UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL

Everyone is familiar with the phrase that comprises the title of this article. It’s a simple phrase, as a counter to the Divide and Conquer mantra. Patrick Henry used the phrase in his last public speech, given in March 1799, in which he denounced The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. Clasping his hands and swaying unsteadily, Henry declaimed, “Let us trust God, and our better judgment to set us right hereafter. United we stand, divided we fall. Let us not split into factions which must destroy that union upon which our existence hangs.” At the end of his oration, Henry fell into the arms of bystanders and was carried almost lifeless into a nearby tavern. Two months afterward, he had died.

The American people know of and clearly understand the premise behind this phrase, but yet fail to understand how important it truly is. Over the last few decades, it seems that the importance has been long forgotten in the gluttony of high lifestyles, fancy cars, big TV’s and five-dollar cups of coffee from Starbuck’s. We have unknowingly been socially organized into different groups, with different mindsets.

The social engineers have driven the nation, politically, into two prominent sides, Left and Right or Liberal and Conservative. This divide has grown strong and in many cases hateful. But it doesn’t stop there. The social engineers have also divided the American people along the lines of race, pitting white against black, with Latino’s against both most recently using illegal immigration as a front. Rich against poor, Big Agriculture against small farmers, Big Pharma against natural medicines, young against old, environmentalists against conservationists. The list goes on and on.

This isn’t by accident by any means, it’s totally designed to achieve a goal. We are an armed society. That, on it’s own would deter any Government to become overly oppressive. In our country today, if a group of citizens took up arms against government, that group would be destroyed and given a very negative moniker. It wouldn’t matter how oppressive our Government gets, an armed revolt against the oppression would be publically decried. In fact, armed civilian militias are already looked down upon, despite the fact for the most part their existence has been and is defensive only.

This has been a long process. Social engineering an armed society into absolute division is the goal, and it is working very well. Too well I’m afraid. In many ways we have become a very divided citizenry. This can only lead to one outcome. It is an ongoing process, with the MSM and elected officials in the lead. Divisions will only worsen, unless people realize what is happening, put aside their differences, and unite to stop the one thing that threatens the very fabric of our society. Our divisions have allowed for oppression to take hold, and it’s grip is getting tighter and tighter each day.

If freedom is what you desire, if you would like to live without tyranny and oppression, if you would like to be free to prosper, eat what you want, travel freely, or just be happy in life, then I suggest you take a look at what is happening all around us. The examples of oppression are million candlepower lightbulbs, they surround us in such scale that they are easy to indentify. However, they are bulbs that have become so bright that we are blinded by them.

How can we stop the divisions between us? Is it even possible at this point in our society, or are we doomed to being ruled by a government that steadily increases the level of oppression? Are our efforts to fix Government focused in the wrong direction, when we should be focusing on ourselves first?

Let’s discuss all the oppression that is reaped upon us, and then let’s find a way to end the division and unite. A citizenry that is divided, will be conquered. A citizenry that is united, is our only hope for the future of a free America.

United we stand, divided we will fall.

Live Free!

G!

About these ads

Comments

  1. Social engineers …. This isn’t by accident by any means, it’s totally designed to achieve a goal.

    Oy vey … I told you no more skipping your meds, Gman!

    Divisions will only worsen, unless people realize what is happening, put aside their differences, and unite to stop the one thing that threatens the very fabric of our society.

    And, pray tell, what is that ONE thing?

    Gman (my man), frankly this is the rhetoric that will guarantee Obama the feckless wins another term in 2012. Now, I want him out for reasons very different than you crazies on the right, but I do want him out. This Glenn Beck insanity is FINALLY being condemned by more reasonable minds in the conservative ranks. Is it Wehner who condemned Beck the other day (with Joe Scarborough seconding the thought)? It really is a bit bat-shit to think like this. The only powers that be in this country that make a difference are the 2%’s … but even they aren’t clever enough to rule by manipulation. Our society is spoiled, I’ll grant you that. We’re also pretty politically naive. We certainly don’t vote enough (as a % of our population) and lord knows many of our voters are pretty clueless as to what they’re voting for (on both sides of the political spectrum) [which at times I “almost” agree that perhaps voting should be restricted to people who can actually name who the current president is; the type of political system we live under; the day of the week; the planet we live on] … but that isn’t right either.

    The biggest problem with conspiracy theories is the assume there are enough people who not only think alike, but can work in concert. Make no mistake, money talks and bullshit walks in America. Money buys power (in the form of government) and will always be the root of corruption. Capitalism fosters greed in the form of power/money and has much more to do with individual decisions to behave badly than some socialist conspiracy. Please, please, please, get off this track already. Honestly, I can’t watch Glenn Beck for more than 30 seconds without cringing (likewise for most on MSNBC) … it’s crazy bat-shit talk and creates further divides you claim you want to see evaporate.

    I’ll give you this … at least my head didn’t explode.

    • So Capitalism fosters greed in the form of power/money and Money buys power (in the form of government) and will always be the root of corruption.

      But Socialism promotes more government which fosters more centralized government power-which will realistically do what?

      • So glad you asked.

        Benefit the GREATER GOOD!

        Another convert! God (if there is one) is great!

        • No really Charlie, explain-how does this work-suddenly the government has the power to control these business’s -seems like just a transfer of power from the hands of one segment of elites to another. The only difference I see is that their power is even more centralized and harder to fight. Actually that’s a pretty big difference.

        • Charlie…are you sure you did not invent the Stepford Wife project?

          • Colonel, I’d be rich if I did! I wish …

            V.H. I can’t show that the government would do a better job. And there would always be new forms of corruption (as there are in every form of social contract) … but … the ony reason I opt for socialism over capitalism is that it would benefit more by number than it currently does. I don’t like freeloaders, trust me. I don’t like the waste government tends to enhance but most of that corruption and waste in government is born of our economic system; you put enough carrots out there, eventually you get a bite. What is going on now is a tremendous disparity in wealth that grows each day and I just absolutely do not believe that anyone can possibly “earn” or be “worth” or “need” a gazillion dollars while the essentials of society are ignored by comparison.

            • I don’t buy it.

              Firstly, even Marx admitted that economic power had to be gained before socialism could work, he saw socialism as a step AFTER capitalism, not as a starting point. That does not speak well for the ability of socialism to help the most people. Leveling the playing field benefits no one if the field levels out at too low a level.

              Secondly, your biggest complaint is that some people have gazillions of dollars and they “don’t need it”. Maybe they do not, and maybe they are not “worth that”. However, that does not indicate a failure of capitalism. Thinking like assumes a static system, which does not exist. The reason capitalism works is that it adjusts to the realities of growth and shrinking and all sorts of changes. The reason socialism does not is that it depends on a static amount of money being available. When you change the rules of the game, you change the way people play it, which, in turn, changes the resources available. You take the gazillion dollars away and give it to others (who may also not be “worth it”, but are deemed to “need it”), and you suddenly find out that there are not so many gazillions of dollars anymore. What then?

              Economics is not just some giant word problem (Jane has 12 apples, she gives one to Jack, how many does she have?). Economics involves a lot more than money. It involves people, relationships, resources, innovation, technology, wear and tear, regulation and control, corruption, theft, productivity, social mores and influences, intelligence, information, and a host of other things NONE OF WHICH STAY STATIC.

              Disparity of wealth is not the problem, the problem is the people who are hurting. If you are focussed on the disparity, that is just jealousy and envy and a warped sense of “fairness”. That does not help anyone. Focus on the problem, not on side effects. There is not a static amount of wealth to work with in the world, wealth grows and changes depending on the productivity of people. Sure, there are scarce resources, but that is not all that relevant. The fact that the buffalo all but died out does not mean we are all starving, because, despite it being a limited resource, we found other solutions. We are not nomadic tribes any more, so the plight of the buffalo is not a life-or-death concern.

            • I don’t like freeloaders,

              So your answer is to take from those of us earning what we have and give it to the freeloaders as a “carrot” to get the freeloaders to earn for themselves. lol…no, hit them with the stick, you’ll get their attention a lot faster.

              You constantly scream about the 2% and it makes me wonder why you don’t remove your blinders and check the reality that under ANY system there is going to be some kind of 2% power elite in control – even under your thieving greater good (failed) socialism.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Question Charlie is who is crazier – Glenn Beck or Charlie Sheen?

      • Good morning, Ray….you did not ask me….but I do have a coin…however, if I flip it….it would be my luck in lands on its side.

        How are you sir?

      • Charlie is fast becoming my hero (for entertainment) … Glenn Beck should be committed for mental reasons; Charlie should be left alone because he spreads the wealth … at least among hookers (and they spend, too, you know).

      • Counter question. What are Obama’s appointee’s up to? The gulf drilling moratorium has been ruled illegal. Do you agree with the administration ignoring a federal court?

        Texas was the leading state on meeting their emissions goals in 2008/09. The EPA revised their standards and is now in a legal battle with Texas. Are you OK with Lisa Jackson implementing Cap & Trade thru the EPA, bypassing congress?

        Does it bother you how many times Beck has been right?
        I think he’s out there on some things, or just over the top with his presentation, he’s playing to an audience. Beck, Mathews, etc..shrug, just talking heads, does not impact me. Oil at $100 now affects the economy, food prices, jobs.
        Maybe we just have a different view on what is radical?

        http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=33500

        As night follows day, liberal journalists pointed to Jones’ skin color to accuse his critics of racism. David Sirota wrote at the Huffington Post,

        “…let’s just be honest — the fact that the right chose to mount a hysteria campaign specifically around an African American, Jones, was no coincidence.”

        The race-baiting Left’s ability to confuse correlation (criticizing a radical leftist who happens to be black) with causation (criticizing a radical leftist because he is black) never ceases to amaze me. In truth, the only color conservative critics of the Obama administration were looking for is red, as in Communist Red. And Jones is a professed Communist.

        Jones is only one of many radical Obama czars. Science Czar John Holdren is an environmental extremist whose writing suggests he once supported coercive population control measures including forced abortion as well and adding sterilants to drinking water.

        Cass Sustein is Obama’s Regulatory Czar. Sustein has written in support of granting animals legal standing in civil litigation (a right, incidentally, he would not extend to unborn persons), banning hunting and encouraging people to eat less meat.

        Then there’s Mark Lloyd, Obama’s Diversity Czar with the Federal Communications Commission. Lloyd is an admirer of Hugo Chavez and supports reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine, which would muzzle conservative talk radio.

        It is into the hands of those and the dozens of other “special advisors” that Obama has placed a level of unaccountable power that even cabinet secretaries do not possess.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Charlie,

      Glad to see your spunky this morning (nookie deos that for married old guys on the left). I take my meds daily and they are helping with the chronic back pain, thank you for your concern.

      CS: “And, pray tell, what is that ONE thing?”

      Geez, that communist rock that hit you in the head must have been a doozy. Hint, it’s in the title! :roll:

      I’m glad you feel that my “rhetoric” has the power to affect presidential elections, I’m quickly becoming a powerful force with must be reckoned with (Charlie, see a doctor, it was a BIG rock).

