressed an opinion that I thought any novel, whether poorly or exquisitely written was a basis for good economics or philosophy.
Nest time, please try using smaller words. I like to be able to understand the insults.
Hank,
You say ” I don’t believe in asking for anything. I try my best to stand on my own and take care of myself and my own”.
To me,responsibility is a great part of being american and it is this enterprise that helps us build a great country like the USA. But life is hard and we never wish that one loses one’s job or wealth on the first strike of misfortune. Having to sell your home because of an unpredicted disease in a family member. But if anything happens to you because of no fault of your own and your family becomes unprotected because of failure to pay premiums,wouldn’t it be nice for your family to have this help until something else comes along ? Come on tough guy ! You got to admit it would be nice !!!
“miconoclast…too much self infatuation here to try to respond to much. I’ll just touch on your more egregious errors.”
Hank,
So that means you don’t like your smug tone of writing used back at you?
“1. Peas in a pod – Tommy appears much brighter, more articulate and better informed than I. So I don’t think so.”
Well you said it, but let me say your taste does you little credit.
“2. Your “Free Speech” comparisons don’t hold water. People expressing their opinion doesn’t equal up to the “Fire” in the theater example.”
Saying no doesn’t make you correct, only ignorant of logic. My point about these people was they were hired to start the equivalent of riots and drown out others free speech, bringing it right into line with SCOTUS views on the limits of free speech. That you are ignorant of, or ignore it doesn’t win you points.
“3. “..factually these are the equivalent of paid thugs, bussed in by lobbying groups..” I’ve asked for and have received nor discovered no evidence that this is more than an accusation. Do you have any sort of support that PROVES this to be a fact?”
The facts and citations have been reported all over, including FOX. Typical rove tactic, request the cites of something factually true and in you next post argue. Everything to avoid taking the responsibility for your own views.
“4. Continuously falling back on “Did you complain when Bush…” is an intellectually bankrupt argument.”
That sounds like the “magical thinking of a 5 year old,” deny it and call names and it will go away. Your adherence to Bush is perfectly germane to your current line of argument and by your answer you didn’t deny the truth of what I said.
“Your opinion of her as a “hack writer” is most likely an unqualified one”
Nothing “unqualified” about it. That you can’t recognize the truth is more a discredit on your taste and reading comprehension. By the way only an intellectual lightweight would use Wiki to quote anything, when googling actually can give you the real stuff. Your use of the link also says much about how much depth you lack, but then again you said it about yourself.
“It seems she is more highly regarded than you would have us believe.”
Now if you really knew anything more about the subject you would know that she did influence University of Chicago Economist Milton Friedman and his disciple Alan Greenspan. Friedman was an adviser to horrible dictators like Pinochet and Greenspan admitted that as head of the Fed his use of “free market” policies didn’t work and criticized himself for being naive. Also what you don’t know is that she went to bed with both these guys and that cemented them to her, since both were so ugly.
“Nor have I expressed an opinion that I thought any novel, whether poorly or exquisitely written was a basis for good economics or philosophy.”
You haven’t had to because your words give you away. You can play the Rove game decently, but I’m not biting. Your aim is not a debate per se, or even an exchange of honest intellectual differences, you’re just another wannabe playing the “let’s make them libruls mad” game and as such your whole manner and method reek with intellectual dishonesty.
Miconoclast….My, my my…aren’t WE just full of ourselves.
Maybe when I grow up I’ll be a smug little sesquipedalian like you. I’m just not quite there as yet. Oh well. Leaves me something to shoot for.
1. So, you are saying YOU don’t like Tommy so I should dislike him also. Typical. It’ll be a much better world when we all think alike.
