The Observation Deck

dl meckes wrote:Bill, has every lunatic right-wing idea become law under Bush? Under Taft?

Thankfully, no.

Bush has had very few ideas and fewer good ideas. Taft not only had no ideas he hadn't a clue.

It looks like the Democrats will retain their majority in the House and increase their majority in the Senate. They might even get 60 seats. In that case we will have a one party state dominated by the most extreme elements of the Democrat party.

ALL of his programs and "solutions" are government centered.

That is pretty much a core belief of the democratic party. Not too long ago, the Republican party was against Big Government... and now, they are all up in every one's business all the time. Don't see the difference here. At least the Dems are up front about it instead of the sneaky way the Repubs get the govt involved in everything under the sun.

Valerie Molinski wrote:ALL of his programs and "solutions" are government centered.

That is pretty much a core belief of the democratic party. Not too long ago, the Republican party was against Big Government... and now, they are all up in every one's business all the time. Don't see the difference here. At least the Dems are up front about it instead of the sneaky way the Repubs get the govt involved in everything under the sun.

IwishIcoulddisagreeIwishIcoulddisagreeIwishIcouddissagreI'llkeepwishingtillcandisagree.

Valerie Molinski wrote:ALL of his programs and "solutions" are government centered.

That is pretty much a core belief of the democratic party. Not too long ago, the Republican party was against Big Government... and now, they are all up in every one's business all the time. Don't see the difference here. At least the Dems are up front about it instead of the sneaky way the Repubs get the govt involved in everything under the sun.

Valerie, there's a distinct difference in each parties vision of a "big government though".

Democrats want a big government to protect and provide for everyone's social needs.

Republicans created a big government to police people and extract information with no concern for the large social welfare of the country.

Whee! It's the broad-generalization-and-oversimplification thread! Everybody can play!

Although you hear conservatives use the phrase 'Nanny State' a lot, it is preferable to the Republicans' 'Daddy State' where you do exactly as Daddy says or you get the belt.

In principle, you'd think with such a huge cadre of economists working on the Obama campaign, one of them would have explained capitalism to him by now, so I think we can assume he understands it. His main economic advisor is a deficit hawk, so again you'd have to assume that there's someone in his ear keeping his spending initiatives grounded in some reality.

The challenge for the next administration will be to find a way to invest in the technologies and industries that will create jobs and keep us as a country on the forefront of innovation, rather than

The proof is in the pudding.

Huh? 'Pudding as evidence?' You make the claim and can't back it up. Okay.

Phil:

These are bad examples and have nothing to do with Obama's policy ideas.

Yes. Straw men.

Valerie:

Not too long ago, the Republican party was against Big Government... and now, they are all up in every one's business all the time.

The Republicans haven't recently walked the talk of less government. They are 'borrow and spenders.' Fortunately, the Communist Chinese have issued the US some credit cards with which to go on our spending spree.

And, with some help from Bill Clinton, Bush I., Reagan, they've turned Wall Street into a casino.

But, as we prepare to hear how Marx=Communism=socialism=liberals, we might also scrape underneath the system of corporate welfare that collectivizes entire industries and shoves tax payer monies into their greedy maw. I'm tempted to suggest in some cases this is done to protect them from themselves! This isn't to me a big secret, yet, it seems not obvious to many that if you follow the money in detail, you can begin to figure out why income adjusted for inflation has been stagnant 'in the middle' for over three decades.

This is hardly surprising. The Republicans reward their elite monied constituencies, sucker everybody else along, and laugh all the way to the bank. They're good at this. They whine about class war when it comes up, but they've been masters at winning battles in this class war ever since Reagan brought these efforts to a masterful pitch.

Remember David Stockman and 'the trojan horse?'

Keep in mind, what Enronism was all about. Creating bold new commodity products; cooking the books; and then in the aftermath of the inevitable collapse of capitalist excess, came insipid fixes from the Republican crony Congress. Is anybody surprised the same damn thing has come to us again in the mortgage industry? 'Innovative products' needing only suckers and deceptive sales practices.

Same result: gouging the average Joe.

All this talk about sacrosanct capitalism in the context of unfettered greed and corporate collectivism and welfare is missing part of the actual deck.

It's called Trickle Up Economics: where plutocratic corporate elites figure out new and amazing!!! ways to empty the change out of the pocket of the working man and woman and send it into fancy and amazing!!! investment instruments parked off shore in many cases and certainly much of it parked away from the tax system.

Free enterprise, my ass. Here's a question. In any economic up-turn the asset/cash benefits can be divided up between cash earned via wages; assets earned via property; assets earned via paper wealth; and, finally, cash flowing into the tax system.

How many times since world war 2 turn has an up-turn disfavored cash earned via wages to the extent that wage earners did worse than investors in non-property assets?