      CS ” The only powers that be in this country that make a difference are the 2%’s”

      Maybe that’s because the other 98% are to preoccupied with fighting amongst themselves to make a difference. That helps clear up one point that I was concerned with.

      CS “The biggest problem with conspiracy theories is the assume there are enough people who not only think alike, but can work in concert.”

      So the most powerful military on earth is a myth and a conspiracy theory. That was one big ass rock Charlie, the Mises needs to call 911!

      CS “Money buys power (in the form of government) and will always be the root of corruption.”

      If their was no left/right paradigm, there would be no money for corrupt politicians. Who would fund corruption when they are made illegitimate.

      CS “Capitalism fosters greed in the form of power/money and has much more to do with individual decisions to behave badly than some socialist conspiracy.”

      THe vast majority of Americans have no “Power” and each day that goes by they have less ans less “Money”.

      CS ” it’s crazy bat-shit talk and creates further divides you claim you want to see evaporate.”

      The swelling is coming down, and you just proved the point of the article (and my last one). So, you spent all your time discounting the subject of the article, and end up agreeing with it in the end. Damn, I’m getting better at this writing stuff. Get to the Doctors (or Doc’s) office, you need assistance. :lol:

      Glad your head didn’t explode!

      • So, you spent all your time discounting the subject of the article, and end up agreeing with it in the end.

        Only in your mind, Gman … where did I discount your title (you lunatic?)!!!!!
        :)

        I discount your agenda … it’s borderline insane (but I still love ya).

        Now, did you pitch my tent under a rockslide? I did notice quite a few around my desk this morning. Probably my stepson attempting another roof-caves-in murder.

        No, no, no … you made no point at all. You twist and turn (in the wind) and still come up with egg on your chops. Your rants are loaded with an agenda … the one very few (outside of this blog and Fox news) agrees with. When one writes with a particular agenda in mind, one doesn’t provide an objective argument. It is your essay/your opinion … and somewhat whacky. You assume you’re speaking objectively but your rants are LOADED with YOUR Agenda. Trust me, when the revolution comes (if ever it does) it’ll come from the left … but chances are this country will engage in a nuclear war long before any people’s revolution and all the 2%’s will be on a flight to Mars (the real Mars, not the one you’re on) laughing their asses off. Maybe one or two (Blankfein, Goldman Sachs) won’t make it … I can dream too.

        • Charlie, if you need a part time job, I could use you on my staff. You would be great in the psy-ops department.

          • Colonel, as I am currently unemployed (and they didn’t hire a replacement for my position–it is the 2nd job I lost under Bush-Obama–used to work 7 days a week), I accept!

            But … I will not work for minimum wage but unless my wife divorces me, I don’t need the health benefits (so give that to me in salary, please).

            • No, Charlie…..you will be placed on the same government supplied insurance that I am on and not allowed to use the sig other. That is the quickest way to convert you…..

              • This reminds me of talking with someone many years ago, that when thier work’s health care changed, the health care said, “If your spouse has healthcare through their company, you must be on the spouses healthcare” only the spouses healthcare said the same thing. Never heard of how it turned out, must have been a real mess.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Charlie, maybe you need to take YOUR meds! I made a point that our nation is divided in it’s thinking. I would say that’s indisputable. My grand agenda is formulate ideas to change this. ( But if you must really know, my real agenda is to try and stop a civil war between the gun control loving left and the gun owning right, because I think I know who is getting their asses kicked in this one ;) )

    • When Weaver refused to become (in his words) “a snitch,” the ATF filed the gun charges in June 1990, also claiming Weaver was a bank robber with criminal convictions (those claims were false: at that time Weaver did not even have traffic tickets and was never a suspect in bank robbery.

      Randy and Vicki went to the “Y” and retrieved Sammy’s body. Randy, Vicki and Harris placed Samuel’s body in a guest cabin near the main cabin. Weaver, Vicki, their three daughters and Harris holed up in their house.[39] From 11:15 a.m. onward, Hunt reported to the Crisis Center in Washington D.C. that no further gunfire had been heard.

      On about August 24, 1992, the fourth day of the siege on the Weaver family, FBI Deputy Assistant Director Danny Coulson wrote a memo:

      OPR 004477
      Something to Consider
      1. Charge against Weaver is Bull Shit.
      2. No one saw Weaver do any shooting.
      3. Vicki has no charges against her.
      4. Weaver’s defense. He ran down the hill to see what dog was
      barking at. Some guys in camys shot his dog.
      Started shooting at him. Killed his son. Harris did the
      shooting [of Degan]. He [Weaver] is in pretty strong legal position.”

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge

      • LOI

        What is missing from your post.

        The Govt entrapped Weaver into a gun deal for the sole purpose of using blackmail to force him to “snitch” on the “militia” groups in Montana.

        Problem one, Weaver was not part of nor involved with any of these groups nor the one in Idaho.

        So they convince him to sell guns to their people. He gets pinched. Then when the court day is getting close the GOVT gets a change in date, but mysteriously the notice to Weaver of the changed court date does not arrive at his residence.

        Date comes, Weaver does not. Making him a “fugitive” and allowing the Govt to launch the entire operation.

        The GOOD PEOPLE of Idaho saw through the BS, found Weaver innocent and the Att. Gen filed murder charges against the federal agents.

        Nobody ever paid for the injustice to Weaver and his family and the murder of his son and wife.

        • JAC,

          A lot missing, have to stop and work occasionally. I think the government did not admit to any wrong-doing says something. The US is outspoken to other countries on how they treat their people, but when an agency of the US government violates our own laws, they refuse to admit any wrong-doing.

          Before the negotiators arrived at the cabin, an FBI HRT sniper, Lon Horiuchi, shot and wounded Randy Weaver in the back with the bullet exiting his right armpit, while he was lifting the latch on the shed to visit the body of his dead son.[48] (The sniper testified at the later trial that he had put his crosshairs on Weaver’s spine, but Weaver moved at the last second.) Then, as Weaver, his 16-year-old daughter Sara,[49] and Harris ran back toward the house, Horiuchi fired a second bullet, which passed through Vicki Weaver’s head, killing her, and wounded Harris in the chest. Vicki Weaver was standing behind the door through which Harris was entering the house, holding their 10-month-old baby Elisheba[49] in her arms.

          Timothy McVeigh cited the Ruby Ridge and Waco incidents as motivation for the Oklahoma City bombing of April 19, 1995.[60]

          The surviving members of the Weaver family filed a wrongful death suit. To avoid trial and a possibly higher settlement, the federal government awarded Randy Weaver a $100,000 settlement and his three daughters $1 million each in August 1995. In the out-of-court settlement the government did not admit to any wrong-doing in the deaths of Sammy and Vicki Weaver.

    • Charlie, unfortunately your comments bring proof to his theory.

      Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it . . . and by the time you find out that it isn’t what you thought it was, it will be way too late to change your mind.

    • Funny, but after I read this article I did not think of conspiracy at all. But then again, I’ve only watched Beck for about an hour since day one, and none in the last three years.

      Without that influence on my opinion, I sense that we (the US) are becoming divided via yelling points when we really aren’t that far apart when push comes to shove. This is based on just two local and small newspapers and the commentors.

      Charlie, Why do you watch Beck anyway?

  2. Good Morning, Gman. HAve to think about your article for a little while…..and I have to respond to Charlie….but until then, it is Texas Independence Day. Hmmmmmmmmm. we did it once…..perhaps…………

    • Mathius says:

      Good riddance!

      • Are we being testy today?

        • Naw.. just glad to be rid of you and your 38 electoral votes. :)

          • But do you know the consequence of getting rid of us and our electoral votes? We then become a Republic once again, you lefties will take over, and we will apply for foreign aid and get it because you guys give out all sorts of things like that. You will then start courting us because we will be the border instead of Mexico. You will import our oil and gas because you still will not drill…Our portion of the Gulf of Mexico will then be Republic Waters…You will import our organic vegetables from the valley because you will be serving TOFU and Veggie Burgers. (we will continue to sell our cattle to Western States who love beef and have Inn and Out Chains)…AND….we will sell Red Bull and Grog at below market value.

            So….there ya go. Oh….I forgot….when you lefties gut the defense budget and do away with the military….we will invade.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good Morning Colonel :)

  3. Ray Hawkins says:

    G-Man – interesting article this a.m. – I do feel like you’re holding back a little – to what/whom specifically do you attribute this oppression or social engineering?

    I have used social engineering before (as part of contracted work to break into facilities and computer systems) – it is a deliberate exercise, not an ad hoc organically developing process. It rarely is one of those “shit just happened” phenomena.

    What is difficult to wrap my head around it this – a couple of years of SUFA articles that (often rightly so) bash the Federal Government for being so incompetent that it cannot scratch its own ass…….is the same entity that somehow has a well designed “plan” being exercised through extensive social engineering, oppression, etc…..

    I think you give them too much credit.

    My 60,000 foot view is that we’ve allowed a very complex system to develop that enables an “elected” few to essentially function unchecked and to perpetuate the complex system to become more and more entangled – the system entangles itself and the few strands that may be used to start unwinding are simply cauterized or snipped right off. The system will never (pardon me here) un-fuck itself.

    • bash the Federal Government for being so incompetent that it cannot scratch its own ass…….is the same entity that somehow has a well designed “plan” being exercised through extensive social engineering, oppression, etc…..

      God bless you, Ray …

    • Ray

      Social engineering is not designed and implemented by the Govt. In fact control of the Govt is the PRIZE.

      The engineering is conducted by large numbers of people with similar ideology. It has been going on for 100 years or more.

      It’s primary place of introduction is the “public school” system.

      The primary facilitators of the conspiracy are located in our “Universities”.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        But JAC

        If the primary place of introduction is the “public school system”

        The that has been a colossal fail – this board alone is evidence alone that not all of us think alike (I’d venture a guess thus that most of us here attended public school – hell – USW, Chris Devine and I all attended the same one)

        If the primary facilitators of the conspiracy are located in our “Universities”……well you’ll probable have the explain that also. There is simply too much diversity in opinion to think its been successful.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good Morning Ray,

      Ray: ” to what/whom specifically do you attribute this oppression or social engineering?”

      Let me just say that I do not believe that there is a grand conspiracy theory in play here. I believe that our current state of division begins with all of us. We have allowed the political system to do this, it wasn’t the intent of the political system, just the results. Look at Wisconsin, the politicians are like a married couple fighting over money. But in this case, it has shown the real problem of our political divide. As history has shown, didvision usually leads to violence in the end.

      Ray:
      It rarely is one of those “shit just happened” phenomena.

      Your right, in today’s America, social endineering is being openly used and exploited. Bush and his WMD fearmongering, Obama nad is “the economy is recovering” bullshit. It is happening at a greater rate today than say 50 years ago.

      Ray: My 60,000 foot view is that we’ve allowed a very complex system to develop that enables an “elected” few to essentially function unchecked and to perpetuate the complex system to become more and more entangled – the system entangles itself and the few strands that may be used to start unwinding are simply cauterized or snipped right off. The system will never (pardon me here) un-fuck itself.

      Spot on Ray, We allowed it to develop, and only we can undevelop it. But we are too consumed with our petty differences to understand this. The corrupt system will never fix itself, only those that allow it to continue can fix it.