2. Well, to quote my favorite sesquipedalian, “Saying no (so?) doesn’t make you correct” First, I have yet to see any evidence any of these people were “hired”. I didn’t think you’d understand so…If you are going to broaden the definition of your “Fire in the theater” example to cover loud or raucous dissenting opinion, how far is it to just banning dissenting opinion altogether. That’s the thing about people of “your ilk”. When you’re shouting down and threatening some conservative speaker or protesting some conservative event, it’s perfectly alright. But when it happens to you, you run crying like a little girl. Basically, you and your ilk are simply cowards. But you already realize that. That’s why you go so hard on the attack.
3. No connection has been established or substantiated. Your “ilk” do what they always do. They publicize one instance then try to broaden the umbrella to cover all dissent. Who’s avoiding responsibility for establishing what they allege is true?
4. About as magical as the empty lament of, “Did you complain when Bush…..” That is a weak, intellectually bankrupt argument and usually used by your “ilk” when you have nothing else to say. “Were you frightened when the fire was in the neighboring county? No? Then you shouldn’t be frightened now that the fire is burning down your next door neighbor’s house.”
5. So, would you mind sharing with us your credentials as a literary critic? For what it’s worth, I’m not a big fan of Wikipedia either. But it was quick. Typical diversionary tactics though. The point is that your opinion of Rand as a hack writer is not widely shared. Perhaps this source is more up to your standards:
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/11/20/books/book-notes-059091.html
Here is the survey’s list of the most influential books:
1. The Bible.
2. “Atlas Shrugged,” by Ayn Rand.
3. “The Road Less Traveled,” by M. Scott Peck.
Number 2 behind the Bible!! And 40 years after it was written!!So, I think it’s safe to say her writings are a bit more influential than you would have us believe. But don’t let facts stand in your way.
So, I won’t bother with the balance of your childish little word tantrum. I just find it a little pretentious that you present yourself as some sort of expert on what I think and feel.
Perhaps you should stick to getting your facts straight and spend less time trying to disparage others.
By the way, what in the flip is a “Miconoclast”? Let me guess. A one-eyed, bull headed person who just goes around attacking other’s beliefs?? (Figure that one out and get back to me.)
I close by saying you’re delusional if you think I care if you’re mad or not. Honestly, I don’t even care if you’re a “librul” or not. But statements like that are pretty indicative of the low level of your thinking.
“Maybe when I grow up I’ll be a smug little sesquipedalian like you.”
Hank,
Good dictionary use, but don’t you think mentioning the rather large size of my penis, sesquipedalian, is a little gross and you know I’m not quite that large.
“1. So, you are saying YOU don’t like Tommy so I should dislike him also. Typical. It’ll be a much better world when we all think alike.’
So besides being able to use a dictionary, you’re also adept with non sequitur’s, which I’ll allow you to look up since you like dictionary’s and seem to need them.
“First, I have yet to see any evidence any of these people were “hired”.
“When you’re shouting down and threatening some conservative speaker or protesting some conservative event, it’s perfectly alright.”
As I explained previously, I know reading comprehension is hard on you, that isn’t going to happen. Not because I can’t but because I don’t play with your ball in your ballpark, like some other liberals you might like to confuse with your Karl Rove games. You know what Henry, you have not proffered any evidence of your charge either. Again a typical Karl rove tactic.
“Your “ilk” do what they always do. They publicize one instance then try to broaden the umbrella to cover all dissent.”
Nice word “ilk” isn’t it, it seems I’ve already broadened your vocabulary, as you make another statement with no backup. You don’t debate, Henry, because you lack the skills. so you argue with all the intensity and lack of skill of a ten year old on the playground.
“5. So, would you mind sharing with us your credentials as a literary critic? For what it’s worth, I’m not a big fan of Wikipedia either. But it was quick.”
That’s the problem with you Henry, everything you do is quick and shallow. not only do you lack perception but you lack depth. One merely could google the appropriate book reviews to see what most literary critic think of her. however, unlike you I can think originally and am well read and well educated enough to come to my own opinions, unlike you who needs to be led, be it tommy, Bush, Rand or Rove.
“Number 2 behind the Bible!! And 40 years after it was written!!”
