Happy Tax Day

April 15th.  The date we all love as it represents our financial contributions to our society  ;-)

I've contacted Ender about the latest spam.  I've suggested he go ahead and implement the "verification" feature that would mean an extra step for regular posters, but would foil bot spam.   

I'll be out of town for the next several days, and most likely entirely unplugged, so please ignore the spam.

 

 

Comments :

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thanks PF

 for the Tax Day Thread and for contacting Ender about the spam-bots.

Wherever you are going have fun.

…………

I went to see the wildflowers...

………… parent

exquisitely beautiful

 and good refreshment for the soul.

 Great job of capturing these fine petaled beauties!

………… parent

I don't normally do talking points

but dammit, this has to be repeated: what tax increases are these tea partiers talking about?  The stimulus reduced the overall tax burden for nearly all of them.  The only coherent gripe I've heard is "they're planning to raise taxes soon, you can bet on it!".  OK, whatever.  Protest tax cuts because they might lead to necessary tax increases later?

If you folks on the Right take issue with our overlabeling of conservative positions as secretly racist, you're going to have to come up with complaints that make sense.  Until then, I'm sticking with:

 tea partiers = bitter ignorami fearful of brown people whipped into frenzy by media machine that hates Democrats.

If you're willing to discard the BS about taxes and focus on government spending contributing to the deficit, we're getting somewhere.  But you can't stop with earmarks and ACORN.  How about some hard historical data disproving Keynes, for one?  Detailed plans for bending the cost curves of entitlement programs, including supporting Democratic bills that do so .  The one worthy idea I've heard so far coming from Republicans is tinkering with TORT to remove the incentive for doctors to practice defensive medicine.  I'm sure we can build from there.

If the top Republican priorities remain "defeat Democratic bills and win the next election", I'm simply going to conclude that Democrats have been too nice to you.

…………

A higher % of tea partyers are supposed to be college educated

They have problems with "high taxes" and the deficit.
Spending is on the back burner.
Seems odd.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

the political war is nothing but talking points

corph

 Why do you think they pay Frank Luntz zillions to find just the right bumper sticker slogans to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

Most folks don't pay that much attention, and all they hear is, government takeover, bailouts, kill granma etc. "They'  use push poll type questions and polls to reinforce their propaganda that taxes are unAmerican, and being against America (ie: the big bad democratic government machine) is patriotic!

 

………… parent

The Tea Party puppet masters feel the top 1% needs more.

And in all seriousness, the top 1% ONLY reaped two thirds the gains made in the last economic expansion.  (as per www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm Center on Budget & Policy Priorities).  They really need more.  Why are all these greedy poor & middle class Americans holding back on giving our oligarch leaders their fair due.....all of it.  Everything.  And the really sad John Galt aspect of it is that even if they did get it all, even if they did get everything, they'd still bitch about getting shafted and not getting enough.

That is what the Tea Partiers are protesting for.

…………

"Income Tax" for those that spread half truths

The Federal Income Tax is not the only federal tax.
The Federal Income Tax is not the only federal tax.
The Federal Income Tax is not the only federal tax.
The Federal Income Tax is not the only federal tax.
The Federal Income Tax is not the only federal tax.
The Federal Income Tax is not the only federal tax.
Corporations only pay income tax on "profits" that aren't ignored by credits/deductions.
Same basic reason why many people don't pay "Federal Income Tax." Basic needs and other stuff are covered by deductions. All federal taxes can gut the lower middle class harder on discretionary income than even the top 20%, let alone the top 1%.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Tea Party=Lassie Faire Economics

 That is what the Tea Party People are protesting for! 

  More Enron's. Less Government. Freedom baby.  

………… parent

Keep Gov't Hands off of Medicare too

True Laissez-faire works nice if humans weren't ever involved.
The same elements that can turn an ok or good government idea into a poor one, will more likely be offset by far worse outcomes if the government gets out of regulation. For profit businesses are in it for one goal, to get the best Return on Investment it can over the short and long haul. People exploiting gov't programs, laws, and law making processes will be left unchecked except by other profit driven companies. Competition isn't cheap. Collusion is cheaper and safer.
I'd have some slight respect for Tea Partyers as a whole, if they didn't just seem like largely made up of Anti-Wrong Lizardians. They are largely just GOP voters, or people just too lazy to vote or be informed. They, as a whole, think they want less gov't involvement, yet barely a quarter of them have a favorable view of Ron Paul, and 2/3 of them have a favorable view of Sarah Palin. They are a big chunk of ignorant old white people that are now upset.
That Jerry Johnson quoted in the Washington Post that doesn't like Obama "not just because he's black" is probably a sizable minority, and Jerry's best excuse is that he's just a Freudian Closet Racist, and not a full blown White Nationalist.
Easily a majority of them really don't distrust the gov't to help them out, they don't like the gov't helping to stop the wealth redistribution more so to the haves.
Gov't trying to stop Health Insurance Death Panels, screw that they say.