      • Gman, how come you talk to Ray and make some sense but you read batty to me? I’m insulted.

        I still think your original article insinuates that government control comes from the left (those wild and crazy socialists) but there are those rocks around my desk …

        My stepson remains fast asleep (probably until 1:00 p.m. or so), then he’ll wake up and play video games until 5 or so … then he’ll go to his job at Target, return at 11:30 or so to play video games until he falls asleep in his target uniform (which he doesn’t bother washing or taking off the next day–never mind showering) … then he’ll do it all over again for another 21 years (just turned 21 last week) and that is our future. Me, the dopey disciplinarian in the family, has to chew on his tongue … if he were my son, I would’ve walked him out to the woods and mercy killed him by now. This is the worst part of unemployment thus far (4 weeks now) … seeing how late this numbskull gets up every morning. Pure torture …

        Sorry for the rant … it’s (he’s) driving me nuts.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Sorry about your stepson. Stop feeding him! He’s an adult, make him act like one!

          My article is about the average American being divided on the many issues (mostly political). Just us Charlie, nobody else.

          • Okay, so if I’m divided (and I am–I do see a lot of good in the libertarian argument and only disagree on certain issues with it), how was I socially engineered to be that way? And if I’m so engineered, how come we disagree about gov’t’s role in society?

            Oh, Gman … I’m married 4 x’s (gee, I wonder why?) … and I’m crazy about #4 … but this has almost split us up a few times already. He’s treated like an 11 year old … needs to grow up fast. If it were up to me …

            She claims this is his last chance: he’s in a Jr. college 3 years now (mostly taking remedial courses) and is STILL not a FRESHMAN by credits, barely carrying a 2.0 (and that grade from basket weaving courses). This is one thing I’ll admit is wrong with education–it’s become business. He should not be in college. He should be in target (so that part is right) … but, boy oh boy, i wish he’d find roomates …

            • gmanfortruth says:

              CS :Okay, so if I’m divided (and I am–I do see a lot of good in the libertarian argument and only disagree on certain issues with it), how was I socially engineered to be that way? And if I’m so engineered, how come we disagree about gov’t’s role in society?”

              When I wrote this article I asked myself a similar question. Who we are and why we think the way we do can only be answered from within. I cannot explain how you became you, no more than you can explian how I became me. I know that I’m a different person than I was three years ago.

              Division is a time bomb, and as it ticks away, the 2% are laughing their way to the bank. WE, as individuals, have to make a conscience decision to unite before the bomb explodes.

              • How do we unite when we have such divergent views? Answer: We can’t. Which is why we compromise (social contract) … and sorry, but the greater good theory here serves more people than a free market ever can.

                Can I sign you up now?

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Charlie, I won’t comprimise my core values. Nor will I except imagined security at the price of my freedom. I won’t sign any damned social contract either. The “greater good” theory will fail, when you run out of the rich folks money, what will you do, give out a different fiat money that has no value? (our fiat has no value now, but thats another day)

              • The free market serves more people. I follow the free market philosophy BECAUSE of its benefit to the greater good. Can I sign YOU up? Even with some variance in classes, the free market created and grew the middle class, it has done this throughout history. It has also helped more poor people by boositng the economy. As soon as moves were made to redistribute wealth by force, the benefits of the free market started to become hampered. Is it a perfect system? Of course not. Will it help everyone without requiring people to be caring and charitable? Or course not. Will human nature be callous to the plight of the poor and be greedy and self serving? Yes. Will it be that in a socialist society as well? Yes. Are those specific traits less damaging in a socialistic society? Yes, because of the structure. However, other human nature aspects like laziness and dependency and power seeking and corruption will take over, and the system will either collapse under its own weight, or fail to provide sufficiently, or to as many, as the free market did.

                Both systems are just systems. Neither one is caring in and of itself, both depend on the goodness of people to work. The free market, however, is less damaged by individual evil, because power is distributed. Thus, when corruption does occur, and it always will, far fewer are hurt. Thus the greater good is served.

                Note: Our current system of facist/capitalist hybrid with a little socialism thrown in is failing miserably. The ills of this system and the damage it is doing are obvious. However, these are issues of corruption and consolidation of power, conflation of government and business. This is not a characteristic of a free market.

        • Charlie,
          Sounds like your stepson could come protest in Madison – he’d fit right in.

    • The system will never (pardon me here) un-fuck itself.

      Now that statement I can agree with.

  4. Charlie Stella

    Government is the root of evil, not money.

    If Govt did not there would be no POWER to attract corrupt people who wish to control the lives of others.

    • Citizen, you’re delusional … do you really think the free market system would promote balance to our lives? Think about it (for longer than a second). As one capitalist profits more than the next capitalist, his power increases. Capitalism dictates that he make it grow even further. Being a good (or great) entreprenuer, he becomes Macy’s … to the detriment of several small businesses … never mind the poor slobs that have to work for him … who have no bargaining rights, etc. … think, brother … think.

      • Charlie

        What POWER grows?

        Without Govt the Capitalist has no authority to act against you in anyway. He/She may try but it won’t last long.

        So what if companies who can not compete die? That is not power Charlie. It is simply the results of free people making individual choices without coercion by Govt.

        It is you who needs to THINK. Your responses are mostly canned reactions, based on your long indoctrination.

        • JAC: So what if companies who can not compete die? That is not power Charlie. It is simply the results of free people making individual choices without coercion by Govt.

          See the gov’t bought by big money and the Wall Street Bailouts for one answer to your “free market” theory.

          No, you need to THINK … without the blinders, brother. Take them off already.

          • Charlie

            Is it even possible for you to stay on the subject and comprehend the premise of an argument?

            NO GOVT………………NO POWER…………..

            NO GOVT…………………Capitalism can’t use POWER against you.

            Because…………………..NO POWER to obtain.

  5. gmanfortruth says:

    Charlie,

    This is my agenda : “How can we stop the divisions between us?”

    Come down from your lasagna induced conspiracy theory fantasy and help out! :)

    • “How can we stop the divisions between us?”

      Turn off Glenn Beck and watch Phil Donahur reruns. Now wasn’t that simple?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I don’t watch Beck, or any of them whackballs on TV. Since I am not manipulated by them, I must have the correct mindset. Who do you watch ?

  6. GMAN

    I am NOT interested in “uniting” with those who’s core principles stand in direct opposition to freedom, liberty and justice for all.

    For different groups to unite on anything there have to be shared goals, objectives or “values”. One can compromise on objectives if that does not compromise the core values.

    But “uniting” at the larger scale is simply not possible. At least until the VAST MAJORITY become the Sheep they are supposed to be.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      JAC,

      Good Morning Sir!

      Freedom, liberty and justice for all. This statement, with regards to our nations history, should be the core values in every American. But for many, it has been twisted out of context.

      How do we untwist it?

      • GMan

        Education and leading by example.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Yes Sir,

          Now to develop a method to get through to the hard headed Charlies of the nation. That method, if effective, would be akin to a miracle!

      • But for many, it has been twisted out of context.

        Now, am I wrong in assuming you mean lefties twisted it out of context? Because it sure seems/reads that way.

        There is no justice when 2% of the population owns 95% of the wealth of a nation. They couldn’t possibly earn it … nor do they need it.

        Welcome to the front!

        • Charlie

          JUSTICE has nothing to do with how much “wealth” anyone has.

          You start with an irrational concept which necessarily leads you to an irrational answer.

          YOUR determination of “want”, “need” and “deserve” are nothing but ARBITRARY and SUBJECTIVE. Which makes using these as criteria for Justice an irrational exercise.

          • JAC, give it up with the irrational nonsense. A guy using a gold wastebasket (true story) in an office consisting of $1,000,000 in furniture while another unemployment guy is eating rotten apples out of a garbage can is unjust and immoral. Spin it however you want, brother. It’s bullshit.

            • Who the frick cares if he’s not using my $$ for his gold wastebasket?

            • gmanfortruth says:

              How is it unjust. Do you know if the unemployed guy got fired for stealing? How is it immoral? Wealth or lack of wealth is not a moral issue, how each got to there levels may have been immoral, equally. So you would take from a wealthy person, who made his money honestly and give it to the poor guy who could be in his position because he is an immoral thief. That sir, is bullshit.

            • Charlie,

              You are very confused over what is immoral.

              You wish to destroy society by forcing your morality on it.

              You cannot accept that each man has his own right to himself and the consequences of his own actions.

            • Hey Charlie…..Got a couple of questions for you…and it is really that I truly want to know…..(in other words, this is not a set up for a future slam)….but truthfully want to know.

              If I am smart enough and fortunate enough to utilize my talents and resources to make a gazillion dollars and have a gold wastebasket, a Leer Jet, 2 mansions and an office full of imported furniture worth a million bucks…..

              and outside my window, there is an unemployed person eating rotten apples out of a dumpster….

              (1) Exactly where is this unjust, in your way of thinking and
              (2) Exactly where is it immoral, in your way of thinking?

              Or, (3) is it just that is the way you believe, unjust and morality are within YOUR definitions….

              Thanks, sir.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Freedom, liberty and justice for all.

          This should not be a left/right issue. If it is, it’s because the left screwed it up! There will be no justice until the corruption is addressed. But, if you haven’t noticed the elected one’s don’t listen, because they are getting two different messages. If there can’t be but one message from the people, this nation will eventually implode. :evil:

  7. gmanfortruth says:

    Newfie Duck Hunter

    A Newfie went hunting one day in Ontario and bagged three ducks. He put them in the bed of his pickup truck
    and was about to drive home when he was confronted by an ornery game warden who didn’t like Newfies.

    The game warden ordered the Newfie to show his hunting license, and the Newfie pulled out a valid
    Ontario hunting license.
    The game warden looked at the license, then reached over and picked up one of the ducks, sniffed its ass, and said,
    ‘This duck ain’t from Ontario. This is a Quebec duck. You got a Quebec huntin’ license, boy?’
    The Newfie reached into his wallet and produced a Quebec hunting license.
    The game warden looked at it, then reached over and grabbed the second duck, sniffed its ass, and said,
    ‘This ain’t no Quebec duck. This duck’s from Manitoba. You got a Manitoba license?’
    The Newfie reached into wallet and produced a Manitoba hunting license.

    The warden then reached over and picked up the third duck, sniffed its ass, and said,
    ‘This ain’t no Manitoba duck. This here duck’s from Nova Scotia. You got a Nova Scotia huntin’ license?’
    Again the Newfie reached into his wallet and brought out a Nova Scotia hunting license.
    The game warden was extremely frustrated at this point, and he yelled at the Newfie,
    ‘Just where the hell are you from?’
    The Newfie turned around, bent over, dropped his pants, and said, ‘You tell me, you’re the expert.’

    • True story…

      I was eating lunch today with my 10 year old grandson when his mom asked him “What is tomorrow?” He said “It’s President’s Day”

      She asked “What does that mean?” … I was waiting for something
      profound…

      He said, “President’s Day is when Obama steps out of the White House and if he sees his shadow, we have 2 more years of unemployment.”