Very impressive were it not a fact that over 60% of Americans believe in the Book of Genesis and don’t believe in evolution.
“I just find it a little pretentious that you present yourself as some sort of expert on what I think and feel.”
Pretension has nothing to do with it. It’s your writing that gives you away. I knew I hit paydirt with Rand for instance and you prove it with the amount of time you spend on her. she’s hooked you and she didn’t even have to sleep with you. I think it’s just your innate greed.
“By the way, what in the flip is a “Miconoclast”
Some one is smarter than you and doesn’t fall for your stupid arguing tactics. In the alternative, someone who doesn’t take your intellect seriously.
“A one-eyed, bull headed person who just goes around attacking other’s beliefs?”
Now Henry this is known psychologically as projection. That’s where you take you secretly held feeling about yourself, which are so painful, that you accuse the other person of being what you know you are.
I started reading Ayn Rand 30 years ago, but got bored so I never finished. I was too liberal back then.
Miconoclast, you’re good at throwing mud. I’m impressed.
Okay. I guess that’s about enough for you. Your mommy is probably going to take your computer away in a moment, so I leave you with this. I’ll pretend to be as smart as you, and evaluate you on your last post.
Let’s see, you’re a dirty little man that uses a whole lot of words to basically say nothing.
You can’t support or substantiate anything you say so you essentially stick your thumbs in your ears, waggle your tongue and fingers at us and probably say something inane like, nah, nah, nah, boo, boo, I’m smarter than you so I don’t have to answer. Or my Daddy’s bigger than your Daddy or something equally immature.
You parrot some unknown critic’s review and that proves how smart you are. Yet you accuse me of following….oh heck….whoever, and that renders me easily led. Gotcha!!
You throw out baseless, incorrect statistics. I mention an integral part of Rand’s book and you brilliantly use that to deduce that I may have read one of her books. WOW!! A real Kreskin moment there!! (Hey. I can quote you both Clintons, Franken, Pelosi and Obama. What can you divine from that??)
But I do appreciate you explaining to me what a Miconoclast really is. I figured it was a combination of a Minotaur and an iconoclast. Thanks for setting me straight.
Now. Why don’t you project yourself to bed before you make your Mommy mad.
Hank, give it up!
@Tommy,
so Tommy if you got bored and never finished Ayn Rand’s book does that mean you didn’t think she was hot?
Okay, okay, okay. (Think Pesci in “Lethal Weapon”) I’m sorry but one more and I really do quit.
Minotaur the hater said:
“…you accuse the other person of being what you know you are.”
So after all that. After such a desperate attempt to dazzle me with how superior, how brilliant you are, you sum up your arguments with:
“I know you are, but what am I?”
(What’s that silly acronym for rolling around on the floor laughing my butt off?)
Maxene…Have to. Not only are my sides hurting from laughing so hard. My brains hurting also now.
“Now Henry this is known psychologically as projection. That’s where you take you secretly held feeling about yourself, which are so painful, that you accuse the other person of being what you know you are.”
Henry,
Just nailing you and who you are. I’m so glad you’re ROLFMAO, because after being made into such a fool, you at least have a sense of humor. I’m off now, you are far too easy a target and have so little ammunition in your clip.
Tommy,
Happy to be of service. While I really do enjoy serious discussion I see some people here like to engage in Karl Rove type games, which have gotten so tiresome after all these long years of conservative failure.
Maxene….I missed you.
“Maxene….I missed you.”
@Hank— You think?
54, this will make 55 comments. Top commented. Mario will be so proud.
@janine – ROLFMAO
@Tommy – It’s R O F L M A O
Get it right!!!
I just copy and pasted from Miconoclast’s post.
R O F L M A O
Tommy… I see that now. Maybe you should copy some of his ideas as well. Let Hank know too!!!
Oh, did he have some ideas? Did I miss something?
@tommy and/or hank
I read over his/her? posts and think he/she made some valid points.
Have a good afternoon.