They definitely weren't around en masse in 2003 with massive government involvement in Iraqis' lives.
Gov't intervention cause the Housing Bubble they might say, and yet the Invisible Hand of the free market is blind, and no many did see the bubble many Free Marketeers act like they knew was coming.
laissez-faire as most propose it is even a misnomer, there would still be an oversight by some entity.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Paying for the War

 That problem of paying off debts after the birth of a nation.... or how to  pay the soldiers that fought for 'freedom' from the Brits.

 The delima of paying the debts of a new nation,  and the soldiers who fought the Revolutionary War created a familiar problem, somehow the new nation had to raise money to pay for itself and to pay the soldiers who fought the war of the revolution.

 Veterans of the Continental Army  also aggrieved because they had been conscripted, had to fight with no pay!  Once discharged they were treated poorly some even locked up in debtors prison.

 How to pay of the debt for the Revolutionary War? A Whiskey Tax but there was a backlash/ The taxes of the newly liberated spurred the whiskey rebellion. The farmers who used their excess grain to make Whiskey were angry that elite urbanites would dare tax their products. The urbanites were looking for ways to pay the war debt and the conscripted soldiers who fought for Independence for this new nation.

James Madison addressed this concept by stating that "Liberty may be endangered by the abuses of liberty as well as the abuses of power." 

 IN other words, not only those in power can abuse their position, but individuals can be found guilty of the same, essentially acting recklessly and irresponsibly.

 Our first President, George Washington,  took to his horse and rode into battle to fight the unruly commoners that refused to pay their taxes, in the battle known as the Whiskey Rebellion. Washington was sending a message to those drunk with liberation that in order to have a union you have to pay for it somehow. The war over taxes is nothing new.

…………

The geniuses at Red State

 specifically Erick Erickson think that holding thieves to account will cripple innovation in this country! If by innovation he means bankrupting the financial markets he is correct.

www.redstate.com/erick/2010/04/19/is-the-white-house-sec-and-dnc-colluding-to-destroy-goldman-sachs-to-pass-financial-reform/

 I see prosecuting those who falsely represented of the three tiered CDO markets as a 'buy' to be a long overdue step towards a remedy that would restore an element of trust in our financial markets. 

…………

Too many hyper-partisan (R) voters

They aren't just Crying Wolf, they're Crying Chupacabra.
They're destroying their credibility.

Is EE thinking that just because he's a paranoid partisan hack?
Yes.

EE
"This is stunning. Let’s not forget that Goldman was a top donor to Obama in 2008. "

My gods, if Barry Hussein Obama does this to his friends, imagine what he'll do to partisan hacks!!1

Crippling innovation is suing the guy that allegedly knowingly sold the financial equivalent of exploding cars?

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Here's a fun one:

Filing jointly at the state level and individually at the federal level, because only one level recognizes my marriage.  Cue the poor HR tax advisor who has to do cartwheels because the software won't let her change filing status like that, involving multiple trips out to her office over the course of two weeks to make sure we're doing everything right.  Whee!

Hi, everybody! 

 

(Where are all the conversatives?)

Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

…………

Hey, did you hear about this?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/20/dilemma-texas-says-gays-divorce/

DALLAS -- After the joy of a wedding and the adoption of a baby came arguments that couldn't be resolved, leading Angelique Naylor to file for divorce.

That left her fighting both the woman she married in Massachusetts and the state of Texas, which says a union granted in a state where same-sex marriage is legal can't be dissolved with a divorce in a state where it's not.

...

You can always fill the tax forms out by hand.  A divorce isn't quite that simple, it seems.  At least in Texas.

 

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

………… parent

This is true, although

with our first time filing jointly and the law a little unclear, we thought it was best to put everything in the hands of professionals.  As for divorce, we've wondered the same thing about CA law, whether the new ban prohibits the state from processing divorce papers.  'Til death do us part, indeed!

Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

………… parent

Texas hates the US Constitution, that's why

They'll be damned if they have to honor the US Constitution that says they have to honor what Mass. did.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Goldman Sachs Blindsided?

 GS claims they were blindsided by an SEC decision to move forward on a suit against the bank. Spare me the crocodile tears. That is like saying they were blindsided by a grandmother on a moped.

 Much is being made of some purported 'partisan' vote to move this case against GS, splitting along party lines. As if that IS the issue. That is a distraction.  Does this imply the reverse, that for years  the SEC decided not to move forward on a party line vote?

 The partisan distraction is irrelevant to the bottom line. How do we protect the American tax payers from being coerced into saving Goldman's hide for making irrationally risky decisions, ie: privatizing the profits and socializing the risk?

…………

Obama's lies ...

I knew it was a lie at the time, but now we know the truth:

Obama Issues Directive to Shut Down Guantánamo

Published: January 21, 2009

WASHINGTON — President Obama signed executive orders Thursday directing the Central Intelligence Agency to shut what remains of its network of secret prisons and ordering the closing of the Guantánamo detention camp within a year, government officials said.