      I almost snorted my iced tea…

  8. Salaries in Inv. Banking (w/ bonus)
    1st Yr Analyst $90-150K $125K BA
    3rd Yr Analyst $120-350K $165K BA
    1st Yr Ass. $150-250K $180K MBA
    3rd Yr Ass. $300-500K $350K MBA
    …VP $350K-1MM $700K 3-6 yrs
    Dir-Principal $400K-1.5MM $900K 5-10 yrs
    Mng Dir-Partner $500K-20 MM $1.5 MM 7-10 yrs
    Dept head $800K-70MM $3.5MM 10+ yrs

    Avg WI Teaching salary: $46,390
    And teachers didn’t bankrupt the economy.

    No Charlie, the government did – and the teachers are part of the problem.

    You didn’t add on top of this salary, health benefits, retirements packages, two months off for summer vacation, spring break, holidays, personal days – amounting to working about only 1/2 the year.

    So their REAL salary is about $100,000 in salary PLUS another -roughly- $45,000 in benefits and retirement, for $145,000 for the average – which means more than half are even higher.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good Morning BF!

      Glad to hear you are feeling better! I hope the improvements continue!

    • No, BF, you’re right. I didn’t add the health benefits of those in the banking industry (which far exceed those in the public sector). Get real with this already.

      • Charlie,

        Ah, Charlie, they buy their own.

        So now you’re next irrational complaint will be comparing the quality of their automobiles!!

  9. Charlie

    The biggest problem with conspiracy theories is the assume there are enough people who not only think alike, but can work in concert.

    The biggest problem with many people is how badly they misunderstand conspiracies.

    Some of the things these type of people miss:
    (1) A consequence of action can answer more than one goal of different people.

    A war in the Middle East may help me (say, achieving political power) and you (say, getting access to oil). We both have different goals, but can work independently to achieve the same confluence.

    The actions I undertake make the likelihood of war increase as do your actions – but we need not coordinate! But because our goals are aligned – by your efforts help me, and mine yours.

    Unity in action is NOT required for a successful conspiracy.

    This is a probable scenario for 9/11 – where one groups independent action aiding another group in achieving a goal.

    One group merely works to allow the other to be successful, and both groups – independent of each other – win.

    (2) Command and Control Structures and Organizational Isolation.

    Example the Vets on this blog – they follow orders without knowledge or understanding of the goal that is being achieved – an equal analogy: How did 10 cowboys herd 10,000 cows? …. by merely herding the “leader” bulls, the rest followed …

    An experiment on conspiracies found that a large complex conspiracy only required 5 to 10 people in key positions.

    If you thought about it, Charlie, a coup is a conspiracy. How do a handful of coup members take over an entire country?

    (3) Misdirection:

    The movie “Edge of Darkness” with Mel Gibson has a character called a “fixer”. He “fixes” events to protect the elite.

    His tool: random disconnected action/killings within the conspiracy – so that when people try to connect the dots, there are a whole bunch of irrational dots that simply do not make any sense with the others.

    This creates questions within questions – and allows others/media to focus on these unanswerable events as proof no conspiracy happened. The situation becomes so confused by anyone outside the conspiracy that it clouds it sufficiently to be successful. Only those inside the conspiracy can separate the wheat from the chaff but why would they??

    Anyway, the biggest conspiracy theory fallacy is that there are no conspiracies – but Charlie, you are surrounded by them and they are very effective, because you haven’t noticed them at all

    • (1) A consequence of action can answer more than one goal of different people.

      Unity in action is NOT required for a successful conspiracy.

      If it is not coordinated, BF, it is NOT a conspiracy. What you describe is a coincidence.

      (2) Command and Control Structures and Organizational Isolation.

      Example the Vets on this blog – they follow orders without knowledge or understanding of the goal that is being achieved – an equal analogy: How did 10 cowboys herd 10,000 cows? …. by merely herding the “leader” bulls, the rest followed …

      An experiment on conspiracies found that a large complex conspiracy only required 5 to 10 people in key positions.

      If you thought about it, Charlie, a coup is a conspiracy. How do a handful of coup members take over an entire country?

      You ignore the conditions that make it possible for a handful of individuals to take over an entire country (thus overly simplifying your answer). The Khmer Rouge, for instance … a handful of Cambodian nationals educated in a French Lycee (there go those French again, Gman) … except it took our continuous bombing of a neutral state for those five clowns to gain momentum for their movement.

      (3) Misdirection:

      The movie “Edge of Darkness” with Mel Gibson has a character called a “fixer”. He “fixes” events to protect the elite.

      It’s a movie, BF … Come on, man.

      Anyway, the biggest conspiracy theory fallacy is that there are no conspiracies – but Charlie, you are surrounded by them and they are very effective, because you haven’t noticed them at all

      Oy vey … BF, are you watching Glenn Beck again?

      • Charlie

        If it is not coordinated, BF, it is NOT a conspiracy. What you describe is a coincidence.

        As usual, your own ego causes you to avoid learning.

        The actions are coordinated – we both want war. How you manipulate things to start the war, and I do not have to be the same thing

        (2) Command and Control Structures and Organizational Isolation.
        You ignore the conditions that make it possible for a handful of individuals to take over an entire country (thus overly simplifying your answer).

        No, I do not. That is the problem. You see my example as a truth, but since you have forced yourself into a belief, you are immune to any learning that contradicts your belief.

        The Khmer Rouge, for instance … a handful of Cambodian nationals educated in a French Lycee (there go those French again, Gman) … except it took our continuous bombing of a neutral state for those five clowns to gain momentum for their movement.

        Yet, you ignore how a mid rank officer can take over a country (Nassar of Egypt).

        It’s a movie, BF … Come on, man.

        So, to you, any parable of Jesus, Conficious, etc. must be wrong because it is a story

        Come on, man! Can’t you grab your brain for a second and learn

        • BF, I really do admire your patience.

          • There is a sliver of good in Charlie, and one day, he will turn away from the Dark side and see the Light.

            It may be on his death bed, though….

        • As usual, your own ego causes you to avoid learning.

          My ego? Mr. rationally against gov’t unless it’s supplying the duckets to save the geniuses who sunk the economy (remember the ones who couldn’t fail)?

          The actions are coordinated

          The actions in what you described, my never give up friend, are separate in plan (which is required in a conspiracy).

          Kathy: Yes, I am patient, but not crazy. I won’t do this all day. He never gives up.

          No, I do not. That is the problem. You see my example as a truth, but since you have forced yourself into a belief, you are immune to any learning that contradicts your belief.

          Does anybody outside of this blog seriously think you know what the hell you are trying to say? Nassar led an anti-imperialist movement … he didn’t just take over. Jesus, you’re thick.

          So, to you, any parable of Jesus, Conficious, etc. must be wrong because it is a story

          Tell me you aren’t seriously suggesting that a Mel Gibson movie explains your theory …

  10. Richmond Spitfire says:

    The Supreme Court HAS made the correct Constitutional Ruling:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/03/02/westboro-funeral-pickets-protected-speech-high-court-rules/

    I abhor the messages and the methods that the Westboro Church uses to spew/regurgitate their crap…But, with that said, I’m glad that the Supreme Court has made the ruling that their speech is free.

    Thank you Supreme Court for upholding my own Freedom of Speech that is guaranteed!

    • I agree! Hate the message, love the freedom.

    • Sadly, I agree. I would very much have likely WBC to pay for being jackasses, but I do believe they have a right to protest.

      That said, the only good way to handle those people is to ridicule them into oblivion. Take a look at how people responded when the WBC protested (for whatever reason) Twitter.

      • I wonder if the supreme court would side with someone beating them up, if they named their fists “free” and “speech”

  11. gmanfortruth says:

    Where’s Buck and Matt today? I thought they’d be all over this!

  12. Gman, Good article but I’m with JAC here.

    “I am NOT interested in “uniting” with those who’s core principles stand in direct opposition to freedom, liberty and justice for all.”

    I have seen up close and personal many people here in WI that are very much opposed to these principles for their own lives and for mine. Not ironically, many come from academia, where they live, breathe and indoctrinate against freedom.

    Your stepson needs some tough love. Set a date, help him formulate a plan, and stick to it. Kids should be raised to be accountable, independent, contributors to society. You are enabling him to be the opposite. Do it now, or he could be like “my” senator and still mooching when he’s 50 years old!

    • What is wrong with pulling him across your knee and giving him some hand to butt education…unless he is bigger than you….but old age and treachery can outdo youth and vigor anytime.

    • “Not ironically, many come from academia, where they live, breathe and indoctrinate against freedom. ”

      We are not against freedom.

      For example, I support your freedom to remain willfully ignorant of the liberal mindset.

      Sigh.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Matt, If you are for government, you are against freedom. To allow control and say you are for freedom is a contradiction of epic proportions.

        • No it’s not.

          I love eating junk food. I don’t love eating veggies. But veggies are good for me and junk food is not.

          So I eat a lot of veggies and very little junk food.

          So, according to your logic, I am against junk food because I control how much I eat instead of just gorging myself on it until I look like Jabba the Hut.

          Freedom is a good thing. I am not against freedom. But all things in moderation. Too much of a good thing is a bad thing.

          Now eat your veggies.

          • Mathius,

            Freedom is not food. You can eat too much because it is physical. Freedom is completely different.

            Freedom is the ability to choose without imposition of another person.

            Thus, using your rather poor analogy, you argue that you should be constrained in your free choices because if you are not imposed upon, you may make too many of your own choices

            But that makes no sense.

            …and thus, neither do you.

            • you may make too many of your own choices

              Close.

              We worry more about bad choices than how many.

              Now, personally, I am of the opinion that any choices, however bad, are yours to make as long as the ramifications are yours alone, or limited to other consenting adults.

              The only place I may be willing to limit the freedoms of others is where their decisions may adversely affect innocent individuals who were not party to the acts committed.

              Freedom is not food. You can eat too much because it is physical. Freedom is completely different. Bah! Freedom is the ability to “choose without imposition of another person.” Those choices can become physical by virtue of the acts which correspond to the choices. Thus they can cause harm. Just like overeating.

      • I have had a good look the liberal mindset over the last couple weeks and “willfully ignorant” is a very accurate term to describe what I’ve seen.

        • It is has been my experience that most people can be willfully ignorant when it serves their world-view.

          You, it seems, are no exception.

        • Willfully suggests we can change. Unfortunately for yous crazies on the right, I’m starting to fear it (your ignorance) is a chronic condition …

        • March 02, 2011
          Forbidden and permitted for teens
          Don Parker, American Thinker
          The American Academy of Pediatrics and the State Legislators in Connecticut have offered up the latest bit of wisdom from our betters.

          The Pediatricians of course, ever vigilant regarding the health of children, want to ban the use of tanning salons for teenagers.

          A Bill has been introduced in the Connecticut Legislature to fine parents who do not accompany their children (18 and under) to the tanning salon, up to $100.

          So the list of restriction for minors goes on. Pierced ears or other parts of the body? Better have permission.

          Smoking? Absolutely, positively not.

          Alcohol? Absolutely, positively not.

          Tattoos? Better have it in witting.

          Teenage abortions and the unborn?