***

I really don't understand how the mantle of conservatism gets thrown about the shoulders of Nixon, Reagan and Bush II. Nixon? Not really a Conservative and not really an adherent of the Constitution. You have Reagan ignoring the Constitution; selling arms to Iran; rivers of innocent blood on his hands; and then raising withholdings on middle class wages until his vaunted tax cuts disappear. Bush II. Growing the government by leaps and bounds; politicizing the cabinet bureaucracies; rebuffing oversight; breaking laws domestic and international; punching gaping holes in the Constitution; and helping many of his most wealthy supporters to laugh all the way to the bank.

Are you better off today?

And all this following from an astonishing end run around the Constitution's law in the aftermath of Florida 2000.

Then on to Iraq. Potted agenda. 9/11. Still, sold on lies, sure, but, let's be honest, a great excuse to borrow and spend and make a ton o' cash, and laugh all the way to the bank. 30,000 very profitable American casualties--well worth it, wouldn't you say?

***

Enough some say. I join them. As a patriot and digger I say: capitalism is not served highly by criminality and cynicism and mendacity and death-making and hammering the working man and woman.

Bill.

Keep in mind that with a Democrat congress and Democrat Senate every left wing lunatic idea will become law.

I doubt it with all the blue and yellow dogs, but, yes, from your mouth to God's ears. ...more like Sweden rather than like Italy in 1940.

Brian Pedaci wrote:Although you hear conservatives use the phrase 'Nanny State' a lot, it is preferable to the Republicans' 'Daddy State' where you do exactly as Daddy says or you get the belt.

This is excellent. It made me laugh out loud.

Valerie Molinski wrote:ALL of his programs and "solutions" are government centered.

That is pretty much a core belief of the democratic party. Not too long ago, the Republican party was against Big Government... and now, they are all up in every one's business all the time. Don't see the difference here. At least the Dems are up front about it instead of the sneaky way the Repubs get the govt involved in everything under the sun.

Democrats and Republicans are the problem with government... Nothing has changed for the better in this country in years. Maybe we are all being duped by both parties and do not even realize it???? Our current form of government only serves the people in power... It does not serve the people. just sayin

Stephen Eisel wrote:

Valerie Molinski wrote:ALL of his programs and "solutions" are government centered.

That is pretty much a core belief of the democratic party. Not too long ago, the Republican party was against Big Government... and now, they are all up in every one's business all the time. Don't see the difference here. At least the Dems are up front about it instead of the sneaky way the Repubs get the govt involved in everything under the sun.

Democrats and Republicans are the problem with government... Nothing has changed for the better in this country in years. Maybe we are all being duped by both parties and do not even realize it???? Our current form of government only serves the people in power... It does not serve the people. just sayin

Well, I do not disagree with what you are saying, but I was responding to Mr Call's initial point of the Dems pushing govt involvement at every turn... as if the Republicans are any different in that respect. And he could not refute that.

Valerie Molinski wrote:

Stephen Eisel wrote:

Valerie Molinski wrote:ALL of his programs and "solutions" are government centered.

That is pretty much a core belief of the democratic party. Not too long ago, the Republican party was against Big Government... and now, they are all up in every one's business all the time. Don't see the difference here. At least the Dems are up front about it instead of the sneaky way the Repubs get the govt involved in everything under the sun.

Democrats and Republicans are the problem with government... Nothing has changed for the better in this country in years. Maybe we are all being duped by both parties and do not even realize it???? Our current form of government only serves the people in power... It does not serve the people. just sayin

Well, I do not disagree with what you are saying, but I was responding to Mr Call's initial point of the Dems pushing govt involvement at every turn... as if the Republicans are any different in that respect. And he could not refute that.

Hope is on the way. A new Billy Jack movie is in production and there will be a Matthew Good concert here in two weeks.

But there are setbacks in the course to Freedom. Turkey may be pulling out of Iraq and withdrawing from the Global War on Terror.

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/arti ... wsid=97707

Experts say Statist Atheist Liberal Communists must be pressuring Turkey to stop fighting terrism in Iraq. Others say Turkey must want the Terrists to win. It takes a tough Imam to make a tender Turkey!

As for the most likely Republican candidate, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gwqEneBKUs "Like Hope, Only Different"

dl meckes wrote:As for the most likely Republican candidate, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gwqEneBKUs "Like Hope, Only Different"

Visions of Waco, Ruby Ridge and Elian Gonzalez being kidnapped by storm troopers does not give me hope...

It looks like Obama for me....

Brian Pedaci wrote:huge cadre of economists working on the Obama campaign[/url], one of them would have explained capitalism to him by now, so I think we can assume he understands it.

No he does not. If he understood it he would support it.

His support of trillions of dollars in tax increases and criminalization of free enterprise indicates he hasn't a clue.