...

we're still waiting, Mr. President.  Do your executive orders mean anything?  Thus far it seems that they don't.  Keeping Gitmo open is just another example of how Obama is just like Bush.  The only difference is that Bush was at least honest about it.

In other news ...

Gitmo Gets Its Groove Back

President Obama's inability to follow-through on his promise to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay has, remarkably, put him in line with the American public.

According to a new CNN/Opinion Research poll, support for closing Gitmo has dropped 12 points since Obama took office, and now sits at 39 percent.

...

Hmm.

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

…………

Thanks for the caring

---

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Obama's failures ...

Obama was going to make government more trusted, or so he seemed to say. The results are in:

President Obama Goes Golfing... Again

We've been hearing for years from Barack Obama that he would be the one to restore confidence in government.  Well, the results are in and things are not exactly going as planned.

 

A new Pew Research Center poll shows that only 22 percent of Americans say they trust the government; an overwhelming 76 percent say they trust the government only sometimes or not at all.

Now by comparison the average level of confidence in the government during the Bush administration, well, that was 37 percent — which was the most trusted administration since the Reagan years when 42 percent sided with their government.

By the way, only 33 percent of Democrats say they trust the government. So looks like the Anointed One and his party have some work to do before the November elections.

...

And remember how everyone used to complain about Bush not being on the job enough?  Well, it seems Obama has been spending more time golfing in the first year that Bush did in eight:

Gone Golfin'

The president may not be setting any records for restoring trust in government any time soon. But he has been able to put his name in the history books, well, for other reasons.

This weekend marked the 32nd time the Anointed One has stepped on to the golf course as president. And get this, after just a year in office he's already played eight more rounds of golf than George W. Bush played during his entire eight years.

The president was scheduled to travel to Poland for the funeral of that nation's president who was killed in a plane crash last week, but because of the volcanic eruption in Iceland, he had to scrap his plans.

I'm glad he was able to find something constructive to do with all that free time. What about maybe creating jobs?

Well said.

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

…………

Take a poll everyday

 and then stick your finger in the wind and spit.

Take a poll to find out whether folks trust AIG, or the Big Banks. Then take a poll and tell us which hand you should wipe your ass with. Then get back to us on how all of the results skew against Obama. I think we should run the country by polls don't you, fellow prayer warrior.

 

………… parent

I think you are confused.

The DEMOCRATS govern by polls.  The REPUBLICANS govern by values (except for the RINOs, obviously).

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

………… parent

Then why do you keep quoting polls

 as if they mean something important?

 I don't think I have ever seen so many polls taken on a daily basis to try and sway public opinion with biased ridiculous questions. As if golfing is an issue.

 It is crystal clear  that you tea party types are bitter Bush supporters transposing your years of frustration over endlessly defending Bush's record of incompetence onto Obama.

 I am taking a poll on X,  so I can decide whether you are pro-America or anti-America.

………… parent

Republicans govern by values in imaginationland

99.999% of the GOP and it's voters are RINO's then.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

I'm not sure I understand the golfing thing.

Bush spent nearly all of his vacation time at his ranch, so comparing number of games of golf being played seems a bit... irrelevant, no? 

For what it's worth, factcheck looked at the number of vacation days spent by the last few presidents in their first year of office, and found :

Obama: 26 days
W.Bush: 69 days
Clinton: 21 days
Bush: 40 days
Reagan: 42 days
Carter: 19 days

The article mentions that days spent in Camp David haven't been counted for anyone, since they're usually a combination of work and leisure.  If you want to include those: Obama-27, W.Bush-78.

Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

………… parent

Yea, that's a fair point ...

regarding counting the golfing vs. ranch outings.  But this data does suggest a useful metric on gaging how great a President will be:

    Presidential_Greatness = Greatness_Constant * 1st_Year_Vacation_Days

where it is known that

    Greatness_Constant > 1

for all valid uses of this predictor.  :)

Note that G.W. Bush is an obvious anomoly in this respect as Reagan was clearly the greatest of the bunch, but for his part in the war on terror Bush wasn't far behind.  G.W. was totally embarassing on the spending front (non-war) and I feared that he would actually serve as a valid example of how the Republicans were no longer the party of fiscal responsibility.  Luckily (in some warped way) Obama came along and dashed that notion from the very outset.

:)

 

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

………… parent

Heh.

Points for creativity.

Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

………… parent

17 years after the fact ...

someone finally tells the truth about Waco.  We all knew it but no one would confirm it.  Bill Clinton was actually the butcher of Waco, not Janet Reno as we had all been led to believe.  Dick Morris finally comes clean:

Limbaugh runs with Dick Morris' dubious Clinton-Reno-Waco story

From the April 19 edition of Fox News' Hannity:

MORRIS: And let's understand what was Timothy McVeigh's motivation. God knows what was going in that crazy head of his but there's some speculation, and he himself had said, that it was the reaction to the Waco takeover. And Bill Clinton orchestrated that takeover. And in fact was so ashamed at what he did in Waco that he was not gonna appoint Janet Reno to a second four year term. And she told him in a meeting right before the inauguration day for his new term that 'if you don't appoint me, I'm gonna tell the truth about Waco.' And that forced Clinton's hand in reappointing her. So I think Mr. --

MORRIS: I have no idea. But I know that he told me, Clinton told me, that 'I couldn't not appoint Reno because she would have turned on me over Waco.' That's the phrase he used.

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): I don't remember you telling this story before.

MORRIS: No, it's never been said before.

HANNITY: Woah.

MORRIS: I think that President Clinton might want to examine his own connection with the Oklahoma City bombing in terms of Waco before he starts accusing people in walkers and wheelchairs who are trying to keep their Medicare of being provocateurs.

HANNITY: So, what was the truth about Waco that Reno threatened to use against him?

Media Matters is trying to pull their typical left-wing CYA for Clinton but it just doesn't wash.  The best they could do to attack the new revelations was to point out how "drastically different" Morris' story was this time from one of his accounts in his books.

From Because He Could: [emphasis added]

Reno's loyalty in assuming the blame for Waco in 2000, years after the event, might have its origin in an interesting conversation she had with Clinton in the first few weeks of his second term. As I've noted elsewhere, Clinton told me that he despised Reno; he once told us that her appointment was the "worst mistake" he had ever made. As he shaped his second-term cabinet, he told me he was going to fire her. He sent her every signal of this intention, reappointing or replacing every one of his cabinet members but her. Clinton was obviously hoping that she would resign, to make it easier to get rid of her. But he couldn't get her to quit. So he scheduled a face-to-face meeting with her, at which, he told me, he planned to fire her.

Instead, he decided to let her stay.

Dumbfounded, I asked him why. "I told her," Clinton said, "that no attorney general had ever served for eight years, and that I thought it was not a good idea for anyone to do so. But she was desperate to keep the job. She says she'll quit [as attorney general] after a year -- but she begged me to reappoint her first, so it won't look like I was firing her because of Waco."

I thought it odd that Reno and Clinton should still be talking about Waco, almost four years after the raid. But the very mention of the issue suggests that another dynamic might have been at play here: Reno may well have been demanding reappointment as her price for taking the fall for Waco-- shouldering the responsibility that should have been his. [pp. 56-57]

Umm, yea.  Those two accounts are "drastically different".  The only difference I see is that this time Morris confirms that Clinton actually told him this rather than beating around the bush to give Clinton continued cover (or possibly fearing some form of physical danger should he expose the truth at the time).  Now that Clinton appears to be neutered in terms of his controlling interest in the Democrat goon squads, I guess Morris feels safe enough to finally come clean.

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

…………

Waco is petty childs play

compared to a Real Manly President, like George Washington (Sarah's fav) mounting his horse and leading the US Military to squash by shooting in person,  the unruly seditionists who wouldn't pay their taxes on their corn whiskey. The Whiskey Rebellion makes Waco look small time.

 

………… parent

No merde

Clinton personally teleported and started the fire too. He has that power, he's a reptilian humanoid with a (D) next to his name.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

I trust Dick Morris as far as I can throw him, regardless

Morris doesn't think there are a good chunk of angry "Keep the gov't hands of my medicare" crowd?
The folks at Waco weren't selling illegal arms now?
Clinton started the fire?
Clinton put in a secret sound system in David Koresh's bedroom, impersonated the Holy Ghost, and told David to be an illegal arms dealer?

Are you just trying to get others to post endless links to McConnel et al.?
Or links GW Bush White House damn near making merde up to invade Iraq?

Was the Clinton bombings in Sudan now the cause of 9/11?

McViegh was blamed the gov't for him not being able to hack it in the special forces. He could have just as easily blamed the Death Squads Ollie North funded by selling weapons to Saddam as cause for his contempt for him being a failure.

Dick Morris probably blamed GHW Bush for now 9/11 too, with the whole US troops in the holy land irking bin Laden.

Clinton the butcher?
It wasn't an assumed fact that Reno took the fall?
People thought Clinton pulled a Reagan and didn't know what was going on?
What the fracking hell is GW Bush to you then?
What the hell is the Saddam is working with al Qaeda bs the Bush White House kept on selling?
How many people died in Waco?
How many civilians has the US killed in Iraq?
How many refugees were forced to flee?
How many more people were tortured or collateral damage and maimed for life by US troops or US interrogators than what Saddam did?

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

It was Obama's fault

  GoRight and his friend Dick Morris haven't figured out a way to blame Waco on Obama, yet.

But wait...... isn't it true that...

You know, while Obama was in his thirties he flew back and forth to Kenya, Cuba and Germany consulting with communists, nazis and radicals to conspire to get the people at Waco to be biblical literalists.