          None of your business, children have the right to make their own decisions about invasive surgical procedures that result in the death of the unborn and might leave permanent emotional as well as physical issues for years to come to the teenager.

          • yeah, some real discouraging but perhaps not surprising reports of the police “not doing their job”. For instance, there have been some real incidents of violence and assault yet no arrests have been made so the reports of “peaceful and no arrests” can be accurately stated. I suspect the AG is being inundated with video of incidents involving police ignoring their responsibilities.

            • I’ve looked hard, and only found the one fox reporter claiming to have been hit, and threatened with breaking his neck. I don’t consider their behavior “peaceful”, but maybe they haven’t crossed the line yet. I do not think I could restrain myself as many have done, yelling in my face, pushing and intimidation… I would be going to the hospital, but I would not be alone.

            • Kathy,
              I find your attitude toward the protesters in Madison quite amusing. As I recall you are a big supporter of the Tea Bagger protests. So does the 1st Amendment only apply to those you approve of?

              And of course the only reason no one has been arrested is because the police are not doing their job. You’ve been spewing for the last two weeks about the Union Thugs that are on their way, but it seems they never showed up. I’m sure that’s disappointed you.

              And I’m sure the few incidents that have occurred were caused by right-wing plants. After all, Governor Walker said they thought about that…

              • I’ve never said they weren’t entitled to their freedom of speech.

                Have you been down here Todd? Have you seen the signs? Have you seen the littering? The stench in the capitol building due them sleeping there night after night? Have you seen what they’ve done to some of the memorials to our veterans? Have you heard the language that has been used again and again? If you haven’t, come on down and see why I’m calling them uncivilized and thugs.

                Also, while I didn’t say much regarding the police holding back, I’m actually privy to some info and can’t even share here, where the MPD and the Dane County Sheriffs have been told to walk away when they see scuffles and well, there’s more but that’s all I can say. There have been many more incidents than what has been reported by the MSM. There is concern within the ranks because of the allegiance to the union, even when in uniform, rather than to their oaths of protection.

                So you just ho hum along and say, yep, no arrests, great group of people expressing their god given rights for their god given collective bargaining. Keep your blinders on Todd.

              • USWeapon says:

                Kathy,

                I am not questioning what you are sharing here, and I appreciate your sharing it. But a bit of devil’s advocate… would you have accepted the same facts from Todd had he presented them about the Tea Party rallies? My guess is that we all see what we see through a somewhat tainted veil. That doesn’t mean there are not thugs and uncivilized folks there. But I also see Todd’s points.

                I will be writing my thoughts on the protests in Wisconsin in the coming week. It should be a lively discussion!

              • I’ve been to both – several tea parties and been downtown Madison 3 times now over the last 2 weeks. If he’s been there and been a part of them, then I’d probably believe him. If he’s sitting in his snowy cabin in the woods and has never attended either, then I don’t give his opinion much credibility.

              • Kathy,
                I haven’t been to the protests in Madison, but I’ve talked to several people who have (from both sides of the issue). No one has described it as you have. Your bias has been obvious from the start.

      • You cannot convince anyone that they are wrong if you ignore the truths that lie within their arguments. Money does give one power and without some kind of balance it can treat people unfairly. This has been proven with history. My problem is that the answer Charlie and others want to use is the one thing that increased the power that money already has-government power backing them up, passing laws to help them and bailing them out so they can’t fail. But the answer has been for the people and unions representing people to use government power to balance things out. Which doesn’t balance out anything it simply creates other greedy entity’s as bad as the corporate power they originally were fighting against. So now we have various power structures who’s aim is to win-not for the good of society but for their own personal gain or beliefs and the hell with the rest of us, to hell with the economy, and to hell with common sense. So the economy is destroyed, small business is hurt, business’s are moving overseas,people have no jobs-somehow people are going to have to wake up and see that using the government to solve these problems isn’t working. Maybe on a very limited basis regulations and such could help but unfortunately the Progressive mind set only cares about power and doesn’t know when to stop. But it is not freedom or capitalism that is the problem. It isn’t even socialism in very small doses that is the problem. It’s the me me me and the bleeding heart out of control extreme liberal mind set that is being used by the powerful to control us. You want to fight the powerful-fight the government-don’t increase it’s size. It’s alot easier for people to stand against a bad employer than it is to stand against the power of the Federal government.

        • Hear Hear! Flawless point V.
          Indeed, the man with the golden trash can, in a vast majority of cases, did not earn all of his money. In some cases, he had money or luck such that, despite stupid decisions and actions of evil, he is rich and powerful. The homeless man might have done everything “right” and still found himself ruined for a variety of reasons. Money does, indeed, equal power.

          But if you entrust money to an already corrupt bastion of power (authority) in order to hopefully distribute that money to those without power, you are asking for trouble. Its like asking an addict to hold your money for you. Government is playing both sides. They get the kickbacks from the fat cats in teh back rooms and then try to get the votes from the common man by making a show of what they are doing to limit the power of “the man”.

          Seperation of power is what is needed, not increased coordination of it, or increased amounts of it.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’m with you and JAC as well. I’m beginning to get the sense that we may be heading in a bad direction. Will it come time for the freedom loving people to stand up and forcibly stop the freedom hating people from taking freedom from us?

  13. **BF Warning:**

    The head of the world’s largest bond fund made a key observation.

    There is a crisis in the Middle East.

    This should produce a flight to quality, which typically meant a rush to buy US$.

    It’s not happening, El-Erian says.

    Quote:
    “What hasn’t happened is US assets, particularly the dollar, have not benefited from the flight to quality and the flight to safety that you would have expected That is a clear warning shot that we have to take seriously.”

    There has been a flight to gold (and silver), which is up over $100 (and silver up 25% in 30 days). But he is correct: the dollar has not soared.

    This indicates that current policies are harming the international value of the dollar.

    It means the dollar has been seriously damaged.

    If you agree, you better not be sitting on your hands.

    • Are you suggesting that any available (personal) dollars be turned into goods like food or PMs ? Or are you suggesting to have dollars in hand instead of in banks? Or both?

      • Anita,

        While one cannot totally divest themselves of the $, holding on to too many of them may be an error.

        The collapse of the banking system (ie: you cannot get your money out of the bank) is probably impossible.

        First, the FED has no constraint on liquidity – it is merely a few keyboard taps to make more (digital) money.

        Secondly, a banking collapse would wipe out the US economy. It would create a consequence nearly equivalent to a small nuclear war. The FED is not insane.

        However, YOU pulling your cash out of the bank sends a very strong message to the bankers – you are undermining the Fractional Reserve system and forcing the FED towards “good” money.

        I do it simply to spite the bankers.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’m with ya, BF. Thanks for the info!

  14. **CS Warning**

    I’m going for my mid-day walk soon, up and down hills. Coming down can be dangerous (320 pounds of momentum, you know) … women and children stay indoors.

  15. Mathius,

    Here is precisely where you fall of the tracks.

    We worry more about bad choices than how many.

    Your great ego makes you believe that you know what a “bad” choice is for someone else

    You are not satisfied in making those choices for yourself – you want to inflict your choices on others.

    Now, personally, I am of the opinion that any choices, however bad, are yours to make as long as the ramifications are yours alone, or limited to other consenting adults.

    …so you are blind when you read the words I type?
    …do not impose upon another….

    The only place I may be willing to limit the freedoms of others is where their decisions may adversely affect innocent individuals who were not party to the acts committed.

    …so you are blind when you read the words I type?
    …do not impose upon another….

    Freedom is the ability to “choose without imposition of another person.” Those choices can become physical by virtue of the acts which correspond to the choices. Thus they can cause harm. Just like overeating.

    Your analogy is frankly stupid.

    You overeating does nothing to me.

  16. Charlie,

    My ego? Mr. rationally against gov’t unless it’s supplying the duckets to save the geniuses who sunk the economy (remember the ones who couldn’t fail)?

    They didn’t fail, did they Charlie? GM is still around.

    And I know that disgusts you in many ways, including proving you wrong.

    The actions in what you described, my never give up friend, are separate in plan (which is required in a conspiracy).

    You do not understand conspiracies at all, let alone understand what is “required” for one to exist.

    Nassar led an anti-imperialist movement … he didn’t just take over. Jesus, you’re thick.

    Man, you are an wall of ignorance.

    So you agree that Nassar took over, but you maintain your irrationality so that you can disagree with yourself, but still be right.

    Tell me you aren’t seriously suggesting that a Mel Gibson movie explains your theory …

    … what is wrong with you?

    Are you serious that you believe if bullets in a movie “kill the bad guy” you believe that bullets in the real world will not, because bullets killing bad guys in a movie “isn’t real”???

    • Once more once with the impossible one.

      They didn’t fail, did they Charlie? GM is still around.

      Once again you approve of the GOVERNMENT SPONSORED bailouts. Thank you, Mr. Republican. It’s good to know big government was there for you since the geniuses couldn’t figure it out on their own.

      And I know that disgusts you in many ways, including proving you wrong.

      The day you prove me wrong is the day I off myself, signore. You, sir, (with all the Ayn Rand bullshit you spew) are a walking contradiction.

      You do not understand conspiracies at all, let alone understand what is “required” for one to exist.

      Imbecile, pay attention: A civil conspiracy or collusion is an agreement between two or more parties to deprive a third party of legal rights or deceive a third party to obtain an illegal objective … In a political sense, conspiracy refers to a group of persons united in the goal of usurping or overthrowing an established political power … In the criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to break the law at some time in the future, and, in some cases, with at least one overt act in furtherance of that agreement.

      Man, you are an wall of ignorance.

      And, my brother, you are a moron.

      • Mathius says:

        Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

      • Charlie

        Once again you approve of the GOVERNMENT SPONSORED bailouts. It’s good to know big government was there for you since the geniuses couldn’t figure it out on their own.

        Pay attention, Charlie.

        I do not approve of the bailouts.

        The Elite of GM knew that the government would cave in to save the workers – they knew how to play the government-game better than you. They won.

        You hate that.

        I find it abhorrent that the game even exists – and what makes me shake my head about you is that you do not like the game at all either but you want more of it

        The day you prove me wrong is the day I off myself, signore. You, sir, (with all the Ayn Rand bullshit you spew) are a walking contradiction.

        You are irrational, therefore nothing can be proven to you.

        n a political sense, conspiracy refers to a group of persons united in the goal of usurping or overthrowing an established political power

        And here you go again proving my point and arguing against yourself!

        I point out explicitly this exact scenario in (1).

        You demand they need to coordinate and then provide a specific definition that requires no such thing!

        You should donate your brain to science – it is a wonder why it doesn’t explode with all the self-contradictions that swirl within it.

        • No more of this, whacko. You were burned a long time in this argument and you don’t get to walk it back now.

          The geniuses that drove GM into the ground (not the union) went begging to YOUR GOVERNMENT for cash and got it … same as all those bankers on Wall Street (surely you remember them, the ones who were so well educated, the best and the brightest, they couldn’t fail) … they begged and got bailed out (by the government–the one you hate so much).

          Id suggest you donate your brain, BF, but I seriously doubt there’s anything besides dirty, dirty wax and a running programed Ayn Rand tape between your ears.

          • Charlie you are free to think anything you want of BF’s opinions about who is to blame in the bailout of the car manufacturers. But to claim that he supports government intervention into anything-shows a total lack of actually hearing him.

          • Truthseeker says:

            Charlie, do you even read what BF writes? How in the world did you come up with the conclusion that he supports government at all? He doesn’t support any side, only freedom. So how can you link TARP approval to BF by saying “YOUR GOVERNMENT”?

            Do you also realize that TARP was approved by a Democrat controlled congress? Just because it was signed by Bush does not mean it was the republicans fault. Both sides are to blame and it seem like you only wish to blame 1 side.

  17. The youth of today have been led so far astray, and it is none other than those of us who are now senior citizens who are at fault for this. We allowed Communism a foothold under the guise of Progressivism, and once established it began to take over inch by insidious inch. In schools, in abortions, in the courts, in our forms of entertainment (music, movies, television, and radio), and finally in our national politics.

    I do not know the answer, but I do know that something must be done and PDQ or we will lose our national heritage.

    • Mathius says:

      Um..

      How is abortion a form/symptom of communism?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Eugenics. You history is sorely lacking.

        • Mathius says:

          Are you on something?

          eu·gen·ics
             /yuˈdʒɛnɪks/ [yoo-jen-iks]
          –noun ( used with a singular verb )
          the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

          Abortions can be used in the practice of eugenics, but they are not, themselves, inherently eugenic in nature. By your logic, ultrasound machines eugenic because they are also used as part of the practice of eugenics. Abortions aren’t preformed to “improve the species.” They’re performed because women do not want to be pregnant.

          That’s such a BS argument, I am not bleeding from my eyes onto my keyboard.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Eugenics can be a means of population control, as can abortion, all of which I might add a favored by leftists. The only BS I can see is always coming from the left.

            • Mathius says:

              Except in the case of China’s 1-child policy, abortions are not a matter of population control.

              Regardless, population control is not eugenics. Eugenics is about improving (via genetics / controlled breeding) the quality of the species. It is not about the number of members of the species.

              Systematically aborting based on DNA for the purpose of creating a “superior” gene pool: Eugenics

              Ad hoc decisions to abort based on willingness / ability to have a child according to a pregnant woman with no regard to the broader gene pool: NOT eugenics.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                OK, Let me put it this way. The Left likes to kill people because they believe they have the right to control the population and control the actions of others. The means are semantics, the reality is historically proven.

              • You might want to qualify that comment G-evil intent-is usually only the intention of a small few.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Yes V.H.

                The small few only get into power because of the mindless minions that believe there BS. While I don’t see anyone as mindless, they are following the same path as the Germans in the early ’30s

              • Mathius,

                GMan is accurate here.

                You yourself have used the justification to kill unborn human beings is based on “development” or lack there of.

                This is fundamentally no different then the justifications of Eugenic.

                In this matter, one leads to the other – that is, if one agrees with Eugenics, abortion becomes a tool to manipulate the development of humans – and if one agrees with abortion/development argument, one cannot disagree with this argument being pushed forward regardless of the age of a human being.

              • Mathius says:

                sigh..

                Abortion isn’t about controlling people. It’s not about “control[ling] the population.” It’s not about “control[ling] the actions of others.” It is about women who do not want to be pregnant, who do not want to get stuck with a parasite for nine months that messes with their hormones, makes them gain tons of weight, makes them sore, makes them tired, makes them cranky, and gives them a craving for pickle flavored ice cream. It is about women who do not want to be a parent, or cannot afford to be a parent. It is about women who fear for their health under the physical strain of pregnancy. Yet you persist in pretending that it’s a lackadaisical thing that women wantonly choose to do thoughtlessly, or worse, enjoy! And worse still, you suggest that they do it as a deliberate attempt at population control (which you then go on to (inaccurately) call eugenics).

                Then you accuse me of being blind.

                A woman having an abortion for personal reasons, even if you consider abortion to be murder, is a far cry from “Germany in the 30’s.”

                And the left does not “like to kill people.”

                Find me one person on the left who has ever said they “like to kill people.” Knock it off.

                I have known one woman who had an abortion (I’m sure there are others who have, who I don’t know about). She was 19 and cried hysterically about it. She said it was the hardest decision she ever made. You should tell her that she’s akin to the Nazis. You should have to tell her that you think she enjoyed it.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                matt, I’m not speaking of You, per se when I say the left, You may not agree with everything on the left. What makes me wonder about the left mentallity as a group is that they will tell a women that it’s their body, their choice, and then walk across the street to fight to deny that same women the right to defend herself with a gun. I think you can see how this makes no sense at all, which seems to be the entire basis of left wing thinking, senseless.

              • Now I may have to shoot myself. Matt-Society isn’t just telling woman they have the right to choose(which they don’t)-they are telling them they are some kind of hero’s for making such a hard but responsible decision. They are encouraging the mass destruction of unborn children. They are promoting lowering the value of life. It is not being responsible to not have a baby-when you were aware that your actions could create a baby-the action of actually destroying your own baby may well not be easy to do-but the fact that you know you can have an abortion makes everything you do to make that baby easier and encourages the young to participate before they are old enough to be responsible or emotionally ready. And it makes it alot easier to be irresponsible when you know your actions will not force you to take care of what you created The whole situation is nuts and it has no redeeming qualities. And it has no societal benefits that aren’t just evil.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Papa,

      As long as I live and can walk and shoot, we WILL NOT lose our national heritage! I have the damn attitude!

  18. gmanfortruth says:

    Holy Cow! I run an errand with Pops and all hell breaks loose. I don’t think that name calling is going to accomplish much, but do as you must. I was hoping that this article would wake people up and get us to work together, but instead, it seems to be going in the opposite direction. I guess this is what happens when people face a fact they would rather not face. It seems it’s easier to stay divided, to our own detriment. :(

  19. Charlie

    No more of this, whacko. You were burned a long time in this argument and you don’t get to walk it back now.

    My argument has not changed, Charlie – and you were wrong the first time, and wrong now.

    The geniuses that drove GM into the ground (not the union)

    The Unions did destroy GM.

    No company can survive paying out $12 billion a year in medical benefits to people who do not or no longer work for GM

    No car company can survive if the first $3,000 of any vehicle they make goes to pay retirement benefits of working employees

    went begging to YOUR GOVERNMENT for cash and got it …

    GM did not need to beg. They merely threatened to close the doors and push a few hundred thousand workers into unemployment and a few hundred thousand retiree’s onto welfare.

    The Government caved in, as GM knew they would.

    same as all those bankers on Wall Street (surely you remember them, the ones who were so well educated, the best and the brightest, they couldn’t fail)

    Un-squirral your mind. I said that about the GM executives.

    The guys on “Wall Street” didn’t do to bad either, did they?

    • I am soooo tired of trying to penetrate that thick skull of yours, BF … don’t change your words now … your ego couldn’t take my making fun of the “geniuses” on Wall Street who failed so miserably … you defended them (they are the smarest/brightest — couldn’t fail, etc.) They only succeeded now by getting the gov’t they own to bail them out. Which, you now think is GREAT. So, ipso facto moronico, you are fine with bailouts of big business … just not anybody else.

      So, no, the geniuses on Wall Street did just fine … because THE GOVERNMENT BAILED THEM OUT, YOU MORON.

      unsquirrel this, paisan …
      :)

      I still love ya’ … just don’t have the energy or time to argue with you over and over and over … about the same things … over and over and over … because you’re completely unglued.

      • Charlie

        your ego couldn’t take my making fun of the “geniuses” on Wall Street who failed so miserably

        How do you think they failed?

        … you defended them (they are the smarest/brightest — couldn’t fail, etc.)

        I didn’t say they “couldn’t fail”. I said they are there because they “didn’t fail”.

        Capitalism works like that – if you can’t do the job, you don’t have a job.

        They only succeeded now by getting the gov’t they own to bail them out.

        So they didn’t fail.

        You are an endless ping-pong – fail/didn’t fail/fail/didn’t fail…..

        Which, you now think is GREAT.

        You do not know what I think, so don’t make up stories.

        So, no, the geniuses on Wall Street did just fine … because THE GOVERNMENT BAILED THEM OUT, YOU MORON.

        Ping-pong — they lost/they won/they lost/they won…. one day you’ll stop…we hope.

  20. Canine Weapon says:

    # Step 2: Let a=b.
    # Step 2: Then A^2 = AB,
    # Step 3: A^2 + A^2 = AB + A^2
    # Step 4: 2A^2 = AB + A^2
    # Step 5: 2A^2 – 2AB = AB + A^2 – 2AB
    # Step 6: 2A^2 – 2AB = A^2 – AB
    # Step 7: 2(A^2 – AB) = 1(A^2 – AB)
    # Step 8: 2 = 1

  21. gmanfortruth says:

    Relevant to today’s topic!

    Southern Poverty Law Center publishes

    “antigovernment, conspiracy minded list

    A new report from the Southern Poverty Law Center on “hate groups” warns of the explosive growth in 2010 of extremist, “patriot” organizations, among them the Constitution Party, Oath Keepers and WorldNetDaily.

    In the Spring 2011 issue of its Intelligence Report, titled “The Year in Hate & Extremism,” the SPLC identifies 824 “patriot” organizations it says “define themselves as opposed to the ‘New World Order,’ engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines.”

    “Hate groups topped 1,000 for the first time since the Southern Poverty Law Center began counting such groups in the 1980s,” writes the SPLC’s Mark Potok in the issue’s lead article. “But by far the most dramatic growth came in the antigovernment ‘Patriot’ movement – conspiracy-minded organizations that see the federal government as their primary enemy – which gained more than 300 new groups, a jump of over 60 percent.”

    “Taken together,” he continues, “these three strands of the radical right – the hatemongers, the nativists and the antigovernment zealots – increased from 1,753 groups in 2009 to 2,145 in 2010, a 22-percent rise.”

    The SPLC describes itself as a nonprofit civil rights organization dedicated to “fighting hate and bigotry,” but takes a clearly left-leaning political bent – criticizing in its spring issue alone the tea parties, “anti-gay” groups like the Family Research Council, anti-abortion activists, radio host Glenn Beck, elected Republican officials and, of course, “patriot” groups.

    Joseph Farah, founder and CEO of WND, takes exception to the SPLC lumping “patriot” groups in among its hate groups, domestic terrorists and “extremists”:

    “How strange it is in a land founded through the courage and convictions of patriots 230 years ago that the word ‘patriot’ can now be used as an epithet by people like the SPLC,” Farah said. “What does this say about them? And what does it say when the worst thing conspiracy mongers like SPLC can find to say about you is that you are ‘conspiracy minded’?

    “The federal government has indeed become a primary enemy of freedom because it has abrogated the rule of law and shredded the Constitution,” he continued. “This is not a hateful thing to say. It’s a loving and truthful message – if you believe in liberty and restoring America to its promise. I know SPLC does not fit into that category. It seeks only to divide Americans over race, class and religion – for profit, by the way.”