When David Karesh got to screw the young ones  and collect those bonus point notches on his christian bible belt,   he was forced to horde arms to make sure no one arrested him for polygamy. But that was only after Obama had whispered in his ear that David Karesh had potential as a great community organizer there at the Waco, also.

 Waco really was all young Obama's fault for secretly inspiring  David Karesh to become a community organizer. 

………… parent

That's ridiculous!

 I know you're one of the Obama right-or-wrong crowd who deliberately chose to look the other way when he voted for the FISA Bill, continued funding for our war in Iraq,  and his promises to escalate our war on Afghanistan, which Obama has most certainly done, missliberties, but I know that I could not and would not, in good conscience vote for him after that.  Obama took the exact same positions as McCain in the pre-POTUS election Foreign policy debate, and he appointed people to his Administration (Geitner, Summers, Rahm, etc.) who helped get this country into the mess that it's in right now in the first place.  Handing Hilary Clinton the job of Sec'y of State was a disaster, he doesn't have the gumption to pointedly tell Israel to get their troops and their rightwing settlers the hell out of West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem and to stop the rough treatment of innocent Palestinian civilians, nor did he have the gumption to kill that disastrous piece of legislature that's called a "Healthcare Reform" Bill and to go back to the drawing board and put the Administration's heads together to construct a whole new HCR Bill with Single Payer, which, btw, Obama threw under the bus pretty much as soon as he took office.

As for the Goldman-Sachs situation, Obama was in their back pocket to begin with, and he's also in the back pocket of the Insurance companies and Big Pharma, which the disastrous "HCR" Bill that was just signed into law and passed by the Obama Administration is a bail-out for.  Don't kid yourself, missliberties.  Obama's not the knight in shining armor that you'd like to believe that he is.

His record on civil liberties, NAFTA, CAFTA and the patriot act isn't really any better than G. W. Bush's, either.

 

 

 

………… parent

No really

 Waco is all Obama's fault.

 It's not ridiculous when you understand that Obama was elected in a secret plot to radicalize the fringe. Get it. The right wanted Obama to get elected!

 Obama never had any intention of doing right by America. His goal all along has been to thwart liberals and elevate passions of the fringe to rise to action so they can have the perfect enemy to galvanize their agenda.  

 Obama cleverly put Hillary in a place where he could have his thumb on her back so he could use her while pretending to give her power.  Obama is secretly conspiring with Glenn Beck to change the world.  It has been his plan all along.

 If only I, like yourself, had been smart enough to see all of this coming down the pike. I am just banging my head against the wall that I didn't listen to your sage advice from the beginning and vote for whoever you voted for.

………… parent

Ha ha ha!

 There you go, with your cynical and bitter sarcasm toward people who see things differently than you do and call them accordingly, missliberties.  More to the point, Waco has nothing to do with what we're discussing here on this board now  

Frankly, I think you're one of the most, if not the most sarcastic, cynical and bitter individual that I've ever met online, and you're more than likely this way offline as well.

………… parent

and.....

 your point is?

………… parent

My point is whatever you want it to be.

 Get the drift, missliberties?  Hmmmmmmm?

………… parent

I bought a Mac.

I had one many years ago.  An old Mac IIci.  But I've had two PC's since so relearning the 'mac' way is intersting.  I have to say I'm impressed.  A very nice toy.  I don't game much so I won't miss that.  Been thinking of loading Windows 7 for those programs that only come out in PC.  We'll see.

The world is OK right now,  The calm before the storm.  Elections too close.  Politicians & party's start making less & less sense.  And don't get me started on those Sarah Palin enthusiasts....

…………

Did you see the segment

 on the Keith Olberman show where he poured gas on a guy holding a tea party sign and pretended to light it on fire, then claimed that tea partiers were destroying America?

 I didn't either.

 Did you see the Ed Schulz show where Ed weilded a baseball bat, beating his hand and the desk and calling for a revolution?

 I didn't either.

 But according to Hugh Hewitt Ed Schulz and Keith Olberman are just like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. Hugh believes this so deeply that he won't stop talking long enough for your to express your opinion. But if you do, as in criticize his home boys, he will tell you that you are trying to stifle free speech. Huh?

 

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/msnbc-pulls-the-plug-on...

You be the judge. I don't think you can call this 'entertainment'.

http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/487daa32-757d-4d1d-a833-31e340cbb936

…………

As for me

I only see segments of Rush via other sources.

I've probably watched at least as much of Beck as Olbermann, not much of Ed.
Ed has his "pyscho" talk, not productive.

Beck is an act, effectively anything he says, or any "logic" he uses to question if something is possible, can be used right back at any idea he supports tenfold*, it was rich once when he talked about doing things nonviolently while smacking his fist into his hand repeatedly.

Beck accepts AGW, but I don't think he's ever brought that up on his show. He'd lose his flock.

Hannity, O'reilly, and Beck aren't helpful to the Joe Schmos that watch them and partly trust them

Donny seems to have chosen an odd topic, considering he's Donny.

*Like when Beck had an all black panel on, with Beck talking about a more limited government could increase the jobs in majority black communities (implying a "free[er]" market could get more blacks jobs and they'd be better off, Beck goes on to loosely refer to the Great Society and that when the Romans took over Britain, the Roman handed out gifts to keep the Brits happy. Implying the Dems and "social justice" were the Romans with the "hand outs", which is quite odd, since early he just effectively promised any poor blacks the money that goes with what Beck says is a "free[er]" market. Beck effectively just did the same thing he vilified, promised money to more blacks if the voted for the GOP. Almost like Welfare was gutted in Beck's world too.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Inglorious Bastards

 

  Those who claim that Obama is some freaky tyrant, are now insisting on using the authoritarian tactics of the German SS. Ve must see yor papers.

 They've targeted their first victim.

A brownish looking truckdriver born in the US. They refused to accept the usual ID and insisted he produce his birth certificate. His wife also a US citizen of brownish color had to leave work, go home and bring it to the police. This is insane.

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/scarce/az-truck-driver-forced-show-b...

Make it stop. IS this really happening in America.

 

…………

The Latino vote would go to Republicans if

'natural' preferences in play.  The culture here in California is somewhat conservative in their own way.  Very Catholic.  No, they'd vote republican except out here republicans brought in Prop 209 which was essentially a 'go **** you' to everyone browner than the Queen of England.  There's a sect, a segment of people who are supremists.  They exist in every culture, every race & every tribe of people.  It's just that here in the US it's the white supremists who are so much more in your face about it and expect you to live by their values, which I won't.  Now why Republicans think they need to pander to the crazy supremists out there, I can't say.  I thinks some of the important people are quitely intolerant of others as a general rule.  They use racism to stoke the fire but they're playing with fire, they should be more responsible.  It's sad.

But, they hold an advantage to Democratic elections this year.  They scare moderates.  They really do frighten the 'silent majority' that don't go to Tea Parties or appear on Fox News,  There are moderates in the Party, just not in the apparatus or administration or operative levels.  There, you have the Rovebots.  It's our own circle of Dante's hell.

………… parent

They are playing with fire

 and it is more than sad. I don't even have words. No doubt there is a problem, but Az. went about this ass backwards.

The whole deal stinks.

To those who say put the national guard on the border, etc. remember that cost $$$, as in higher taxes. The immigration service has been underfunded, understaffed, and is likely corrupt. Nevermind that transporting cheap labor across the border is a money making business.

 Immigration has been ignored for so long that it's just a mess. Folks have lived in this country 15 and 20 years, had kids that are US citizens, been employed by US employers, purchased homes under US law, purchased cars with US bank loans,  and now they are being targeted as criminals?

 The drug problem is separate from the immigration problem. Yet I would venture a guess that manufacturers of guns have zero problem selling  machine guns, automatic rifles or anything that shoots bullets to illegal immigrants, or folks just south of the US border.

 If I was queen, I would first off target the gun manufacturers who sell weapons to illegal immigrants and on the border. Lets see the NRA squeal about regulating gun sales  across the border. I'd love to hear the 'free market' excuse they come up with.

 

………… parent

That was a fed agent

Not a state agent.
But AZ state agents doing similar things aren't likely far behind.
The law virtually guarantees profiling and harassment of Hispanic US citizens via detention or other acts.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Sure does

 Does this mean that John McCain will have to lose some of his Mexican help that maintain his  eight homes?

………… parent

You know, ML, your comment is actually racist, right?

Does this mean that John McCain will have to lose some of his Mexican help that maintain his  eight homes?

Why do you assume that Mexican's can only rise to the status of being the "paid help" for white people like John McCain?

I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4

………… parent

As is yours

 You said "white people".  Race baiter!

………… parent

Question for serious tea partiers

 Why are you not demonstrating and getting people out in mass to support ending too big to fail and some regulation of banks? 

Seriously. That should be your big issue. It was the geniuses at the big bank investment firms that busted the economy and had to come groveling for your tax payer dollars. The bankers got the bailout money. I thought that was your pet issue...... the bailouts.

 I don't understand why the tea party people aren't camped out in front of Goldman Sachs, demanding and end to privatizing the profits and socializing the risk.

 

…………

Some conservatives are, and have been, pushing for that

Eliminating the "too big to fail" problem is and has been discussed by conservatives as quite possibly the best solution to the financial mess.    It's just not something being talked about by the circus we know as our media outlets.   Sensible solutions don't make for good entertainment.

The Senate rejected consideration of the "finance reform" bill yesterday, and although Senator Reid insisted that the Democrats try again, most thought the bill dead for the year. As Republican Senator Mitch McConnell said, "it's not ready yet."

I'd go farther and say that what's in the current bill ought not ever be ready. Were it left to me I'd reform finance regulation all right, but it wouldn't be a hasty process. It certainly would not include the oligarchic legislation in this bill. Adam Smith told us that capitalist would always collude to get government to make it tough for competitors to enter the market place; the current financial reform bill does this in spades with big casino. Of course Sarbanes Oxley already did that; but this make the cheese more binding. If the goal is to lock in big combines and outfits too bid to fail, and be sure no one will compete with them and take some of their market share, the current "reform" bill is a very good continuation of the work started by Sarbanes Oxley.

As I said yesterday, we need to change the system so that companies "too big to fail" can't take great risks with the Treasury as their backer. The question is, is it better to tamper with the market, or limit the size of companies so that none are "too big to fail." If we had 40 major banks instead of the Big Five -- in other words if no bank were too big to fail -- then we could let the market take care of the rest. Some would bet right, some would bet wrong. Some would win, some would lose. The FDIC has worked very well to protect depositors, and there's no reason to change that -- guarantees of deposits up to some reasonable amount - it was $100,000 per account for most of my lifetime but recently raised -- is very reasonable and as I said, it has always worked. One of the really good things to come out of the New Deal.  I'd also go back to the restrictions on investment banks as opposed to commercial banks, but I'm willing to listen to arguments on that.

 The other reason, of course, would be that the conservatives have no political power at the moment, and based on what the Democrats have done so far this presidency, it's clear that the Democrats support further increase in the power of big business, not a decrease.

………… parent

That is not clear to me

"Democrats support further increase in the power of big business"? I am not clear on what you mean exactly. 

………… parent

You say Democrats support increased Big Business control but

what about Republicans then?  Remember, the first bail out for the 'too big to fail' came under bush43.  & I agree there are corporatist Democrats out there with all the 'blue dogs' in the House & Senate, but compared to Republicans?  C'mon.....McConnel & Cantor promised Wall Street in a private Friday meeting two weeks ago that they would stop any regulations of the Financial Industry if Wall Street would fund the '10 elections, which all accounts so far said they accepted.

I don't want full on populism as I want to see business' make money, but I think the citizens of the United States are currently getting the short end of the stick & I trust the Democratic party more to budget & plan financially than I do Republicans.  Their two trick pony is to give the already wealthy (individuals & business) a tax cut and privatize more governmental services to for profit corporations.  What does that tell you?

………… parent

However, kindness,

 the Democrats have essentially slit their own throats by going lockstep along with the GOP with pretty much everything, from our wars to GITMO, to whatever.  I honestly don't trust one party any more than I do the other anymore, if one gets the drift.

………… parent

Refresh my memory

  When was the last time a Republican proposed a bill that would regulate business?

  The next hip green progressive that suggests to me that both parties are the same is in for it. :-)

  When Democrats run things, they tend to go after corporations, polluters, wealthy white collar criminals, etc.,  the tree hugger crowd that thinks CEO's have too much power and money.

  When Republicans run things they tend to go after the cultural morality play, the wedge issues, like gays, uncovered breasts, fear of workers in groups.  Plus their never ending screed against  teachers, public education, history and science. (There is no global warming.)  I honestly don't remember ever hearing a Republican, in recent history,  slam monopolies or offer any regulation on business whatsoever.

………… parent

I disagree, missliberties.

 The fact is that the Democrats have to share an equal amount of responsibility for their complacency over the past several decades by doing an awful lot of what the Republicans are doing.  The people who're saying that both parties are corporate-bought are right, imho.  The fact is that neither the Dems or the GOP have passed bills that regulate businesses..  Moreover, Democrats have not gone after corporations, polluters, wealthy white collar criminals, despite their rhetoric that makes many people believe that they have.  Actions speak way louder than words, and the Democrats have NOT taken action on those things.  

Obama supported the firing of unionized teachers in Rhode Island recently, and he has not liften a finger to go after polluters, the criminals in the Bush Administration, or the wealthy white collar criminal.  His whole facade, imho, is just that....a facade to make you and tons of other people believe that he's going to change the world into a wonderful place, when precisely the opposite is happening. The fact that Obama also said that today's oil rigs are safe from oil spills due to new technology, etc., is rather disgusting, and, I'm not surprised.  I expect that from him, and I'm sure getting it.  

 

………… parent

Beyond Petroleum

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/30/bp-greenwashing-drill/

 

 BP whose profits rose 135% in the first quarter of 2010 has been busy branding itself as environmentally friendly oil company.

 BP spent 16 million dollars lobbying the federal govt in 2009 to promote themselves and insist that the regulations on safety be voluntary.

  At the same time BP spent the millions on ad campaigns with pretty flowers branding themselves as the environmentally friendly oil company. If only BP hadn't wasted money on their PR campaign and had spent that money on a safety valve to shut of the oil flow in case of an accident.

 This oil spill will devastate the Louisiana coast, it's wildlife, it's marshes and destroy the cajun fisheries, and fishing industry and tourism along the once beautiful Gulf coast.