    While the report does make the distinction that listing WND, the Constitution Party, Oath Keepers and various militia groups and organizations “does not imply that the groups themselves advocate or engage in violence or other criminal activities, or are racist,” Potok’s article hints more than once that these modern day “patriots” are motivated by bigotry.

    “Like the year before, it was the antigovernment Patriot groups that grew most dramatically, at least partly on the basis of furious rhetoric from the right aimed at the nation’s first black president,” Potok writes. “What seems certain is that President Obama will continue to serve as a lightning rod for many on the political right, a man who represents both the federal government and the fact that the racial make-up of the United States is changing, something that upsets a significant number of white Americans.”

    As WND reported, the SPLC issued similar accusations last year about “so-called ‘Patriot’ groups” in a report titled “Rage on the Right”:

    “The ‘tea parties’ and similar groups that have sprung up in recent months cannot fairly be considered extremist groups,” Potok wrote then, “but they are shot through with rich veins of radical ideas, conspiracy theories and racism.”

    The report even went so far as to warn the rise of “patriot” groups “is cause for grave concern. Individuals associated with the Patriot movement during its 1990s heyday produced an enormous amount of violence, most dramatically the Oklahoma City bombing that left 168 people dead.”

    But Stewart Rhodes, founder of Oath Keepers, told WND accusers like SPLC only try to link “patriot” activists with extremists such as Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, because their accusations have no substance.

    Oath Keepers, Rhodes said, “has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorists like Timothy McVeigh.”

    He said his group doesn’t advocate the overthrow of the government, “whether local, state or national.”

    “We want our government to return to the constitutional republic that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution defined and instituted,” he said.

    Oath Keepers are members of law enforcement or the military who have sworn – again – to uphold the U.S. Constitution against any illegal orders that might be given.

    “We hope for a return to a constitutional republic free from fear and hatred. We hate only tyranny,” his website said. “We are Oath Sworn Americans who want the Constitution returned to its legal and rightful place, intact, as the ultimate Law of the Land.”

  22. gmanfortruth says:

    Power always seeks to preserve itself. Governmental power is, along with financial power, a prime example. In Libya, the dictator Gaddafi has vowed to fight to the last bullet (fired by others), to the last drop of blood (other people’s blood, of course), to keep his power. Yet people around the world, since the advent of the Internet, have been learning much about the numbers game. By that we mean that the average citizen of any nation on earth today knows that there are only a relatively few people in charge of national governments, and there are many people comprising the body of the “governed.” That does not bode well for leaders who fail to satisfy basic expectations within the public at large (such as respect for their natural rights to life, liberty, and property). That’s one thing. The government, however bloated, is always vastly outnumbered by the people. That is a universal truth.

    What has changed is now the people have now been made fully aware of the power they hold in their own hands, of that power they have always held in their hands. Now, because of the internet, which makes an end run around official state controlled media, they can get information both in and out of a country ruled by an oppressive regime, and organize from the bottom up to resist. They can know their own numbers and communicate easily, where before there had been a lock and monopoly on mass communications that was most favorable to the powers that be, who could hoodwink the people into thinking “there aren’t many who think like I do, we can’t win.” Now the people of the world know better. They CAN win.

  23. Mathius,

    Abortion isn’t about controlling people.

    Of course it is.

    It is about one person unilaterally deciding life and death over another person.

    There is no stronger expression of human control then that.

    It’s not about “control[ling] the population.”

    It is a tool of those who do wish to control the population (ie: China).

    It is about women who do not want to be pregnant, who do not want to get stuck with a parasite for nine months that messes with their hormones, makes them gain tons of weight, makes them sore, makes them tired, makes them cranky, and gives them a craving for pickle flavored ice cream.

    It is about a person who wants to be relieved the responsibility of their actions by murdering another human being.

    Find me one person on the left who has ever said they “like to kill people.” Knock it off.

    Robespierre.

    Want more names?

    She said it was the hardest decision she ever made. You should tell her that she’s akin to the Nazis. You should have to tell her that you think she enjoyed it.

    I am sure killing innocent human life is difficult for many people.

    It didn’t stop her from doing it, however.

    • Mathius says:

      You’re being an idiot.

      You are not an idiot.

      So stop acting like one in your pathological need to be argumentative.

    • Yet, BF, you’d let people starve to death if they were unable to survive by their own means. Somehow you don’t mind letting people die of illness because they are uninsured. Die of lack of heat if they can’t afford heat. They are doomed to die because welfare is too altruistic. Once again, your wires are crossed. You have the power to save them, yet choose not to (unless you get to cherry pick who you want to help). You are just as responsible for others as yourself, especially when you can afford the inconvenience of reaching into your wallet.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        So your idea of freedom is that you can dictate to others what they are responsible for? Sounds like dictatorship to me, certainly not freedom.

      • Charlie

        Yet, BF, you’d let people starve to death if they were unable to survive by their own means.

        No.

        But I would not steal from you to feed them either. That would be evil and no good comes from evil acts.

        Somehow you don’t mind letting people die of illness because they are uninsured.

        No one stopped them from buying insurance.

        To steal money from others may prevent those people from taking care of themselves.

        Your answer always is: shift the misery around to someone else and when that someone else is a person you don’t like you are happy. If it lands on someone you like, you complain about how unfair it is.

        But you never solve the misery, Charlie – you increase it.

        • Oh, BF, don’t you know it takes a village yet?

          There’s no mystery … universal health care … everybody is covered (even you get to be proud for supporting those who need it) … you’re a star in the eyes of the greater good. You get to go to heaven … I like everybody so everybody gets saved … how cool is that?

          • You don’t like the 2% Charlie

            • It’s not that I don’t like them (that’s BF’s contention because he requires that in his mundane arguments) … I say the 2%’s don’t need what they have. Redistribute that wealth to the needs of society as a whole (education, healthcare, etc.) … nobody needs what the 2%’s have … and they certainly didn’t “earn” it (even if they could) on their own.

              • Charlie,

                They earned “on their own”.

                You are just mad because you can’t.

                What I find funny is that you don’t have the same feeling about Jordon and basketball. You will say he “earned” all those baskets that he scored …..

          • Charlie,

            Your economic ignorance is one of your greater faults.

            You cannot have a scarce, valuable good available universally

            Thus, your idea is doomed as all irrational ideas are doomed, except in this case – as it there is an attempt to manifest such an idiocy – will cause great suffering on the nation.

            • “Your economic ignorance is one of your greater faults.”

              Well, that and I’m guessing all his exes might put marriage on that list also. Huh Charlie?

              • Kathy, Kathy, Kathy … and here I was ready to propose …

                I’ll plea to economic ignorance if you, BF, plead to being a moron. Otherwise, you lose … again … you obviously need big government to save all your geniuses on Wall Street (and those at GM) from their inability to cultivate all they learned as the best and brightest going to the best schools. Government bailed them out because, moronski, they bankrupted their firms.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                WOW, if I slammed my fist on the table that hard, I’d shatter it.

      • Truthseeker says:

        Charlie, how on earth has man survived thousands of years without central A/C, heaters, health insurance and food being delivered?

  24. Charlie and Michael Moore – Brothers in our pockets!

    Michael Moore: Wealthy Americans’ Money is a ‘National Resource’

    Yesterday, Michael Moore said that the money of wealthy Americans “isn’t theres, it’s ours,” and is a “national
    resource.”

    http://michellemalkin.com/2011/03/02/national-resource/

    • He’s right! I usually get pissed at Michael for his always at the last second bending over for Obama, but about this he’s right. Nobody needs to earn $2.4 million an hour (for instance). Let him take $100 and give the rest to those who need it.

      Or walk him to the plank … I know, I know … I’m such a savage. Oy vey …

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Charlie,

        Serious question here. We do you cling to a political ideology that has been proven an epic failure through out to 20th century.

        • Gman, I am not clinging to it. If I thought there was a better one, I’d advocate for it. It has never been proven anything but overtaken by brutal dictators. Where socialism wasn’t absued as such (where it exists in some places today) it is not an epic failure. I see capitalism as the ultimate failure. It served it’s purpose. It worked for a while, but in the end, the disparity it has created will eventually bring it down. Money can move the press of a keyboard key … the 2%’s no longer needs manufacturing to expand here in the states … there are too many people here to do what? How are we going to put them to work? Free up the markets and we return to the dark ages (unions get wiped out and everybody is making minimum wage). How can you justify the disparity between a teacher in Wisconsin earning $46K and some hedge fund manager making $2.4 million an hour?

          Ask not why Charlie clings to a different political pardigm as you. As why you are comfortable being a slave to your wages.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Charlie, Teachers wages and fund managerwages have no bearing on my life. I am responsible for me and my family, that is all. I currently work for nobody, as I quit a regular job because I’m fed up with funding those that don’t work because they get government cookies, plus I’m assisting my aging father. I’m good in terms of finances because I worked my ass off at work and doing side jobs most of my life.

            Now, I will work doing what I want, based on my skills, at my rate of pay. It will be cash only. No more funding the slackers of the inner cities for me. I see you as having a big heart, but if you haven’t noticed, the left leaning governments in Africa, the Middle East and Europe aren’t doing so well the last year or so. The money for the greater good has run out, and now the greater good must suffer the consequences.

            We are already screwed in this country. You said: “there are too many people here to do what? How are we going to put them to work?” While I agree with this statement, what is to be done. If you say: “we’re taking all the rich peoples money and dividing it up based on need, so that everything is fair” Then what? All the rich peoples money is gone and when it runs out, then what? That of course can only happen if the rich don’t flip you off and leave the country before you can take their money. It’s a no win situation.

            I’ve been warning you of a coming SHTF time. How do you think that it won’t happen?

            • No more funding the slackers of the inner cities for me.

              Just curious (serious question). Do you really think that every person out of work in the inner cities is a slacker? Is it possible they can’t find work? Is it possible zoning laws/real estate values and the disadvantages they’ve born over generations keep them in areas where work is just not plentiful? Why is everyone out of work a slacker? I worked 6 and 7 days a week and am currently unemployed (except for writing). I’m going back to school in June for an MFA so I can teach down the road because my job has effectively outsourced into oblivion … I have the advantages most in inner cities do not have (education and a few stored coins) … yet I’m out of work right now … am I a slacker?

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Charlie,

                I was referring to the welfare lifers, not the unemployed. Prior to the Obama administration, I do not recall taxes being used for unemployment benefits. It has traditionally been unemployment insurance, payed for by employers. I should have been more clear, my bad!

              • Truthseeker says:

                ” Is it possible zoning laws”

                Now you see the crux of politicians? It doesn’t matter what side of the isle you sit on, laws will eventually affect you. I am sure when this stuff was going on, you were not paying attention.

                Now think about the state laws that prevent you from buying insurance from where-ever you want. Why is your freedom being limited?

  25. Charlie

    their inability to cultivate all they learned as the best and brightest going to the best schools. Government bailed them out because, moronski, they bankrupted their firms.

    Them putting a hundred million in their pockets makes them rather successful and you …. in comparison …. not so much.

    • No, actually it makes you the Republican shill I figured you for. Trust me, I thought the bailouts were worth armed revolution. Blankfein should have been thrown off the roof of Goldman Sachs; his money confiscated and distributed to all those he laid off or who lost their jobs to outsourcing.