 My heart is heavy with sadness for the simple hard working fisherman who depended on the gulf for to feed their families. Their way of life has just been completely destroyed. 

 Beyond heartbreaking.

 

 

…………

Analysis of the Blogosphere

Linking this here as I think it might be of interest to some of us, and I 've not read it yet and don't want to lose the link ;-)

 

 

…………

I'm wondering why the emergency shut off valve in that oil rig

didn't work.  I mean, it seems to me that having a functional control valve at the well head is kind of a big deal.  Why hasn't it's failure been addressed?

…………

Thanks for a good question, kindness.

 The fact that the emergency shut-off valve in that particular oil rig didn't work is sadly indicative of the fact that short-cut-taking runs rampant in the overall American work ethos, and that the United States has learned NOTHING what. so. ever from the North End Molasses flood, when a poorly-made vat holding tons of molasses burst its seams, flooding a whole neighborhood, and killing tons of people.  This indicates yet another danger of off-shore oil drilling that's been constantly and blatantly ignored by USA Administrations, including the Obama Administration.

 Puleo's book  "Dark Tide" is an excellent book about  Boston's Molasses flood, if you can get hold of it.

 

………… parent

If the problem for conservatives is spending

 not taxes, then why do they keep trying to get the Federal government to spend more money for border security and cleaning up the Gulf Coast? 

 No new taxes!! Cut spending they say.  Then they complain that the Federal Government isn't spending or doing enough on border security.

You can't have it both ways people. The mantra seems to be, "Cut government spending, just not for me!"

…………

Anti-Liberal Shortcuts often reaches Critical Mass

A number of topics were reached via anti-liberal rationale and that got mixed with policies that came via other means. AGW Skeptics was nurtured and grown bigger by anti-tree hugger sentiments. Any and every flaw real or imagined flaw was ate up, even easy to debunk quote mines and frauds done by AGW Deniers.

Most voters generally want their programs and programs they approve of and for others to be cut. Too many GOP voters seem pretend they're not for big government in bedrooms and social engineering via big moral police government and tax codes and the War on Drugs, or war on other people outside the US.

Ones that don't fall for just going with a anti-liberal shortcuts seem to move to being Libertarians, not many of those.

Anti-science ideas that came from completely bastardized understanding of a topic is the norm for GOP voters that aren't afraid to speak up locally. Anti-liberal stances seems to be one big reason why many GOP voters go along with racist so often.

People support strict enforcement of laws designed by racist and watered down just enough to pass by the radar of enough Republicans. And then support keeping them in place to screw over the people that called them racist and to help enforce laws that put food on the drug cartels' table.

 

Liberals & Progressive Commies are destroying America after all, what better way to help America than to have a Reactionary Anti-Liberal Agenda? It's the Democrats and the Anti-Democrats (formally the Bush Apologist Against Liberal Hate Party).

 

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Who said it?

 "There's something else you need to know about me," declared the earnest young politician, "which is I believe the test of a good and strong society is how we look after the most vulnerable, the most frail and the poorest."

~ David Cameron the UK's conservative party leader at the end of his third televised debate and the man who will likely be the next Prime Minister.

 

 GOP beware.

 You've lost the compassion in your conservatism.

 Take a lesson from Mr. Cameron, who if he were running in the US today would be tossed on his ear.  Today's fire breathing republicans decry any sign of empathy or compassion as weakness and a threat to personal liberty.

 

…………

I will take it...

 I find myself in agreement with Glenn Beck. He states that the NYC Times square bomber has a constitutional right to be read his Miranda Rights since he is a US citizen.

 Good for Glenn. He is correct. I praise him for taking this stand which is contrary to most of his cohorts on Fox.

 "The others" are insisting that since this was an act of terrorism the guy should lose his citizenship? No that is not the way it works. Tim McVeigh was tried and convicted as US citizen. You don't revoke your citizenship when you commit a crime.

 

…………

Remember

People can only have so many quasi-paranoid delusions and Beck knows which ones sell on his TV show. He throws a bone out there from time to time, and that makes the Snake Oil he sells the rest of the time all the more reasonable to people that eat the crazy stuff up.

...Beck also has a knack of stating slightly obscure knowledge like he discovered some lost knowledge. He gets his foot in the door that way, like he knows something "we" don't, and uses that to sell the crazy.

He believes in AGW, but you won't probably be hearing that on his TV show with chalk board and all.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent

Yes I remember

  But since the Beckster is actually making the wingnuts head spin round and round, it's a bone that' worth taking because it is a valid point.

You got to love the response to this at RedState.

http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2010/05/04/yes-faisal-shahzad-must-get-...

………… parent

http://www.youtube.com/watch?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8x-5wI_64x0

About 4:35 in

Beck came to the right conclusion using partly-false reasoning.

Beck is pro-torture.

In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,

………… parent