      Success is relative, BF … I’m doing fine. How ’bout yourself and your “pathological need to argue” … maybe you need to get out more? No disrespect … I’m just saying.

      • Charlie,

        Your flaw: you are superficial and ego-centric. You cannot think out of your own self.

        For example, you believe the bailouts to be bad. I agree, they are bad.

        But the answer – attacking the head of Goldman Sachs – is superficial. The problem still exists and continues to exist – government-controlled market place.

        Here, you do not want to change a thing – indeed, you want more of it. Indeed, what you want is different people gaining illicit funds – and have no real problem with the illicit funds themselves.

        If it was someone you liked, say Nadar, that benefited from the largess of government, you’d be joyed.

        But because it is a group of people you do not like, you are peeved.

        You cannot understand it is the illicit funds (government money) that is the problem, not the people.

      • Truthseeker says:

        “makes you the Republican shill ”

        Charlie, how in the world did you come up with the conclusion that BF is a Republican? If you read any of his stuff, is he very anti-government. Does anti-government = republicans now? last I checked, some of us just want a smaller government, not no government at all.

  26. Charlie

    Free up the markets and we return to the dark ages (unions get wiped out and everybody is making minimum wage).

    You are a Marxist, red right through.

    Karl Marx posited the same baseless theory, and during his lifetime saw the opposite happen.

    As more and more free enterprise occurred the wages of the “average” guy …. went up!

    When confronted by the evidence, he was much like you.

    He denied it.

  27. Sorry-off topic-just thought it was note worthy!

    March 02, 2011
    NYT, WaPo ignore Clinton condemnation of UN Human Rights Council’s ‘structural bias’ against Israel
    Leo Rennert
    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was in Geneva on Feb. 28 for a major U.S. policy address to the UN Human Rights Council.

    While Clinton welcomed the ouster of Libya from the Council — on orders of the UN General Assembly — her speech was more newsworthy on two other counts.

    First, she called for creation by the Council of a special rapporteur to document human-rights abuses in Iran — “Why do people have the right to live free from fear in Tripoli but not in Tehran?” she asked — and second, she slammed the Council for its “structural bias against Israel.”

    This was a dramatic, public spanking of a Human Rights Council that has disgraced itself by its singular determination to demonize Israel, while ignoring real human-rights abuses in China, Russia, Burma, Iran, Cuba and, until last week, Libya. Only four months earlier, the Council actually had heaped praise on Qaddafi’s regime.

    Here is what Clinton had to say about the abysmal behavior of the Human Rights Council vis a vis Israel:

    “The structural bias against Israel — including a standing agenda item for Israel, whereas all other countries are treated under a common item — is wrong. And it undermines the important work we are trying to do together. As member states, we can take the Council in a better, stronger direction.

    “The Council must apply a single standard to all countries based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It cannot continue to single out and devote disproportionate attention to any one country.”

    Clinton’s sharp denunciation of the Council’s vendetta against Israel was doubly newsworthy; first, because she delivered it directly to its intended target at a plenary session of the Council, and, second, because it came from the foreign policy chief of the Obama administration, which has been more wont to blame Israel than to defend it on the world stage. Prime Minister Netanyahu still has personal scars from withering Clinton criticisms to prove the point.

    Yet, neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post devoted a single line to Clinton’s condemnation of the “structural bias against Israel” by the UN Human Rights Council.

    Nor did these two papers report still another newsworthy nugget in Clinton’s speech in Geneva –her flat rejection of a long-standing campaign by Muslim countries to criminalize criticism of Islam.

    While Jerusalem welcomed her defense of Israel to be treated equally with other UN members, there must have been lots of rumpled feelings in capitals throughout the Muslim world for her demand that the Council “move beyond a decade-long debate over whether insults to religion should be banned or criminalized. It is time to overcome the false divide that pits religious sensitivities against freedom of expression.”

    Supporters of the First Amendment have been in the forefront of pushing back against Islamic efforts to criminalize criticism of passages in the Koran. One would have thought that the Times and the Post, as self-styled First Amendment freedom-of-expression disciples, would take note of Clinton’s remarks on this topic. But they didn’t.

    It seems that at the Times and the Post, a high-profile expression of support of Israel and an equally high-profile rebuke to Muslim countries by the secretary of state of the United States don’t rate as news that’s fit to print.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/03/nyt_wapo_ignore_clinton_condem.html

  28. Charlie,

    Marx predicted that competition among capitalists would grow so fierce that eventually most capitalists would go bankrupt, leaving only a handful of monopolists controlling nearly all production.

    This, to Marx, was one of the contradictions of capitalism: competition, rather than creating better-quality products at lower prices for consumers, in the long run creates monopoly, which exploits workers and consumers alike.

    What happens to the former capitalists? They fall into the ranks of the proletariat, creating a greater supply of labor, a fall in wages, and what Marx called a growing reserve army of the unemployed. Also, thought Marx, the anarchic, unplanned nature of a complex market economy is prone to economic crises as supplies and demands become mismatched, causing huge swings in business activity and, ultimately, severe economic depressions.

    But almost everything Marx claimed simply does not happen.

    Capitalists do not make money by exploiting workers. They make money by taking risks, delaying profit and organizing production.

    Although capitalist markets have changed over the past 150 years, competition has not devolved into monopoly.

    Real wages have risen and profit rates have not declined.

    Nor has a reserve army of the unemployed developed.

    We do have bouts with the business cycle, but more and more economists believe that significant recessions and depressions may be more the unintended result of state intervention (through monetary policy carried out by central banks and government policies on taxation and spending) and less an inherent feature of markets as such.

    Socialist revolutions, to be sure, have occurred throughout the world, but never where Marx’s theory predicted—in the most advanced capitalist countries. On the contrary, socialist revolts have occurred in poor, so-called Third World countries.

    Most troubling to present-day Marxism is the ongoing collapse of socialism. Revolutions in socialist countries today are against socialism and for free markets. In practice, socialism has failed to create the nonalienated, self-managed, and fully planned society. Real-world socialism in the twentieth century failed to emancipate the masses. In most cases it merely led to new forms of statism, domination, and abuse of power.

    • But almost everything Marx claimed simply does not happen.

      Capitalists do not make money by exploiting workers. They make money by taking risks, delaying profit and organizing production.

      Nike puts children to work overseas. Not much of a risk or delayed profit or tough organization of production. Nike isn’t the only outfit exposed for this over the years. They’re just a big name one.

      Although capitalist markets have changed over the past 150 years, competition has not devolved into monopoly.

      Really, then why are so many on the right concerned about insurance companies being confined to state boundaries. Why were anti trust laws drummed up (more of that gov’t regulation to protect workers/consumers).

      Real wages have risen and profit rates have not declined.

      Real wages in this country alone over the last year have declined while the top 2% have risen dramatically.

      Nor has a reserve army of the unemployed developed.

      Real unemployment is at a dangerous number right now. Whether it turns into an army is yet to be seen.

  29. G-Man,
    You say your agenda is “How can we stop the divisions between us?”

    But then you pretty clearly state that the problem is the Left, who you describe as “freedom hating people” and “This should not be a left/right issue. If it is, it’s because the left screwed it up!”.

    So it would seem your solution is for the Left to accept your position on the issues, and then the divisions will be gone?

    Do you see the problem with that?

    Do you see any of the current division occurring because of the actions of those on the Right?

    Do you ever read your own articles and comments? You say you want to bring people together, but you’re one of the most polarizing people out there…and I really do mean out there!

    • gmanfortruth says:

      HI Todd,

      Nice of you to join the asylum :)

      While I can understand how you may come to your conclusions, let me clarify. I really do wish we could all come together. During the course of the discussion, I came to the conclusion that is basically impossible to do so. I see divison coming from the right as well. That’s the problem, we are a divided nation, and I, alone, can do nothing about it. But, I tried.

      I hope that I am polarizing, but I’m honest and speak from the heart, you get no bullshit from me, you just get me telling it the way I see it. You don’t have to agree, and I could be wrong sometimes and I accept that.

      Funny, when the message can’t be attacked, it falls on the messenger. I’m thick skinned and can defend anything I write, I’ll leave it to you and others to show the errs of my ways.

      Peace!

      • G-Man,
        So after the effort to write this article, one comment from JAC and you change your mind?

        You think I’m attacking the messenger? No, I’m pointing out the contradiction between your article “UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL” and your comments where you blame the Left and show no interest in uniting.

        Understand?

  30. USW: If you catch this in time..they’re auctioning off a 66 Chevelle Convertible on Discovery Channel right now…..

    • $21,250 SOLD! :)

      • USWeapon says:

        Oh….. How I would love to have another Chevelle from that era. I saw a 70 Chevelle a year or so ago that was restored and the guy was selling for 17k. I was so tempted, but the reality is that I want to buy one that is rough shape and restore it. One day….

        • I didn’t catch the whole show. I stared watching about 5 minutes before I posted the comment. The car was a real POS when the show started. They ended up finding All factory original parts…no after market stuff. It ended up NICE and they got the price they were looking for.

  31. Charlie Stella

    Nike puts children to work overseas.

    Whereas you would simply let them starve instead of earning money for their food an shelter.

    Not much of a risk or delayed profit or tough organization of production. Nike isn’t the only outfit exposed for this over the years. They’re just a big name one.

    The Capitalists of Nike delay their profit …. this is called “investments”.

    An investment is when you do not spend the capital you have today for goods today, and instead delay your expenditure for a time in the future and give your capital to someone else who spends the money today for goods. Usually these people buy goods to produce other goods. Your expectation: in the future, your capital will be returned so you can buy these future goods that your capital today helped create.

    The tradeoff for you: you delay self-gratification today expect to get more capital back in return so you can buy more (or better) stuff in the future. This is called, in economic speak, “time preference of expenditure”

    All of this is economics – an area of study I know you have spent very little time understanding.

    Although capitalist markets have changed over the past 150 years, competition has not devolved into monopoly.

    Really, then why are so many on the right concerned about insurance companies being confined to state boundaries. Why were anti trust laws drummed up (more of that gov’t regulation to protect workers/consumers).

    Again, you have not studied, therefore your understanding is superficial.

    Marx declared the monopolies would become the norm inside a free market. This has not happened nor can happen.

    It can happen within a government-controlled market place as you note. It is government that prevents insurance companies from operating in certain areas, not the free market.

    It is government that creates the conditions for cartels, not the free market.

    It is in the benefit of government to erect barriers and create cartels – with barriers comes fees and license payments; with cartels, it is easier to control and tax a small number of very wealthy companies then the fleet-of-foot, nominally wealthy many companies.

    To demand government correct what the government willfully created is akin to asking a sadist to torture himself.

    Real wages have risen and profit rates have not declined.

    Real wages in this country alone over the last year have declined while the top 2% have risen dramatically.

    Indeed – as this is a government-run economy, it is to be expected that those who cater to government win and those that cannot lose.

    What astonishes me the most about you Charlie is that you are observant, yet don’t have a thread of understanding about what you see. You are superficial – you see the ax fall and blame the ax. You cannot see the hands the wield it.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 127 other followers

%d bloggers like this: