Post Election Reflections from a Different Voice…

Greetings again SUFA. Someone shared the following article with me the other day and I wanted to share it here with all of you in order to see what all of you have to say. It the aftermath of an election that I think many are not thrilled about (meaning those on the right are depressed and those in the center felt it was the lesser of two evils and those on the moderate left felt he wasn’t a great choice but wasn’t a bad one either), there are a lot of different trains of thought going on out there. My personal thoughts are that I am not happy with Obama. I would have preferred Romney (by a very slight margin and mostly because I think that Obama may be the most dishonest President in history) and that we were screwed either way. I don’t think much changed with this election, but I could be wrong.

I felt that the article I share below was a pretty thoughtful look at where we stand today form one person’s perspective. The author is a man by the name of Scott Strzelczyk and he has his own blog called “A Citizen’s View” which you can find by following this link:

http://sas4liberty.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/my-post-election-reflection/

So please read on and enjoy Scott’s take on the election and as always, I look forward to reading what all of you think….

My Post Election Reflection
by Scott Strzelczyk

Let me start off by sharing a story. On Sunday, two days before the election, I was in line at the grocery store and overheard the cashier talking to the customer in front of me. She said “well I hope things work out the right way on Tuesday”. Now, I don’t know what the right way meant, but I did offer these words. No matter who wins the election on Tuesday, one half of the country will be happy and the other half will be disappointed. She agreed. Most people will agree with that statement.

For those that believe the country is lost or we are well on the path to socialism you are wrong. The country isn’t lost now. We lost the country a long time ago. Today is the time to recognize and acknowledge the system is broke and broken. Today is the time to recognize the system is dysfunctional. Today is a time for reflection and introspection. This article summarizes my thoughts, my reflection on what transpired and where we stand as a society today.

In a recent article by Charles Hugh-Smith he wrote, ‘the system we have is an imperial presidency”. In Arthur Schlesinger’s 1973 book the Imperial Presidency the term is defined as:

A presidency becomes imperial when it relies on powers beyond those allowed by the Constitution. The Constitution established three separate branches of government not for efficiency but to avoid the arbitrary exercise of power.

There has not been a congressional declaration of war since WWII. Every war has been waged without congressional approval thus every war has been unconstitutional. Schlesinger goes on to say:

The Constitution and its authors determined that the power to initiate a war belonged to the Congress. The President had the responsibility to conduct ongoing wars and ongoing foreign relations and respond to sudden attacks if the Congress was not in session. As the United States of America became a great world power, and then a superpower, the Presidency acquired more war powers despite the Constitution. This reduced the Congress’ powers and the separation of powers, which is necessary to avoid the arbitrary use of power.

Through various means, Presidents subsequently acquired powers beyond the limits of the Constitution. The daily accountability of the President to the Congress, the courts, the press and the people has been replaced by an accountability of once each four years during an election. These changes have occurred slowly over the centuries so that that which appears normal differs greatly from what was the original state of America.

I cannot emphasize enough Schlesinger’s last sentence. He said, “These changes have occurred slowly over the centuries so that which appears normal differs greatly from what was the original state of America”. [Emphasis added.] He is saying the Constitution established a constitutional republic not an imperial presidency. He is saying the role of government and the authority of government has fundamental changed to a government without limits and a government that acts arbitrarily and capriciously.

Smith continued on to the expanded powers of executive orders. Smith wrote, “Events since then (such as the invasion of Iraq in 2003) have revealed how far an Imperial President could go with broadly granted war powers, “presidential immunity,” “signing statements” (declaring which congressionally approved statutes he would ignore or refuse to enforce) and the increasingly popular “executive orders” which enable everything from imprisoning entire ethnic populations (E.O. 9066) to claiming extra-legal powers over the entire U.S. economy.

Presidents before G.W. Bush and Obama managed to perform their duties with a handful of Executive Orders–five per term seemed about average. President Bush issued 160 in his first term while President Obama has so far issued 139. Both of our most recent presidents also made heavy use of Executive privileges such as “signing statements” and other “work-arounds” to feeble limits on presidential powers.”

I have said before we need to choose between uncomfortable truths or comforting lies. The latter is the rationalizations people go through to avoid uncomfortable truths; about themselves, our government, or society in general. In some cases these rationalizations amount to mental gymnastics to somehow, anyhow, maintain some semblance of reason and understanding today. The result is a normalcy bias where people simply cannot digest or understand what is happening around them, thus the need for mental gymnastics to catapult their minds back to a place they understand. Those are the comforting lies people tell themselves to cope with the unknown and unchartered territory we are headed into.

The problem is exacerbated by rhetoric and fear. We are headed into unknown and unchartered waters. At least for us they are unknown waters. But these waters have been traversed before. History is replete with examples of great societies rising and falling. But do not believe for a minute that we are doomed. Contrast where we stand today with those that voyaged to America on the Mayflower. Undoubtedly, they truly entered unchartered waters. The risks they took were orders of magnitude greater than what we have to deal with after the 2012 election. That doesn’t mean things won’t be difficult as we all try to figure out how to navigate the choppy waters ahead and charter our own futures.

The perspective needs to be on the uncomfortable truths of what we have become as individuals, a society, and a system of governance. In addition to the imperial presidency there are numerous other uncomfortable truths we must face without performing all the mental gymnastics to rationalize away reality. As Ayn Rand said, “you can ignore reality but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.”

Regardless of who won the 2012 election we are faced with these truths:

Government debt will grow and deficit spending will continue. The simple truth is both Romney and Obama would continue government’s profligate spending and run annual deficits which increase the national debt. Albeit the amounts may vary slightly, but nevertheless, the path of fiscal insanity will continue. Today, government revenues are less than the total expenses for Social Security, Medicare, and the interest on the debt. All discretionary (non-military) and non-discretionary (military) spending is funded through borrowing. By the next presidential election I expect the national debt to be between $20 trillion on the low end and $23 trillion on the high end.

To fund their deficits, government will continue to borrow money and print money. Government will continue to debase the currency. I’ve written on this extensively and won’t cover it again here, but it is sufficient to say that the purchasing power of a dollar (spent now or savings spent later) will decline. Government securities that cannot be sold to foreign central banks, foreign governments, or the primary dealers will be bought outright by the Federal Reserve. Expect prices to rise and your stored purchasing power (i.e. your savings) to diminish.

An interventionist foreign policy will continue. In addition to the unconstitutional wars U.S. involvement in other countries’ affairs will continue unabated. In some cases the U.S. will prop up foreign governments whether they are dictatorships or not. In some cases the U.S. will supply and arm insurgents to combat foreign governments because it’s in our national security interests. All will be justified under the guise of “national security” or our “national interests”.

The entitlement state would continue unabated. Neither Romney nor Obama has any plans to reduce or eliminate entitlement programs. This is how I describe the system to people. The government confiscates your earnings through a tax and places into a “trust fund” with the Treasury Department. The trust fund is raided so the current government can spend it and is replaced with an I.O.U. The money is spent on wasteful and unconstitutional government programs. Eventually it is replaced by borrowed funds which the government says you have to repay and with interest. This is referred to as a Ponzi scheme. The system is unsustainable and government uses its enforcement arm – the IRS – to ensure you comply and participate in the scheme whether you consent or not.

The welfare state is a source of votes for politicians. In a quid-pro-quo the agreement is we will provide a “government benefit” such as EBT cards, housing, etc. and in return you vote and keep us in power. In other words, the people are voting themselves largesse out of the treasury. But that largesse comes from a source other than government. It comes from taxes or borrowing. In one case the rightful property of one person is taken by government and provided to another that has absolutely no rightful claim to it. In the case of borrowing, this is more of the same problem where the debt is increased and you are expected to repay the principle and interest out of your future earnings.

Unalienable rights, liberties, and civil rights will continue to be abridged or denied. Decade after decade the erosion of our rights and liberties continues unabated. Asset forfeiture laws, traveling on airplanes, parts of the Patriot Act, parts of the National Defense Authorization Act, and unlawful violations of the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments continue unabated. Usurpation of power by Congress, the executive, and the judiciary is considered normal behavior where it was once considered treasonous. States no longer exercise their constitutional authority by checking the powers of the federal government. States have been reduced to mere satellites, mere corporations, to the leviathan occupying the ten square miles known as Washington D.C. with its tentacles reaching out to every state, county, municipality, community, neighborhood, and home across our great Union. All will be done under the guise of “keeping us safe” or “we are doing it for the kids”.

The unfunded liabilities of the federal, state, and local governments combined exceed $200 trillion.

We haven’t had a free market economy in generations. Today we have a centrally planned economy where the state controls the money supply, the cost of money (interest rates), and forces people to use fiat currency through unconstitutional legal tender laws. The state redirects capital towards government centric preferences. Supply and demand is distorted. Price signals are manipulated through government intervention. Scarce resources are misallocated primarily for political purposes. Economic figures and statistics are adjusted and manipulated by government bureaucracies for political purposes. GDP, CPI, unemployment and other figures are routinely manipulated for political purposes.

Taxes are primarily paid by the top 25% of earners. The bottom 50% of earners pay no federal income tax. Estate taxes prohibit family owned businesses from passing on from one generation to another. Corporate taxes are a farce. Corporations don’t pay taxes, people pay taxes. Income taxes are another expense item for a corporation which they pass on to the consumer in the price of the good or service provided. There are hundreds of other taxes and fees paid at the federal, state, and local levels.

These are the uncomfortable truths. These things would continue regardless of who occupied the White House. What is important is what to do next? As the size, scope, and authority of the federal government expands, and the debt continues to grow, and the currency continues to be debased what should we do next? What can you do to insulate yourself and better secure your unalienable rights from the leviathan’s tentacles?

The answer is to build a firewall between your family and the federal government. What I mean by a firewall is a way to insulate the federal government as much as possible while strengthening things around you. The things that are around you are:

1) Your family.

2) Your neighborhood and community.

3) Your local government.

4) Your state government.

5) Your county sheriff.

6) Your network of like-minded people.

Recently, Hurricane Sandy hit the mid-Atlantic coastline and there are still many people without food and water, shelter, or electricity. The government is ineffective in these situations. People suffer. People die. People that look to and depend upon government to rescue them, to support them through so-called government programs, to provide for their retirement or medical care, and many other things must face some uncomfortable truths.

The government can’t rescue or save you. The government cannot be the answer for your everyday needs in life. The government cannot provide a cradle-to-grave life for you. The government cannot provide spiritual guidance. This is nothing more than a comforting lie which allows you to ignore reality; to ignore the uncomfortable truth that there are risks and rewards in life. That failure is an option. Success is an option. Your choices are yours and yours alone to make. And, you live with the consequences of your choices.

To live in a government imposed and controlled society where choice and individuality is limited, where success is punished, and failure is rewarded is to ensure a constant, pleasant Prozac-like state of mediocrity. It ensures that no individual is unique or different. Rather, nobody is special and we are all mere cogs in government’s machinery. It is to live in peaceful slavery as you and your fellow man battle with others in society for the crumbs tossed your way by government masters. This is wrongful liberty and certainly not how free people live.

The answers must come from us. We must build a firewall between ourselves and the federal government through local and state solutions. We must reclaim responsibility for our lives, our liberty, and our property. We must reclaim our virtues and not allow government to dictate what is or isn’t virtuous. We must recognize the smallest minority in the country is the individual. Each individual must exercise rightful liberty to unobstructed action within their own will drawn around the equal rights of others. Not to exercise superior rights over others or to have others exercise superior rights over you. Not to have a government use the brute force of institutionalized state violence to exercise superior rights over you and obstruct your actions. Not to decide winners and losers in life or in the economy. Not to create a dependent society demanding, by right or precedent, free things from government. Rather to create an environment, a condition of rightful liberty where each person’s choice of unobstructed action allows them to obtain goods and services they want or need.

Changes indeed have occurred slowly over the generations and have reached a point where America is no longer recognizable. I encourage each of you to take some time after this election and genuinely reflect about these things. Cast aside political parties and propaganda, rhetoric and fear, and free your minds to consider your future and the future for your posterity. God Bless.

About these ads

Comments

  1. Well said.

  2. He is saying the Constitution established a constitutional republic not an imperial presidency. He is saying the role of government and the authority of government has fundamental changed to a government without limits and a government that acts arbitrarily and capriciously.

    Of course, can’t let pass a fundamental error.

    The Constitution, by fact that it exists, did establish an imperial president.

    Also, in fact, this is exactly what Madison wanted – in fact, again, he argued that the Presidency should be sovereign , a king, appointed for life.
    He compromised half way – and got essentially everything he wanted a Presidency to be, except for the “appoint for life” thing.

    Before 1795, the Office of the President was about as exciting as watching grass grow – it was powerless.

    Note an important fact, we do not measure the era of Presidents from 1779 to 1795. You can’t even name who they were.

    After 1795, you can.
    It was the “Washington Presidency” as now IT defines the policies of the entire nation, and continues today.
    We measure the 1990’s by declaring it the “Bush Years” or the “Clinton Years” and now, it will be “The Obama Presidency” that defines the first part of the 21st century….

    Nope, from day one of the Constitution, the President was “a King of our own making”

    Otherwise, yeah, I decent post.

  3. :)

  4. Good Morning SUFA :)

    Nice article. The Govt is definately broken. How to fix it (or replace it) is what needs to be considered IMHO. It’s easy for me to see the Feds for what they are, not so easy for others. THe solutions are even tougher for all of us. One day till Bear season, :)

      • Yes, because the workers should just immediately accept the pay cut….I mean, seriously, how dare the workers protest a pay cut being imposed upon them!?

        • A Puritan Descendant says:

          The workers should see Reality before throwing away their jobs.

          • That is a gamble, true, and in this case the worker’s lost. In hindsight many probably would have taken the pay cut over no job. But don’t the workers have the right to protest management’s decision to impose a pay cut? Or should they just sit back like good little workers and accept whatever pittance they are given?

            • A Puritan Descendant says:

              Yes, they have that right, Just need to find a safer way to do it.

            • Howdy from Texas, Buck…..hope you are doing well, sir.

              Question…you and I agree that the workers had a right to do what they wanted…..do you agree that Hostess had a right to do what they did and the reasons for it?

              • Howdy Colonel,

                I don’t know enough to judge the overall decision of Hostess. That being said, of course they have the right to shut their doors. Not sure if it was a smart business decision for them either, but again, I just don’t know enough on the situation.

              • @ Buck……as the Fonz would say…………………………cool a mundo!

        • They have absolutely a right to protest and exercise their right to not trade their labor if the deal is not to their liking.

          But, the company, too, has the absolute right to protest and exercise its right not trade money for labor that is not to their liking.

          You, as a retail store, have the right to not sell your good to who ever you do not wish to.
          But ,you, as a consumer, have the right to avoid that store and go somewhere else you are more welcome.

          That’s all that happening here.
          The reason it is exaggerated is because of the workers economic ignorance and stupidity – as if they had a “right” to a job.

          • BF — I agree with you that the company had a right to shut its doors (as I posted above to the good Colonel, not sure if it was a wise business decision, but I don’t know enough to make that determination). Where I disagree with you is your statement that “…it is exaggerated because of the workers economic ignorance and stupidity – as if they had a ‘right’ to a job” Once again you seek to ‘blame’ the workers for the result with absolutely no care of the business’ underlying decision to unilaterally slash wages.

            • @ Buck…..I see this as a unilateral issue in the months to come. Unions and stupid management created this. At some point, as stated in eco 101, you reach a point of diminishing return. Then there is no choice but to slash something….and, if I am reading correctly, the same amount of slashing went to management as well…..it was not one sided.

              Now, I am hearing, that management bought off the union leadership…….not sure what they mean by that…stay tuned.

              • Sorry Longhorn.. going to step in here..

                and, if I am reading correctly, the same amount of slashing went to management as well…..it was not one sided.

                ::GONG::

                BCTGM members are well aware that as the company was preparing to file for bankruptcy earlier this year, the then CEO of Hostess was awarded a 300 percent raise (from approximately $750,000 to $2,550,000) and at least nine other top executives of the company received massive pay raises.

                Source.

                ::rides back off into the sunset::

              • Ah Mathius, can always count on you for a dose of reality.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Buck

          There is a flaw in your statement which changes the context considerably. Not necessarily the “rights” of workers but the nature of the gamble and who was impacting who.

          It was not THE workers. It was SOME workers, and in fact a minority of workers. They have in affect killed the jobs of their fellow workers who had agreed to the new contracts.

          So yes, they have a right to strike. But what is missing is the employers right to replace them. Because of our “laws” the minority in this case ruled the majority.

          They gambled that management was lying, because they are taught that management is always lying. Well they screwed up and pretty soon they will ALL be unemployed.

          And the biggest travesty of all is I won’t be able to get my Hostess Cherry “fruity pie” on road trips anymore.

        • The workers absolutely have a right to quit if they don’t want to work for less. The problem is the Bakers Union also, through government force, prevented anyone else from making that choice for themselves, so Hostess was forced to shut down due to lack of capital to continue operating without any sales revenue. Maybe that would have happened anyway if not enough other people were willing to work as a baker there for low pay, but now we’ll never know.

      • Gman – why not link the original CNN article? It has much more detail on the bankruptcy proceedings and even a quote from the Teamsters Union basically yelling at the Bakers Union for not playing ball, plus the actual contract details.

        http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/companies/hostess-closing/index.html?hpt=hp_t4

  5. A Puritan Descendant says:

    Well written, easy to understand, and just plain accurate and outstanding.

  6. “There has not been a congressional declaration of war since WWII. Every war has been waged without congressional approval thus every war has been unconstitutional.”

    ???Bush did get approval & dubbed it a “War on Terrorism”. Congress authorized the invasions and the wars. Korea & Nam were “police action” and I think authorized by congress? They were wars and were funded.

    Overall, a good article. A little too close to what most of us “righties” have expressed? Maybe we need to post a lefty article? Is there any out there that would interest us? Has anyone called on Obama to save the Twinkie yet?

  7. Just A Citizen says:

    USW

    Re: The issue of “Declaration of War”. There is nothing in our Constitution that “requires” Congress to issue a formal “Declaration of War” before AUTHORIZING the president to conduct military operations against a foe. It only requires that Congress authorize such action. It does so via authorities granted, such as with Afghanistan and Iraq and/or via “funding authorizations”.

    If it had ever been the intent otherwise Congress would not have authorized Jefferson to raise a Navy and attack the Barbary Pirates and then to take whatever other actions he deemed necessary in the event the Berbers were to announce war on the US.

    On the other hand, Congress has become ever more sloppy and deceitful, in my view, in authorizing such actions. I tried to warn people when Congress gave Bush the authority to attack Iraq that the Dems had set it up so they could deny they approved later. They deliberately constructed an authorization to conduct war for the purpose of beating the President with it later. That is as VILE as it comes in my book.

    For those who are curious, here is a brief summary of the Barbary War(s). Notice how mankind later establishes “National Boundaries” to avoid such conflicts. Bwahahahahaa.

    http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/jefferson_papers/mtjprece.html

    • They are all crooks, thieves, and liars. Both Parties, and all branches of Government. Federal, State, and local as well. At least in MY State.

      We are doomed, in my opinion, not by our latest choice of President, but by the choices our leaders have been making for the last 100 years or so. Slowly indebting us and taxing us into oblivion, while giving the public more and more “entitlement” programs. In truth, I have to agree, in principal, to most of the above article.

  8. Just A Citizen says:

    More on the issue of immigration and assimilation.

    For those interested that is. If so I suggest you read the editorial “debates” as well as the multitude of comments from various “Americans” and “Immigrants”. It is very enlightening with respect to how “individualized” their views are.

    Makes a perfect post for Friday cause it might take most all weekend to sort through it.

    http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/11/15/how-immigrants-come-to-be-seen-as-americans

    • Thanks again, am slowly going through the comments. The politicians of both sides are wildly off the mark on this one. Probably has to do with out inferior educational system which does not teach people to READ, scan yes, but not read. I expect to stew over this article and the comments in Wakey, wakey for a while and then write a proposed law. One thing though, there are too many people out there on the sidelines on this one who are silent. They should not be. Whether it’s language. border, customs, or Nativism or Ethnocentrism or a desire to wreck the country, it is perhaps the key, the lowest common denominator to the future of this nation. One cannot afford to be silent.

    • Switching gears on immigration from the theoretical to something more practical….

      When negotiating, the first thing to do is build a framework based on the points on which both sides generally agree. With respect to immigration, I would postulate that *most* people agree with the following three (very general) points:
      1) Legal immigration needs to be made easier
      2) Illegal immigration needs to be made harder
      3) The illegal immigrants already here need to be dealt with in some ‘humane’ manner

      • DK, Illegal immigration could be severly curbed by doing two things. End the war on drugs, let the States control the sale and strength of all drugs currently illegal. Tax them heavily, with efforts to end “property taxes”. Second, Change the welfare system, education system, ect. and end all Govt freebies. With no Govt cookies and no illegal drug trade, immigrants will come for work and a better life, rather than crime and cookies. A better quality immigrant would end the problem and they would be welcomed with open arms. Whoever buys Hostess could use some good bakers, I’m sure some immigrants could fill in just fine. :)

      • Like, uhhh, that’s what I thought I was trying to do. Till I got sidetracked into being a lying racist homophobe. Whoops, scratch the homophobe at this time, that’s my next post.

  9. No Twinkies….No cup cakes…..No Ding Dong’s……………………………………..SIGH!!! It must be Bush’s fault. What is next…..the demise of RC Cola and Moon Pies? And you call this….progressive. SIGH SIGH SIGH!!!!

    • Let’s not be too melodramatic here. Hostess brands are too valuable to simply disappear, someone will snatch them up. They’ve been in and out of bankruptcy most of the last decade.

  10. SUFA, Who is afraid of dying? Simple question, simple answer. :)

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Gman

      Afraid? Not sure that is the right word but to keep it “simple” I would say……….. I AM.

    • Bottom Line says:

      Every day is a good day to die.

    • I am certainly not in any hurry to die, that is for sure.

      But I don’t really “Fear” dying. I just want to make sure that when I go, if I have those last few moments of reflection, that I lived a good life, with “a good life” being by my own personal definition only.

      • USW, I agree with you, I’m in no hurry, but not fearful of death. It is inevitable. I hope to just enjoy my remaining years and no desire to leave some kind of “legacy”. I just want to be known as being good to my fellow man, regardless of any differences :)

        • Having to face near-certain death twice in my life, the actual thought of death was really distant…too busy trying not to die to worry about dying, I guess.

          If anything it was more a regret or sadness of not fulfilling all the things I wanted to do or thoughts about missing loved ones.

          • I have found that under a life-threatening experience, true character will come out in a person. Suprisingly, those I thought were leaders, were not. They quickly became followers and survived. I have seen absolute fear in the eyes of some, fear so bad they were literally paralized. I found it very scary to think they had my back. I never allowed that to occur.

            I doubt I will ever achieve all the things I want, but such is life. For now, I’m just happy to be alive and healthy to enjoy a whole lot of hunting :)

  11. Bottom Line says:

  12. Bottom Line says:

  13. Bottom Line says:

  14. Medical giant Stryker cuts 1,170 jobs, citing ObamaCare

    A “medical device excise tax” included in the mandate imposes a 2.3 percent levy on medical device manufacturers and suppliers, which critics say will raise prices on everything from pacemakers to prosthetics to stents. Companies will be required to pay the tax regardless if they have a profit or loss for the year. The tax is estimated to cost the medical device industry $20 billion.”

    It is not just Twinkies………………………………

  15. Despite devastation and millions of power outages in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, a utility crew from Alabama said it has been unable to help a ravaged New Jersey shore town due to a union dispute.

    Officials from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers presented Alabama-based Decatur Utilities with documents that “required our folks to affiliate with the union,” Ray Hardin, general manager of Decatur, told FOX Business on Friday. “That was something that we could not agree to. It was our understanding and still is that it was a requirement for us to work in that area.”

    Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2012/11/02/union-red-tape-in-nj-causes-alabama-recovery-crew-to-head-home/#ixzz2CRee3JnJ

    It is not just FEMA….this is ridiculous and exactly what happened in New Orleans, And people wonder why they cannot get help. It has been reported that several Texas power and gas crews have been sent home for the same reason. Inexcusable

  16. Interesting facts……over 500 missiles have been fired at Israel in three days. I am surprised but pleased to note that the ADA has successfully destroyed 90% of the fired missiles in route, that were actually targeted. Most of the rest are falling into fields as Hamas has been given no guidance systems. Very much like the V2 rockets of WWII Germany……they run out of fuel and then fall. I expected a 20% kill rate…based upon past performance. Things have improved to 90 % and using a tactic from the German Navy of WWII….a wolf pack design. The missiles that are not targeted are hitting farmland. The missiles fired by Hamas are being supplied by Iran and the Chinese and are being smuggled through Syria.

  17. French Week at the Movies … Baseball’s MVP “WAR” … Other Stuff …

    http://temporaryknucksline.blogspot.com/2012/11/french-week-at-movies-baseballs-mvp-war.html

    • Hey Captain Canolli :)

      French movies? Really? Go Green? Why? The econuts are ruining this country, hang them all! :) Drill, Baby, Drill ! Twinkies will be back, the idiot bakers deserve to be unemployed, the rest should sue that Union for everything it has. Geez, even the Teamsters understood the economic times, that should be telling of how stupid the Bakers Union is. The layoffs in the medical field have begun, sad really, I hope they all voted Obama too! Doubt it though. Obamacare is going to cause a mess, with lots of folks suffering. You should be proud!

  18. Well now. Seems more wonderful news befronts us today. http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/11/tsa-unionized-americans-screwed/

  19. @Flag, Obviously, noone can predict the future, myself included. But I sure feel like this could lead to very ugly things, up to and including the use of nukes. I’m glad I don’t live near any cities :wink:

  20. Good Morning SUFA :)

    It seems, that in ten States yesterday, EBT cards did not work for about 6 hours. This poses questions that should be asked. Is this a clitch or a “test”? If JP Morgan gets hacked and all EBT cards are turned off, for say 3 days or more, what will happen? Could this also be a false flag attack? Interesting times.

  21. Bottom Line says:

  22. FISHY – Allen West recount finalization delayed until tomorrow morning
    Posted by The Right Scoop The Right Scoop on November 17th, 2012 in Politics | 96 Comments

    Reports on the ground are that over 32k votes were recounted today in 12 hours which finished around 9PM, but for some reason the remaining 304 votes couldn’t be completed in 2 hours. Officials are saying an automatic alarm is set at 11PM and they are forcing everyone to leave and come back in the morning at 8AM to finish the recount. The deadline is tomorrow noon.

    Funny thing is this alarm wasn’t an issue on election night, says Gary Galiano:

    I asked, how is the [alarm] being automatically set, when you guys were here until 2 am on election night…. Their response to me.. We are closing. Sheriff then ask me leave

    This certainly smells fishy and hopefully people will stand guard tonight to ensure the building is secured and no one enters until 8AM tomorrow morning.

    http://www.therightscoop.com/fishy-allen-west-recount-finalization-delayed-until-tomorrow-morning/

    • ***UPDATE: FLORIDA LAW ALLOWS EXEMPTION TO DEADLINE*** Deadline missed in West/Murphy recount
      Posted by The Right Scoop The Right Scoop on November 18th, 2012 in Politics | 97 Comments

      ***UPDATE 4: FLORIDA LAW ALLOWS EXEMPTION TO DEADLINE***

      Again this smells incredibly fishy. The St. Lucie County Canvassing Board had until noon today to certify the retabulation results. According to those I’m following, all votes were counted but one card wouldn’t upload results. The Palm Beach Post reports the following:

      Campaign officials for Patrick Murphy, Democrat candidate for the congressional district 18 race, are calling their candidate the winner because the St. Lucie Canvassing Board has missed the noon deadline to certify results to the state Division of Elections.

      Under Florida law, if the deadline passes with final certified results, the unofficial certified results filed last Sunday stand. Those results show Murphy ahead by .58 percent – above the .5 percent spread which would trigger an automatic recount.

      Attorneys for Allen West have been dispatched to the St. Lucie County courthouse for request an emergency hearing on the noon deadline the St. Lucie County canvassing board missed to certify results.

      This is a breaking news story and I will keep you updated. Please stay tuned to this post.

      UPDATE: Here is the latest from the Palm Beach Post:

      The St. Lucie County canvassing board has missed a noon deadline to file election results to the Division of Elections, prompting campaign officials for Patrick Murphy to declare the political newcomer the winner in the race for congressional District 18 race.

      Under Florida law, the final certified results were due from all of the state’s 67 supervisors of elections today. If the results do not arrive on time, the certified unofficial results submitted last Sunday stand. Those results have Murphy winning by 0.58 percent. A spread of less than 0.5 percent would have triggered an automatic recount.“Today at noon, it became clear Patrick Murphy will be officially certified as the next congressman from the 18th Congressional District,” Anthony Kusich, Murphy for Congressman campaign manager, said in a prepared statement issued around 12:40 p.m. “The voters have spoken and Patrick Murphy is once again the clear winner. It is beyond time to put this campaign behind us and put the interests of the people of the Treasure Coast and Palm Beaches first.”

      “All Patrick Murphy wanted was to follow the law,” said attorney Gerald Richman, a member of Murphy’s legal team. “They absolutely missed it (deadline). Whatever it is, it is. We just want the law to be followed.”

      Tim Edson, [West’s] campaign manager, disagreed.

      “As usual, Murphy’s people are full of garbage,” Edson said. “This is something the secretary of state and governor will have to sort out.”

      Edson said other problems arose this morning. The recount showed 900 voters cast ballots in precinct 93, where there are 7 registered voters, Edson said.

      “We have concerns here,” Edson said. “The results are raising more questions.”

      Shortly after the deadline passed, attorneys for West headed to the St. Lucie County Courthouse to request an emergency hearing on the issue. It is not known if a hearing has been scheduled.

      UPDATE 2: The Palm Beach Post continues to update their article. Here is the latest update:

      West supporters, upon learning that the deadline was missed, have crowded into the ballot-counting area shouting “Count our vote!” Others have heckled elections officials, blaming them for ending the recount last night at 10 p.m. because the security system in the vacant shopping mall where the ballots are being counted would be triggered if the counting continued.

      This is true. Reportedly ln election night this security system wasn’t a problem. But all of a sudden it became an excuse not to stay and finish last night. Just ridiculous.

      UPDATE 3: Gary Angelo Galiano, one of the patriots on the ground said this bad card could have been fixed last night if they would have stayed:

      It took one and a half hours today once they got started to do what they could’ve done last night and if it’s true the memory card failed it could’ve been fixed last night!!!!!

      UPDATE 4: Apparently there is still hope, as Florida Law allows an exemption to the deadline in case of an emergency (via Palm Beach Post update)

      Florida law does allow an exemption to the deadline in an emergency and West’s attorney are expected to argue that the exemption applies.

      That exemption defines emergency as “any occurrence, or threat thereof, whether accidental, natural, or caused by human beings, in war or in peace, that results or may result in substantial injury or harm to the population or substantial damage to or loss of property to the extent it will prohibit an election officer’s ability to conduct a safe and orderly election.”

      • How’s the recount going today??

        • Only thing new, I’ve read about is Ms. Walker signing herself into the hospital after the botched recount.

          What do you think should happen?

          • I’ve heard that Patrick Murphy’s lead has increased.

            Why can’t Florida run an election? Is it really that hard?

            • I don’t know why it’s so hard. But I think our insistence that we try and call every election on election night is probably a bad idea. I also find the idea that sending returns by a specific date is more important than actually certifying the election with the correct numbers is a little backwards..

              And although I can see reasons why there might be a bigger number of voters than their little sheets of papers tell them, considering mistakes, late registering and such. But a district with 7 registered voters supposedly having 900 people vote, seems like a problem to me-one which should be looked into before any election is called for anyone and it shouldn’t take people going to court to have it looked into.

              Think about it-you are setting there with your sheet of legal voters-7 people come in, I don’t know maybe another 3 or 4 people show up-okay you handle it with provisional ballots or whatever they use. But for people to see 100’s more of people coming in-who aren’t on their sheets-how do they handle this-what makes one just do nothing but count the votes. Why isn’t there an explanation or a throwing out of 100’s of supposedly illegal votes?

              • But I think our insistence that we try and call every election on election night is probably a bad idea.

                That’s the lame-stream media satisfying our need for instance gratification. They’re usually pretty accurate, but I have no problem with waiting for “Official” results until the next day – or two. Maybe more for a close election and recount.

                I also find the idea that sending returns by a specific date is more important than actually certifying the election with the correct numbers is a little backwards.

                But how long do you allow? Do we keep recounting until West wins? The longer the time period, the more opportunities for fraud…

                But a district with 7 registered voters supposedly having 900 people vote, seems like a problem to me-one which should be looked into before any election is called for anyone and it shouldn’t take people going to court to have it looked into.

                First it was 147% voter turn-out. But it turned out each voter turns in 2 pieces of paper, so it was actually 74% voter turn-out.

                Now it’s 900 votes cast with only 7 registered voters. They only place I saw this comment was on “The Right Scoop”, and it was made by Tim Edson, Allen West’s campaign manager. Is there anything to actually document this? Or just a rumor?

                Think about it-you are setting there with your sheet of legal voters-7 people come in, I don’t know maybe another 3 or 4 people show up-okay you handle it with provisional ballots or whatever they use. But for people to see 100′s more of people coming in-who aren’t on their sheets-how do they handle this-what makes one just do nothing but count the votes. Why isn’t there an explanation…

                First we need documentation that this is actually true. The explanation may be “this isn’t really true”….

                or a throwing out of 100′s of supposedly illegal votes?

                So you just want to throw them all out…because supposedly they’re illegal votes? Maybe we should determine if there is really an issue before we start throwing out votes…

                I saw West has finally conceded…

  23. Get tired just watching. For those with good knees and intact hips.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=ab9i0s4WEY0&feature=related

  24. The moon, stars and planets aligned perfectly this weekend because Bama is back in the National Championship hunt. With a lot of help this past weekend looks like someone from the SEC will be in the big dance again.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      bamadad

      They sure did. I see the SEC BIAS in the polls is GLARING through again. But then so is the Boise State bias, because I don’t think they should be in the top 25 this year.

      Now talk about Irony. Oregon could finish the year with 1 loss, NOT get to the BCS Championship AND NOT get to the Rose Bowl. Standford could wind up the PAC 12 Champion as the only team to beat BOTH Oregon teams this year. They would go dancing with Roses.

      My wish which will not happen this year. Alabama vs. Stanford. Would love to see those two defenses and running games get after it for 4 quarters.

  25. Just A Citizen says:

    Buck and Mathius

    re: Ah Mathius, can always count on you for a dose of reality.

    What you got from Mathius was FLAWED information.

    The executive pay hikes referenced were the “prior” executives. Rayburn, the current CEO, was reported to be getting a raise. In response to complaints he supposedly cut his own pay to $1.00.

    Across the board cuts to executive pay was included in the agreement that the Teamsters approved but the Bakers union rejected. The CEO clearly stated this on several business news networks and has not been challenged by anyone as to its truth.

    The article Mathius cited includes the flaw and ignores the rest of the story. As is typical with these things, everyone is looking back in time and not from the point of a new decision. The current CEO was brought it to turn the company around. Pretty obvious that wasn’t possible given the demands of all parties concerned.

    Mathius is flagged for a “false start” and is penalized 5 yards.

    • Good day JAC ! The company is doing exactly what many other companies will do in the near future, close their doors. They are all under attack by the Liberal left and all the “we hate Capitalism” and “the rich need to pay more” crowd. Sadly, everyone who will lose a good job because of these idiots and their bullshit mentallity will suffer. This is what they, the Liberals want, class warfare. Done deal, now deal with the results. The liberals are making lots of enemies and would not want to be one when the economy tanks. It will soon “suck to be them”!

      • Oh, G …. oh, G … we’re getting thirsty in captain cannoli land … us liberals want our fare share of the booze … come on, now, show that personal responsility … dynamite open the wallet and go get that Chivas bottle … we long to celebrate Obama’s big win!

        • I think the “right” has a different definition of “personal responsibility”…

          • The “right” welcomes immigrants by saying “Hello, here’s a list of open jobs to help you get going”. The “left” welcomes immigrants by saying “Hello, Here’s some welfare”. I agree Todd, we do have a different outlook.

        • Charlie, I’m still hunting for the posts to verify your claim. My memory isn’t great, and your past is worse :lol: You could help you know!

          • Good Lord, a welcher! Come on, G, I had so much more faith in you than this. Is it because I intend to share my Chivas with everyone I know is on welfare in my community why you’re opting out of personal responsibility … or is it that Ayn Randist greed has already possessed your soul?

            • Charlie, Can’t prove your claim? Maybe that’s why I want too. I never read Rand, so your hard-on for her won’t work on me :)

              • So, you’re requesting my address in a Facebook message was my imagination?

                Geesh, you guys kill me (all of you) … where’s the pressure for “personal responsibility” wingies?

                Now I have to “prove my claim” … what a joke.

              • Yep, have your address. Now , I believe I owe you a bottle of my homemade brandy. I just want to get it right. When we do, it’ll be on the way. That’s not much to ask from a French loving Pinko Commie, is it? :)

  26. Just A Citizen says:

    There is hope for America yet. Starting at the local level, we can RESTORE FREEDOM to this country. One County at a time.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49882974/ns/us_news-life/#__utma=14933801.80355801.1343225800.1353189770.1353341650.113&__utmb=14933801.1.10.1353341650&__utmc=14933801&__utmx=-&__utmz=14933801.1351613859.100.5.utmcsr=google|utmccn=%28organic%29|utmcmd=organic|utmctr=%28not%20provided%29&__utmv=14933801.|8=Earned%20By=msnbc|cover=1^12=Landing%20Content=Mixed=1^13=Landing%20Hostname=www.nbcnews.com=1^30=Visit%20Type%20to%20Content=Earned%20to%20Mixed=1&__utmk=187217192

    • “He said bordellos pay significant taxes to rural counties and the women are regularly checked by doctors.

      “I use the term caregivers for our industry,” Gilman said. “The public has no idea, but so many of the men we deal with are damaged or widowed or in need of kindness. The industry is so much more about providing care and human nurturing than anything else.”

      All those poor, poor damaged men-Gag me like a maggot.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        V.H.

        I thought you might appreciate that. The first statement is true by the way.

        The second one I have never heard before. Conforti said he was in the “entertainment” industry.

        I had wondered what happened to that place after the Fed Govt auctioned it. Now we know.

  27. Just A Citizen says:

    Ah yes, lets not forget the pending shutdown of our Ports. Oh what will they think of next?

    http://michellemalkin.com/

  28. Just A Citizen says:

    Ya Gotta love them AGGIES

    As in both Texas A&M AND Utah State.

  29. Just A Citizen says:

    Doesn’t it seem appropriate that in the USA a movie about Vampires and Werewolves would gross 140 million dollars on opening weekend?

    I missed it but assume it was a Novela about US Political History! :)

    • There is frankly something basically wrong with a society that fixates on this trash to the exclusion of almost everything else. The thing has gone way beyond anyone’s definition of “fun”. Fun was Dracula, the Wolfman, Frakenstein, the Mummy etc. This stuff tends to be pretty sick and vying for an alternate lifestyle among those having a really hard time distinguishing between fantasy and reality.

      I see where Speilberg’s bio movie of Lincoln came in third. Wonder how fast that will fade?

  30. Bottom Line says:

  31. November 20, 2012
    Economic Disintegration is Almost Here

    By Monty Pelerin

    The disintegration of an economy and a society can take two courses. One course is like rust. It is slow and barely perceptible. The other is a sudden collapse. The first course, if left untended, eventually turns into the second.

    The US economy is now rusting away. Arguably it has been for decades. For anyone interested in looking, the signs are there. They will soon become unavoidable for even the most disinterested of our citizens.

    Dan Amoss correctly described what is happening as a result of Washington’s overbearing involvement in the economy:

    All government-directed economic activity grows at the expense of the private sector. And the election suggests that government coercion will drive even more U.S. economic activity in the future. This is a shame, because freely adjusting prices, competition, and innovation elevate living standards. Mandates, price controls, and subsidies – coercive actions – depress living standards. Quality falls. Shortages develop and persist.

    Mr. Amoss is correct but does not forcefully convey the reality of a dying economy. These effects are beginning to appear.

    Many businessmen hung on, hoping for a change in the madness that passes for economic leadership and policy. These hopes were dashed with the re-election of the ideologue driving the madness. Obama won the electoral college, but not the confidence of business. They are just beginning to cast their votes and it does not bode well for the future. Here is a partial list of the business reactions to the outcome of the election:

    Layoffs Announced Since Election:

    1. Abbott Labs 700
    2. Activision 30
    3. Adventist Health 48
    4. Airlines SAS 6000
    5. AMD 400
    6. American Cotton Growers 110
    7. ArcelorMittal 20
    8. American Independence Museum 4
    9. Ameridose 790
    10. American Airlines 4400 + 800 leaving voluntarily
    11. American Coal 54
    12. Atlantic Lottery Corporation 16
    13. Assc Milk Producers 130
    14. Aveo Oncology 45
    15. ATI 172
    16. Bankia 5000
    17. Bechtel Power Corp 277
    18. Bigpoint Games 47
    19. Boston Scientific 1200
    20. Brake Parts LLC 75
    21. Brattleboro Retreat 31
    22. Bristol Myers 500
    23. Career Education 900 + Closing 23 Campuses
    24. Cigna 1300
    25. Citigroup 100
    26. Commerzbank 6000
    27. Consol Energy in W.V. 145
    28. Covidien 595
    29. Crouse Hospital Syracuse NY 70
    30. Cummins 150
    31. CVPH 27
    32. DEP in Tallahassee FL 15
    33. DuPont, Co. 64
    34. Eagle-Tribune, Andover 21
    35. Emanuel Medical Cente 24
    36. Energizer Holdings 1500
    37. Ericsson 1550
    38. Exide Tech, Laureldale 150
    39. City of Findlay, OH 39
    40. First Energy 400
    41. Gameforge Berlin 20
    42. Gamesa Energy 92
    43. GenOn Energy Inc 33
    44. Glen Falls Hospital 29
    45. Groupon 80
    46. GT Advanced Tech 165
    47. Harris’ Broadcast 17
    48. Hawker Beechcraft 400 + Facilities closing
    49. Hill Rom 200
    50. Hills Holdings 300
    51. HMX Group 567
    52. Hostess 627
    53. Iberia Airlines 4500
    54. ICM of Colwich 25
    55. ING 2350
    56. Judson University 21
    57. Juniper Networks 500
    58. Kaiser Permanente 84
    59. Kinetic Concepts 427
    60. Kratos Defense Security 125
    61. Lackawanna County PA 11
    62. Lightyear Network Solutions 12+
    63. Lonza 500
    64. Majestic Star Casino/hotel 80
    65. Major Wind Company 3000
    66. Martha Stewart Living 70
    67. Medtronic 1000
    68. Mills Manufacturing NC 68
    69. Momentive, Inc. 150
    70. Monitor Group 235
    71. Montco Behavioral Health/Dev 58
    72. NBC 500
    73. Nebraska Medical Center 38
    74. Neovia Logistics Services 52
    75. New Energy 40
    76. Ormet 200
    77. Panasonic 10000
    78. PayPal 320
    79. Penn Refrigeration 40
    80. Penske Logistics 50
    81. Pepsi 4000
    82. Philips Electronics 218
    83. Pierce Mfg 325
    84. Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne 100
    85. Research in Motion 200
    86. Rheem Manufacturing 50
    87. Sentry Foods 70
    88. Shaw’s Supermarket 700
    89. Shawano foundry WI 90
    90. Smith & Nephew 770
    91. Smithfield Packing Co. 125
    92. Solel Solar Systems 140
    93. Southeastern Container 15
    94. SpaceX 100
    95. SRA Intl Inc 222
    96. St. Jude Medical 300
    97. Stryker 1170
    98. Sulake 60
    99. Sun Media 500
    100. TE Connectivity 620
    101. TECO Coal Corporation 90
    102. Texas Instruments 1700
    103. The Providence Journal Co 23
    104. TMX Group Ltd. 100
    105. Turbocare 220
    106. Turkey Point Nuclear Plant 277
    107. Oce North America, Inc. 135
    108. Turbocare OCE 220
    109. UBS 10000
    110. US Cellular 980
    111. UtahAmerican Energy Inc 102
    112. Volvo Trucks Pulaski County 300
    113. Wake Forest Baptist Medical 950
    114. Welch Allyn 275
    115. West Ridge Mine 102
    116. Westinghouse 50
    117. World Media Enterprises Inc 105
    118. WPS Health Insurance 600
    119. Wright Patterson AFB 115
    120. Wyodak Coal Mine 11
    121. Xerox 2500
    122. Yakima Reg Med Ctr Washington 10+

    Announced Business Closures Since Election:

    1. Bakers Footwear closing 150 stores nationwide, including 21 in California
    2. The SCA plant in Barton – Plans Staff Reductions
    3. Handy Hardware to close its 2-year-old Meridian, Miss. warehouse
    4. Caterpillar Inc. will close its plant in Owatonna Minn.
    5. Waltz Pharmacy in Waldoboro Maine
    6. Zac’s Place in Hinsdale IL
    7. Lone Star Steakhouse at 70th and O streets and Ruby Tuesday at 56th Street in
    8. Lincoln NE
    9. Career Education Corp – Closing 23 Campuses – 900 Jobs Lost
    10. Handy Hardware to close its 2-year-old Meridian, Miss. warehouse
    11. Shamrock Bar at Payne City’s Rose Avenue. in GA
    12. Monitor Company Group LP
    13. ThinkEquity LLC
    14. Homer City Funding LLC
    15. Caterpillar Inc. will close its plant in Owatonna Minn.
    16. Mount Pleasant’s Albrecht Sentry Foods
    17. The Target store at Manassas Mall Va.
    18. Millennium Academy in Wake Forest NC
    19. Target Closing Kissimmee FL Location
    20. Calgary’s iconic Rideau Music store ( International )
    21. The Andover Gift Shop in Andover MA
    22. Grand Union Family Markets Closing Storrs Location CT
    23. Movie Scene Milford Location NH
    24. Update: TE Connectivity Closing Greensboro Plant – 620 Layoffs Expected
    25. Gomer’s Fried Chicken in South Kansas City
    26. Kmart in Homer Glen
    27. Fresh Market on Pine Street in Burlington
    28. AGC Glass North America to permanently close its Blue Ridge Plant in Kingsport Tenn.
    29. The Target store at Platte and Academy in Colorado Springs
    30. Island Colors – A Carolina Beach Clothing Store
    31. The Roses store on Reynold Road in Winston-Salem NC
    32. Meanders Kitchen losing its West Seattle location at 6032 California Ave
    33. Bost Harley-Davidson at 46th Avenue North and Delaware Ave. in West Nashville TN
    34. Townsend Booksellers in Oakland
    35. The Kmart store in Parkway Plaza off University Drive in Durham NC – 79 Jobs Lost
    36. Guarantee Shoe Store in Beaumont Texas
    37. Associated Milk Producers Inc. Closing manufacturing facility in Dawson Minn. – 130
    38. Jobs Lost
    39. FacadeTek Inc Closes Whitestown Facility – 72 Jobs Lost
    40. Comet Market in Punxsutawney Pa.
    41. JC Penney store in Miracle City Mall Titusville FL
    42. TurboCare Inc Closing Manchester CT Facility – 88
    43. The United Colors of Benetton store on Armitage Avenue IL
    44. Update: Bicycle shop Ten 27 Cycles 1027 Davis St. in Evanston IL
    45. Two Sears Product Rebuild Centers in The Woodlands Texas
    46. FesslerUSA Clothing Maker Closing in PA
    47. Ralph Lauren’s plans to close its 14 stand-alone Rugby locations
    48. Nashville Sash & Door Co. Inc Tenn.
    49. First Portuguese church in North America in Bedford Mass Closing?
    50. International Fashions in Carbondale’s University Mall IL
    51. Harper’s Old Army Surplus Store in West Monroe La
    52. Nova Financial Holdings
    53. The Party Warehouse in West Springfield Mass.
    54. TLC Wine and Liquor at 1205 W. Main St in Kent Ohio?
    55. The HAPPY Place 1042 N Coast Hwy, Laguna Beach, CA
    56. Air Carrier Accessory Services – Chapter 7
    57. SOW Inc. shelter on South Broad Street GA?
    58. Systemax Inc., Closing Miami County Ohio Computer Plant – 120 Jobs Lost
    59. Textbook publisher McGraw-Hill Cos. Closing 2 Distribution Centers – 166 Layoffs
    60. First Place Financial Corp
    61. Nash Finch Closing Cedar Rapids Iowa Food Distribution Center
    62. Johnnie’s Foodmaster MA Closing all 10 Locations
    63. Rainbow Foods will be closing its Forest Lake location MN – 59 Layoffs
    64. Berry’s Camera Shop Inc. in Downtown Lafayette
    65. Schreiber Foods to close their food packaging plant in Ravenna – 70 Jobs Lost
    66. Kmart store at 5300 Salem Ave. Trotwood Ohio
    67. Mr.Christie plant in Toronto ( International ) 2013 – 550 Jobs Lost
    68. Coffee with T cafe in Stevenson Village business MD
    69. Minas Basin Pulp and Power are closing a mill in Hantsport ( International ) – 135

    Actual Layoffs:

    1. The Colonial Country Shoppe on Park Street in Adams MA
    2. Vestas Wind Systems Closing R&D; Office in Louisville – 60 Jobs Lost
    3. Dollar Castle in downtown Ferndale MI
    4. Bistro One West in St Charles IL
    5. Sun Dog Diner in Neptune Beach FL
    6. Jim’s Builders Hardware in Wichita, Kansas
    7. Madeleines Bakehouse in Fort Wayne Indiana
    8. Barnes & Noble plans to close its doors in Union Station Dec. 31
    9. The Semiahmoo Hotel in Blaine Washington
    10. Highland Curves CA
    11. The Salem Sport Shop in Salem Ohio
    12. Navistar International Corp. to Close truck assembly plant in Garland, Texas – 900
    13. Jobs Lost
    14. Divine Mercy Catholic Books & Gifts Denton Texas
    15. Singer Mental Health Center in Rockford IL
    16. Garelick Farms Ends Production at Bangor Maine Facility
    17. Fashion Tech Window Coverings in Portland?
    18. Custom House Tavern Chicago IL.
    19. Jim’s Builders Hardware in Delano
    20. Lone Star Steakhouse at 1801 22nd St. in West Des Moines
    21. Sears to Close Woodlands Product Rebuild Center – 117 Jobs Lost
    22. Whitehead Inc Rockford Real Estate Company
    23. Robert’s Mens Shop in Downtown New Philadelphia Ohio
    24. Fort Tecumseh Olde Fashun Store in Ohio
    25. Lakewood Beginnings Child Development Center in Lakewood Ohio
    26. Green Fields Seed & Feed in Grand Junction Colo.
    27. The Army and Navy Store in Melrose Mass.
    28. Vitalistic Therapeutic charter school PA
    29. Diamond Foods Inc Closing a plant in Fishers Indiana
    30. Old Town Alehouse 5233 Ballard Ave in Seattle
    31. Space Aliens restaurants in Minot and Grand Forks ND
    32. DeWaay Financial Network LLC
    33. Sears at Quail Springs Mall Oklahoma City OK.
    34. Fashion Bug in O’Fallon MO is closing in January
    35. Kmart Store in Oak Hill W. Va
    36. Update: Jett & Hall men’s clothing store in Richmond KY
    37. D.C. school List of Possible Schools Closing to Be released Later today
    38. Dunkin’ Donuts in Holly Hill FL
    39. Hostess Brands Inc Permanently Closing 3 Bakeries Following a Nationwide Strike
    40. Philips Electronics subsidiary Lightolier will close its local fluorescent light
    41. fixture manufacturing plant in Willington
    42. Smithfield Packing Co. will close in 2013, laying off a total of 400 employees
    43. SuperFresh outlets in Marlton and Westmont NJ
    44. The Bagel Shoppe in Katonah NY
    45. Ben Franklin and Homestead House Gifts in the Kimball Ridge Center in Waterloo IA
    46. Several West Virginia Suzuki dealerships Being Forced to Close
    47. Kowalski Cos Closing All 4 of its Metro Detroit Delis but to Continue Food
    48. Production
    49. Three Memphis charter schools and one in Nashville Tenn. Could Close Due to Poor
    50. Test Scores
    51. The Custer School District SD – Closing 2 Rural Schools
    52. The Dressing Room, on North Lincoln Avenue IL
    53. The Utica Office Of Ibope Ny

    Bankruptcies:

    1. AMF Bowling Worldwide Inc
    2. Aletheia Research & Management Inc
    3. Omtron USA
    4. Helmkampf Construction in Olivette
    5. Clear Light Publishers
    6. Monitor Company Group LP
    7. ThinkEquity LLC
    8. Homer City Funding LLC
    9. US Suzuki Distributor – Chapter 11
    10. Revolt Technology

    This list should frighten every thinking American. It is a huge warning regarding what lies ahead. These changes are coming to an economy that is already unable to provide jobs or sustain living standards.

    Decline is a slow process, until it becomes fast. It is not easy to see at first. It should be obvious to most that our economy is approaching a critical stage. When you have destroyed the trust and confidence of business, there will be no job creation.

    Some parting words are in order for those responsible for the decisions reflected above. Shutting down and giving up is anathema to the spirit that built this country and is now only found among our entrepreneurial class. It goes against the very fiber that drives success. It is a last resort for entrepreneurs.

    The decision to quit is lonely, involves guilt, self-doubt and remorse. It is the last act for someone that has tried everything to avoid it. Giving up and withdrawing is not an act of retribution. People do not willingly choose to go to Galt’s figurative gulch. They are forced there.

    While the masses exult in the continuation of their food stamps, cell phones and other booty, the real story of this election is yet to be told. The nation is about to find out that policies and elections have consequences more important than free stuff.

    The war against private enterprise can no longer be denied. President Obama’s re-election ensures that it will continue and likely accelerate. The makers are beginning to give up. The takers don’t have a clue. Soon the country is going to get a real-life lesson in economics. TANSTAAFL (There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch) is about to be learned.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/economic_disintegration_is_almost_here.html#ixzz2CkYwGNyS

  32. A Puritan Descendant says:

    People can’t be this stupid. We must be in a war between God and Evil, neither political party holds a valid claim to one or the other. You just have to love the “new economic activity” quote >

    “• The USDA signed a pact in 2004 with Mexico requiring 50 U.S.-based consulates to hand out information to Mexican nationals on how to obtain welfare and other benefits.

    • The agency created a Spanish-language ad in which an individual is “pressured” into accepting food stamps, even though she says her family is self-sufficient.

    • The USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — commonly known as food stamps — has a website that includes a “community outreach partner toolkit” that says local communities “lose out” when eligible people don’t apply for benefits. The site claims that boosting participation will generate billions in “new economic activity.”

    A SNAP pamphlet says Electronic Benefits Cards, which allow welfare recipients to withdraw cash and pay for food and other items, “make it more difficult to commit SNAP fraud.” The ad also states: “Everyone wins when eligible people take advantage of benefits to which they are entitled.”

    Another site gives SNAP recruiters tips on how to “overcome the word ‘no’” when seeking to sign up new recipients.”

    http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view/20221119outrage_over_fed_ebt_push_for_aliens/srvc=home&position=1

  33. Good Morning SUFA , Our Federal Govt is under a lot of scrutiny. Many will blame the Dems and Obamacare for losing their jobs. The Repubs are just as big a part of the problem as the Dems, so blaming one over the other is silly. THe world is a mess. Wars are growing in the ME, and the CIA funded Al-Qeida is still making news as a manufactured boogieman. I believe it’s too late to take needed action to stop the soon to be imploding society. Get prepared as best you can. Even you lefties should understand this.

  34. @G … the bet was for a bottle of Chivas (what I get) … Keep your home made brandy, please. Pinko’s wouldn’t want to separate deadbeats from their dollars unecessarily. You must need them very badly …:)

  35. Oh God,……Hillary Clinton to try to broker peace? There can be no peace and H Clinton does not know what is going on. People have forgotten that Gaza was turned over…100 percent….to Hamas and Hezbollah. From the inception of that, rockets have routinely been fired from Gaza into Israel for over a year. They are being fired from school yards, orphanages, church yards, hospitals……..Israel should disregard this and clean it out.

    Syria and Iran will start a huge regional war, Egypt is bankrupt…….Russia will become involved and Russia and China are at odds right now. Obama missed his chance…the ME is lost to the Brotherhood.

    • The USA…..well, stay out of it. We owe nothing to that part of the world. Forget ME oil……exploit our own reserves and fossil fuels, tell the EPA and Green BS to go to hell. You are beginning to see state’s revolt….wonder what will happen.

      • …..states revolt. That’s about the only way out at this point. I’ll be studying hard for then next several months to couple years. Working on getting myself as compact and lean as possible to make a nice smooth transition to a more self reliant area. Jac..any inside info (links) in the northwest will be appreciated. (Montana, Idaho, Wyoming..seriously)

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Anita

          Tell me what you are looking for and I will give you some ideas.

          You talking about “retirement”?

          • Hey JAC. Yes, retirement. A couple longtime friends and I have been tossing this idea around for years and now seems to be the time to get more serious. Keep in mind that I’ll need another ten yrs on someones payroll and so will my friends. Minimum 10 acres Wooded. Low tax,low or no state tax, some water, river or lake. I don’t ask for much :)

        • Here’s the problem with a ‘states revolt’.

          The federal government will never allow it, and they have all the fancy toys to blow you away with. Unless you can get some segment of the military to also come over, along with a stockpile of super-tech weaponry, there’s no way to stand up to the federal government in a direct military conflict. A prolonged, guerilla-style affair would be your best bet, but even then all major population centers in the state would quickly be leveled. Worst-case would be both sides making liberal use of nukes.

          Assuming, for the moment, that you could somehow get the federal government to agree to a peaceful secession, they would force a portion of the federal debt on the seceding state as well. That debt would immediately be so large as to collapse the economy of the state and force it to come crawling back begging for table scraps.

          If you can manage to not only secure a peaceful secession but do so without taking on any of the federal debt, well, then at that point the federal government has lost all its power anyway and is basically irrelevant whether the state officlally secedes or not.

          • “If you can manage to not only secure a peaceful secession but do so without taking on any of the federal debt, well, then at that point the federal government has lost all its power anyway and is basically irrelevant whether the state officially secedes or not.”

            Bingo

  36. JAC…Broncos v Sparty..8pm tonight..E Lansing..Spartans under Izzo are 46-0 at home in November….. Look out Boise! Time to get rid of some football frustration! ;)

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Anita

      Did not know they were going to play.

      Wow, Boise is WAY over their head on this one. Basketball is NOT their strength, to say the least.

      Wonder if they did some package deal with Basketball and Football?

  37. Oooops – someone’s been “put in his place” for bad behavior… ;)

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/20/john-metz-dennys-obamacare-surcharge-_n_2146735.html

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Yep, typical radical left wingers.

      Can’t even tell the difference between a Company and the Franchise.

      • That is right, JAC. It is interesting in that there will be surcharges and add ons……and it will be done quietly. Fortunately, we will not have to do that because we have positioned ourselves to not be part of the issue that will require us to raise our prices. Franchises will also raise their prices. I love the fact that the left is laughing so hard about this. We shall see in about 6 months. I do hope there is no compromise on the fiscal cliff but I fear there will be a sell out.

      • No JAC,
        It’s up to the person sending the message to make sure it’s clear. It’s not up to the person receiving the message to try to figure out what is meant.

        And now “Papa John” is walking-back his little anti-Obama screed too. But this is just the opposite – I’ll bet the CEO was getting heat from his franchise owners.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-h-schnatter/papa-johns-obamacare_b_2166209.html?utm_hp_ref=business

        Typical right wingers – always blaming others for their short-comings…

  38. JAC….you need to come to Texas this weekend….our veterans group (800+) are organized to help shoppers cross picket lines, if they exist. We are setting up in Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth, San Antonio and Amarillo out side of Walmart and Home Depots and Lowes, The picketers are welcome to picket but if they block a door, a parking spot, or walkway, veterans will escort shoppers into the stores and to their cars. It should prove interesting.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      D13thecolonel

      Good afternoon Sir.

      I most assuredly would come help if not for prior plans to eat turkey with my Daughter and Son.

      But in keeping, I think I will wander down to the WalMart in Boise and help anyone who needs getting into the store.

      Please report back on how the Vet’s fared in their effort.

      And in case I don’t get back to you before I leave Zero Dark Thirty tomorrow………….HAPPY THANKSGIVING.

      Give my best to TEXAS.

  39. Seems the daily reality of some things is worse than the sanctimonious words can cover.

    Nov 20, 7:12 PM EST

    San Francisco lawmakers vote to ban public nudity

    SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — San Francisco lawmakers on Tuesday narrowly approved a proposal to ban public nakedness, rejecting arguments that the measure would eat away at a reputation for tolerance enjoyed by a city known for flouting convention and flaunting its counter-culture image.

    The 6-5 Board of Supervisors vote means that exposed genitals will be prohibited in most public places, including streets, sidewalks and public transit.

    Supervisor Scott Wiener introduced the measure in response to escalating complaints about a group of men whose lack of clothing was an almost daily occurrence in the city’s predominantly gay Castro District.

    “The Castro and San Francisco in general, is a place of freedom, expression and acceptance. But freedom, expression and acceptance does not mean anything goes under any circumstances,” Wiener said Tuesday. “Our public spaces are for everyone and as a result it’s appropriate to have some minimal standards of behavior.”

    Weiner’s opponents on the board said a citywide ban would draw police officers’ attention away from more critical problems and eat away at city’s reputation for tolerance.

    “I’m concerned about civil liberties, about free speech, about changing San Francisco’s style and how we are as a city,” Supervisor John Avalos said.

    Under Weiner’s proposal, a first offense would carry a maximum penalty of a $100 fine, but prosecutors would have authority to charge a third violation as a misdemeanor punishable by up to a $500 fine and a year in jail.

    Exemptions would be made for participants at permitted street fairs and parades, such as the city’s annual gay pride event and the Folsom Street Fair, which celebrates sadomasochism and other sexual subcultures.

    A federal lawsuit claiming the ban would violate the free speech rights of people who prefer to make a statement by going au naturel was filed last week in case the ordinance passes.

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NUDITY_BAN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-11-20-18-57-31

  40. Just A Citizen says:

    Time to head to bed. Tomorrow I’m off to Boise for Turkey Day.

    Best wishes to one and all.

    Have a very merry and wonderful Thanksgiving.

    JAC

    LIVE FREE

  41. USW;

    Seems to me some time back you made a comment about Petreaus being the right man for the job and one of the reasons was because the man had earned the priviledge of wearing a particular “tab” on his uniform. I assume that is because that tab denotes the person has proven him/herself to be honorable, courageous and intelligent. I guess somewhere along the way ‘booty’ blocked the neurons travelling up the spine to the brain from reaching their destination???????

    What in the hell was that man thinking??????

    I have a theory.

    If you throw a perfectly good fresh apple in a barrell filled with rotten ones the fresh apple will eventually spoil and become just as bad as the rest of them. The bacteria just spreads and turns everything into a foul smelling mush. In Petraeus case I am not sure when the bacteria started spreading since I don’t think you obtain 4 stars on your shoulder without prior involvement politically. Somewhere in his career he started spending a lot more time dealing politics than military duties; maybe at the 2 star level???? USW and the Colonel are better suited to answer that than me.

    My point is that it seems that no matter the level of ‘goodness’ an individual possesses Washington and its team of rotten apples can easily and effectively ‘spoil’ any and all who attempt to swim in the same barrell.

    Now don’t get me wrong here, I have no idea if the General was always chasing skirts and this particular skirt turned out to be shithouse rat crazy, or if this in fact was his first and only deviation????? Nevertheless, I cannot fathom an otherwise intelligent man of his accomplishments decideing that it was perfectly ok (morally or otherwise) to jump “All In” with this particular skirt; especially considering his position. I mean for God’s sake he was the head of the CIA and well problems like this can just disapear you know… (I say that in a joking manner, but with a little bit of actuall reality. Can you say Wet Boy?)

    I am not sure if over the course of his last few years the corrupting bacteria called Washington eventually ate away at his armor and he lost all sense of reason and morality, or if the little head overpowered the big head in decision making???? Kind of a shame, since this will be his most memorable ‘feat’.

    It makes you wonder if Jesus himself could withstand all the temptations and corrupting bacteria filling the halls and sewers of Washington? I guess that this is just another example of why we should not waist our time attempting to change the government at that level. Hell, even if there are a few good apples left in the barrell we would more than likely just wind up covered in the flesh eating bacteria trying to find them.

    Happy Thanksgiving everyone. Enjoy the time with family, eat to your heart’s content, laugh, love and give thanks to those within your circle for all they do.

    CM

    • CMan,

      Simpler, power corrupts.

      Power pretends it is above the morals and ethics of society – it steals, kills with immunity, heck, even claims it is honorable!

      Women are attracted to money and powerful men and add a twinge of danger and violence – well, the movies advertise this in “James Bond” characters.

      He was a powerful rich man above the peons he thought little of – she sought that type of man.

      • Or perhaps they were both just weak, which made them temporarily stupid. Who knows. But one thing for sure-it isn’t a mistake exclusive to the rich or the powerful.

  42. Happy Thanksgiving to all my SUFA friends :)

    I hope, like myself, time with family is on the agenda. Like most, we have a feast planned. We also made sure all our freinds have fresh eggs for the holiday :) Yes Charlie, we do share! Enjoy everyone, enjoy!

  43. I’ll believe when my bottle of Chivas arrives …

  44. A Puritan Descendant says:

    Happy Thanksgiving All!

    And this especially for Charlie! http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/11/21/the_real_story_of_thanksgiving

    • Have a good Thanksgiving. All the kids will be home. 1 cherry pie done. Apple in the oven. Pumpkin tomorrow. Brining the bird tonight. Got my broken water line fixed so the water is back on. Time to R&R.

    • Seriously, Puritan, this is why we think you’re all mostly nuts. You listen to that shit and believe it … worse, you spew it to others and reinforce absolute propaganda and stupidity that can only be explained in the morons you send to the forefront of your cause … i.e., Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann …

      Rush Limbaugh? Really?

      • A Puritan Descendant says:

        Sri charlie, it is documented fact (see William Bradfords papers). Look it up, I already supplied copies of primary sources for this in the past. You are willfully ignorant and have proved you always will be. You are the one spewing ignorance. Rush Limbaugh has it correct, you have it wrong as usual.
        “Willfully ignorant”

  45. For the weather/climate experts here, I have a riddle for you!

    This morning, our entire 200 acre lake was ice covered. It was only 1/8” thick, but not only is this way too early for ice, our recent weather has not been anywhere near cold enough for the ice to form. We’ve had a few cold spells, but the last few days the highs have been in the 50’s with the lows in the 30’s. The last 2 nights have gotten down to 31.6 and 30.2. We haven’t have any rain in the last 10 days. Winds have been light.

    And ideas why/how the ice would form?

    This is the weather data for November. If it’s not readable, cut’n’paste it into an email and make the font “Courier New”.

    MONTHLY WEATHER SUMMARY FOR 11/2012
    
         MEAN                    WIND SPEED  DOM  MEAN   MEAN
    DAY  TEMP  HIGH   LOW  RAIN  AVG   HI    DIR  BAROM  HUM
    ---  ----  ----  ----  ----  ----------  ---  -----  ----
    1    35.6  36.5  34.7  0.00   2    12    WNW  28.04  17
    2    32.9  40.6  27.0  0.00   0    12      S  28.31  20
    3    26.8  27.3  25.9  0.00   0     2    ESE  28.35  36
    4    25.5  26.8  24.8  0.00   0     0      N  28.38  41
    5    28.7  37.0  20.5  0.00   0     8      S  28.35  36
    6    33.0  34.3  30.2  0.00   2     8      S  28.05  69
    7    35.1  37.0  33.4  0.12   0     5     SW  28.22  88
    8    38.3  46.2  34.2  0.04   2    11     SW  28.21  60
    9    39.7  43.3  36.1  0.00   1     8     NE  28.25  56
    10   43.2  54.0  36.1  0.04   2    11    NNE  28.04  90
    11   28.5  54.0  24.4  0.59   0     8      N  27.97  73
    12   22.0  24.6  20.1  0.00   0     0      N  28.13  41
    13   26.1  33.6  19.8  0.00   1     9     SW  28.47  31
    14   33.3  38.8  29.7  0.00   1     9     SW  28.45  32
    15   38.4  47.7  28.9  0.00   2     9     SW  28.40  25
    16   31.2  39.7  22.8  0.00   1     8      S  28.59  33
    17   39.7  46.6  33.6  0.00   2    10      S  28.54  58
    18   43.2  52.0  35.2  0.00   3    13      S  28.43  24
    19   44.1  50.2  39.7  0.00   1     9    SSW  28.30  25
    20   39.6  50.9  31.6  0.00   0     6    WNW  28.28  45
    21   40.5  50.4  30.2  0.00   2    12     SW  28.18  56
    ---  ----  ----  ----  ----  ----------  ---  -----  ----
    • A Puritan Descendant says:

      Wow, that is bizarre sounding to me. As someone who fishes a lot I am curious for an answer!

      • A Puritan Descendant says:

        Those night when it got down to 20ish may have cooled the lake a lot. Is it deep? Cold sinks, while days in the 50s have a hard time warming it up much as heat stays on top. Maybe that explains it…?

        • Puritan,
          The lake is only 20 ft deep, so the cold nights definitely cooled it down, but it just doesn’t seem like that would be enough. After the warm days of the past week, I wouldn’t have thought 30 degrees would be enough for it to freeze. But maybe the calms wind allowed the top layer of the lake to freeze. A little wind pushed all the ice by our dock Wednesday afternoon – it was a mini ice-jam – piles of slush all along the shore and in front of the creek that flows out of the lake.

    • Hppay Thanksgiving to you and your family Todd :) I hope you have a great holiday.

      NOAA explained it on the radio a few days back, as we are experiencing icing in the AM as well. By memory, as the air “rapidly” warms in the morning, evaporation occurs and moisture rises. Because of the current weather pattern, the moisture just sits in the atmosphere, then when the air cools rapidly at night it just falls. Last night for example, without a cloud in the sky, snow was falling. Our lows are in the 20’s with highs in mid 50’s. That’s what the weather guessers are telling us in these parts.

      • Gman,
        We’ve gotten that “clear sky snow” in January when really cold air forces the dew to freeze and fall as snow – sometimes up to an inch or two of snow. But I’m trying to figure out how that would affect the lake when it’s only 30 degrees at night. I emailed a couple of local weathermen to see if they can explain it. No response yet…

        • A Puritan Descendant says:

          I think it is probably difficult to pin down an answer with so many variables, some of which are probably unknown. Kinda like trying to predict the weather.

          • I agree it’s difficult to pin down. I’m just always intrigued by weather, especially the change to and from Winter, when everything freezes in Fall and then thaws in Spring.

            An update on the lake/ice:

            It was 50 degrees Wednesday.
            Mid 50’s Thursday.
            At 10pm Thursday, it was 28 degrees.
            Friday the low was 18, high 28 and we got an inch of snow.

            It’s been in the teens and 20’s since.
            We got another 2″ of snow.

            The lake has NOT refroze!!

            There is some ice around the edges, and it has been windy which stops the ice from forming…this is much more “normal”. Something happened last week that still seems weird…

  46. November 22, 2012
    Give Thanks for Our Religious Heritage
    By Bob Weir

    As we prepare for the annual Thanksgiving feast with family and friends, let’s keep in mind how fortunate we are to live in such a bountiful country. Even those considered poor will have access to turkey dinners, compliments of the social service agencies in every town and city from coast to coast. With all of our political and social differences, we are always united in our belief that no one should go hungry. We are a wealthy and proud nation that was born and nourished with the philanthropic milk of human kindness.

    However, even humanitarianism must have limitations; otherwise, it will lead to abuse. The reason our country is in this wealth-sucking black hole is because of an elite ideological group of elected reps who think they can wave a magic wand and create not equal opportunity, but equal results. Hence, if you didn’t work hard and save enough money for a down payment on a house or a car, that doesn’t mean you should be denied something that others have.

    Our parents wanted to make us happy, but they understood the danger of taking satisfaction to the extreme. In addition, they understood the need to teach us the merits of self-sacrifice. They realized that we would grow up and be released into a world in which discipline is a key factor in our maturity. If you were really lucky, you had parents who taught you that life isn’t always fair and that nobody owes you a living. They were preparing you for adulthood.

    What our government is doing today exemplifies the permissive parent/spoiled child syndrome. Liberal ideologues say you should have everything you want, that freedom is unlimited, that every grievance should be soothed by the curative balm of government largesse. Conversely, conservatives say you must take responsibility for your own future and not use the blame game as a crutch. When you take advantage of a legal product like cigarettes, despite warnings of ill effects, you should not expect a multimillion-dollar “reward” for your own lack of discipline when you get sick. Blowing up like a tick on fast-food burgers, fries, and shakes doesn’t mean you have the right to get rich as part of a class-action lawsuit brought by an army of obese opportunists. And getting pregnant because you didn’t behave responsibly by taking precautions shouldn’t give you a license to kill the child growing inside you.

    Behavior must have consequences; otherwise, we’ll be ruled by animal instincts. Freedom must have limitations; otherwise, we’ll have chaos. Civilization is a social contract in which the participants must agree on the terms of an orderly existence. Those terms involve moral obligations consistent with the dominant culture. History teaches us that great civilizations are conquered from within, perhaps because, in their striving for greatness, they neglect and abandon the principles that built their success. Those principles are usually grounded in religion. Before there were laws in books, there was religion in the hearts and minds of people struggling to carve a decent life out of a cruel and brutish landscape. Before there was a Constitution to guide us in the building of a nation, there was religion to guide us in the spiritual recognition of a soul.

    Yet in spite of all the lessons of history, we find ourselves in the classic struggle between good and evil. Murder, rape, child abuse, and pornography have become so commonplace that the public pays scant attention unless the victim or the offender is a celebrity. Bodies found in dumpsters may not be mentioned at all if a sports playoff game is in the headlines.

    We have been systematically conditioned to tolerate behavior that once would have elicited gasps from even the most seasoned exhibitionists. It appears that we have lost our ability to be shocked. Nevertheless, in the face of all this evidence that we are in desperate need of a spiritual Renaissance, those who strive for a rebirth of values are pejoratively referred to as members of the “religious right.” In other words, if you want a return to the days when twelve-year-olds were not having sex with their teachers, child molesters weren’t soliciting children on the internet (NAMBLA), and murders didn’t occur in multiples, you must be some sort of extremist.

    Well, if being an extremist means having faith in a higher power and clinging to a values-based moral code, it’s a label we should wear proudly. It was worn by our ancestors when they celebrated the first Thanksgiving in the New World.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/give_thanks_for_our_religious_heritage.html#ixzz2D1aTny00

    Happy Thanksgiving from your local Christian, conservative, fellow citizen :) I’m thankful for a lot of things- including you guys!

    • Bottom Line says:

      ” I’m thankful for a lot of things- including you guys! ”

      I have to second that. I came here a few years ago, and have since been relieved of a lot of ignorance. I have learned from you all. I’ve developed a greater awareness of the world as well as within myself, be it the realization of what an asshole I am sometimes.

      You have collectively contributed to me becoming a better man, and I thank you.

    • VH, Appropriate I think though after watching it Charlie might just like it too for the “collectivism” of the ants.

      • This is a GREAT cartoon … it shows how the ants work for the greater good, not profit! And I love that the grasshopper is big and green (symbolism, anyone?) … how it “took” without a thought of anything … and was SAVED by the community!

        Excellent choice!

        Now, here’s 3 generations of cannoli pinkos … and some other stuff.

        http://temporaryknucksline.blogspot.com/2012/11/3-generations-of-stella-back-to-school.html

        • Bottom Line says:

          The big green grasshopper is a piece of cake. Green symbolizes growth/rebirth (notice how he transforms through learning – how rosy).

          It’s a little more complex than the grasshopper’s learning though. The part you seem to have missed is the paradoxical nature in which duality of political philosophy has been mixed and split up to be used to form a synthesis in your subconscious.

          It is about the proper balance between responsibility and creativity, as well as between personal responsibility vs collective responsibility vs. independence/freedom vs. utilitarianism vs. altruism vs. etc, etc,…(coercive force not included)

          Synthesis: It takes a balance of all of the above. No one is an island.

          And check out the number patters hidden everywhere… i.e.- 1 cart, 2 wheels, 3 apples

          Just for practice, try this one instead: http://passion.edu/elearn/file.php/361/Butterfly_Pics/Crop_Circles/Hunab_Ku_2009_Phase2.jpg

        • Nice piece Charlie. You and I have very similar views of education. Back in 1967 as a delegate to the National Student Association convention I discovered an amazing thing, that politics is not a line with an extreme left or an extreme right but rather a circle with the left and right meeting at the top. As a member of Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) founded by Bill Buckley and others in 1962, I found I had a whole lot more in common with the members of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) than I did with either the Young Republicans or Young Democrats. Our goals were remarkably similar and yet our strategy to achieve those goals was markedly different.

          In the ensuing 40 plus years, it is amazing how my generation, the baby boomers, the supposed brightest, best educated generation ever managed to screw things up. today, theoretically, the mantle of the leftists of my time has been passed to folks like Pelosi and Ried. On the other side the torch has been passed to Rove, and Cheny. Supposedly, the goals are the same, and only the mechanism to get there has changed. The reality is that the mess we are in has been brought about by the centrist. mainstream young Democrats and Young Republicans of my time. Us radicals never really had a chance.

          • You are mistaken.

            Government education is a brilliant success.

            The problem: you believe government education exists for a different purpose then what it was created and meant to do. Thus, you mistakenly rate such education as “failed” or “poor”.

            But by the measure of the entity that formulated the education system, it is a towering success.

            A very large, politically motivated benefactor – professional, university educated teachers – whose political power continually reinforces the education system.

            A constant supply of new victims.
            A growing caste of educated idiots, dependent on government, and grand supports of the same.

            A perfect situation, and one that will continue until collapse (and sadly, maybe beyond).

            • You missed my sarcasm. Just need the piece of paper, that’s all. Along the way, the universities will empty your bank account now and forever and then have the unmitigated gall to hit you up six times a year for “donations”.

              • Then you are right!

                I totally agree – re: University degrees.

                I and her Mom will be teaching/enrolling Lil’BF in University next year via online studies. Expect she will get her accredited BA in 18 months (she will be 19 then), for less than $10k.

              • Buddy from High School flunked out of college in 1 1/2 years because of motorcycle and girlfriend issues. Wound up in “Nam”, got wounded, came home, met a nurse, married her, got her pregnant, returned to college, completed four years in 2 1/2 and then wrapped up grad school in 1 1/2. Amazing what you can accomplished when you stay focused.

                Have heard many similar stories from GI Bill guys from WW 2 on. Little maturity and the willingness to forgo the “college experience” can get you down the road a lot faster. All four of mine went away, did real majors, science, engineering, pre-law, in non-party schools and graduated with credits to spare in the allotted four. It was understood from day one that even though most was paid for by scholarship it was a four year plan only. Two of the colleges made a very big deal out of telling me how my kids would “benefit” from five. Their mistake was that I had been to college myself. No one in my family before me had. I was shocked, amazed and totally dumfounded when I discovered on day one that two credits meant two days of class, and three meant three days. Knew then, September of ’64, it was a total piece of cake, easier than High School unless you were a science, math or engineering major. Everything else is BS and can probably be done from home .

      • Yes a Great cartoon-or it is as long as the Grasshopper actually learns a lesson from the experience. In today’s world it goes more like this!!!!!

        OBAMA-REID-PELOSI VERSION

        The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

        The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

        Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.

        CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

        America is stunned by the sharp contrast.

        How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

        Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, ‘It’s Not Easy Being Green.’

        ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, “We shall overcome.” Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper’s sake.

        President Obama condemns the ant and blames capitalism for the grasshopper’s plight.

        Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

        Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

        The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the grasshopper.

        The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn’t maintain it.

        The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again.

        The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and once peaceful, neighborhood.

        The entire Nation collapses bringing the rest of the free world with it.

        MORAL OF THE STORY: If you choose to become a parasite, don’t kill your victim.

        http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/the-fable-of-the-ant-and-the-grasshopper-the-pc-version/

        • Or like this:

          The Modern Little Red Hen (The Incredible Bread Machine) – Ronald Reagan

          A modern day little red hen may not sound like or appear to be a quotable authority on economics but then some authorities aren’t worth quoting. I’ll be right back.

          About a year ago I imposed a little poetry on you. It was called “The Incredible Bread Machine” and made a lot of sense with reference to matters economic. You didn’t object too much so having gotten away with it once I’m going to try again. This is a little treatise on basic economics called “The Modern little Red Hen.”

          Once upon a time there was a little red hen who scratched about the barnyard until she uncovered some grains of wheat. She called her neighbors and said ‘If we plant this wheat, we shall have bread to eat. Who will help me plant it?’

          “Not I, ” said the cow.

          “Not I,” said the duck.

          “Not I,” said the pig.

          “Not I,” said the goose.

          “Then I will,” said the little red hen. And she did. The wheat grew tall and ripened into golden grain. “Who will help me reap my wheat?” asked the little red hen.

          “Not I,” said the duck.

          “Out of my classification,” said the pig.

          “I’d lose my seniority,” said the cow.

          “I’d lose my unemployment compensation,” said the goose.

          “Then I will,” said the little red hen, and she did.

          At last the time came to bake the bread. “Who will help me bake bread?” asked the little red hen.

          “That would be overtime for me,” said the cow.

          “I’d lose my welfare benefits,” said the duck.

          “I’m a dropout and never learned how,” said the pig.

          “If I’m to be the only helper, that’s discrimination,” said the goose.

          “Then I will,” said the little red hen.

          She baked five loaves and held them up for the neighbors to see.

          They all wanted some and, in fact, demanded a share. But the little red hen said, “No, I can eat the five loaves myself.”

          “Excess profits,” cried the cow.

          “Capitalist leech,” screamed the duck.

          “I demand equal rights,” yelled the goose.

          And the pig just grunted.

          And they painted “unfair” picket signs and marched round and around the little red hen shouting obscenities.

          When the government agent came, he said to the little red hen, “You must not be greedy.”

          “But I earned the bread,” said the little red hen.

          “Exactly,” said the agent. “That’s the wonderful free enterprise system. Anyone in the barnyard can earn as much as he wants. But under our modern government regulations productive workers must divide their products with the idle.”

          And they lived happily ever after, including the little red hen, who smiled and clucked, “I am grateful, I am grateful.” But her neighbors wondered why she never again baked any more bread.

          http://virginiamargaritalibertyblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/07/the-modern-little-red-hen-the-incredible-bread-machine-ronald-reagan/

          Of course that Happily ever after time is running out! We may well be left with nothing but the I’m grateful, I’m grateful. Whether we are or not!

          • Keep trying, V.H. … but you’ll never get it right, I’m afraid …:) The cartoon speaks for itself.

            • I’m not sure what you’re seeing there, Charlie. The ants are an absolute monarchy under a benevolent and forward-thinking queen – one of the least oppressive governments you can have, nothing to really do with collectivism. The grasshopper received a job rather than a handout – goods exchanged for services.

              Besides, collectivism works great for a small group with a voluntary membership (little ‘c’ communism) anyway. In a small group where everyone knows each other it’s far easier to enforce ‘the rules’ via social pressure than by violence.

              • DKII
                1) TRUE! Monarchy is one of the least oppressive governments
                2) TRUE! Collectivism works for small groups, like a family or extended family, where allocation of resources is not based on merit but on emotional attachments. Collectivism cannot, however, scale because emotional attachments cannot scale much larger than 100 individuals. Thus, allocation by earning (merit) becomes the best means over large (to infinity) groups.

                Keep this up, DKII, and I can retire from this blog (to much cheering from a few, if that would happen, I’d guess)

              • Well, I for One, would not be cheering!

              • Psh I was here a couple years ago saying much of the same things, you never really retire from posting on the internet. ;)

              • ’bout time.

                I was starting to feel alone again.

  47. The cartoon worked much better than I thought. Had forgotten all about Disney’s “Silly Symphonies”, have to dig up a few more. Wonder if we could work up a Rap version of “The World Owes Us a Living”.

  48. Just saw Lincoln … have to wonder how you lunatics on the right were once Democrats … :)

    • Let me guess -you believe a movie about Lincoln is the truth.
      ahahahhaha

      Lincoln was a racist, he hated blacks, he want all of the shipped back to Africa.
      I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races; that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say, in addition to this, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

      …his First Inaugural speech:
      “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”

      He was an atheist who knew the power of religion, so he often would lace his rhetoric with biblical quotes so to appeal to those that he personally thought were idiots. One astute clergyman of his day observed that Lincoln became a Christian “six months after his death.”

      He was liar, a tyrant, started a war over money, instituted “total war” doctrine on the American people. He was, even in his day, noted for his ability to switch sides of any debate when it was political expedient to do so. He was the Romney of his day.

      And imagine, most Americans think he was their greatest president… ironic and telling, no?

      • Do you ever, EVER, tire of being an asshole, BF? Not even once a day?

        ahahahahahahahahaahahahahahah

        • You’re an idiot.

          You love your myths and you disparage the truth.

          • Do you ever, EVER, tire of being an asshole, BF?

            Answer: NEVER … :)

            • I’m curious Charlie-Why do you think BF is being an ass-his attitude towards Lincoln is no different than your attitude towards all the Founding Fathers?

              • I’m curious Charlie-Why do you think BF is being an ass-his attitude towards Lincoln is no different than your attitude towards all the Founding Fathers?

                I will answer this one because it merits a response. Actually, No, I don’t have that attitude towards all (or any) of the founding fathers. Reread your Stella, V.H., and without the “emotional” :) attitude. I merely point out over and over again how the founding fathers spoke mostly for wealthy white men and didn’t take into consideration anything aside from the property they were seeking to protect with a government (why, perhaps, Chomsky believe capitalism couldn’t exist without government). Inclusive of that disregard for workers, etc., was a factual disregard for slaves and native Americans. I don’t believe they were “racists” (as the asshole suggests Lincoln was). I’ve read quite a bit about Lincoln, including the negatives, and I don’t believe the man was a racist. I believe he was a master politician first; that some of what he had to do (including his willingness to permit slavery in the south to avoid a civil war) was questionable vs. general morality and justice; that his more dictator-like actions may have been what he believed was required and were not the actions of a power mad usurper of freedoms (as the asshole suggested). I point to contradictions of fact regarding the founding fathers and the policies/government they enacted, no matter their intent (mostly because I don’t believe for a second we know their “true” intent beyond what we believe we know).

                And I am RARELY sure I have it all right (and or that my way is the only way) … very much unlike the asshole. Only assholes assume they’re always right; life taught me that a very long time ago.

                So, I call him an asshole for his belief in his infallibility. His jumping on my back about Lincoln was just funny. I wasn’t about to engage him a Lincoln (or any argument). What’s the point? He’ll just sit on here for 6 days if that’s what it takes, repost and comment until the cows come home. I actually have a life. I suspect the asshole megalomaniac doesn’t. :)

              • I don’t believe the man was a racist.

                Obviously, you don’t read much….

                “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.

                And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

                Yep, only in Charlie’s distorted world view is this not racist.

              • Yep, Charlie’s insanity.

                “Founder’s” intentions are assumed to be racist, no matter what they say contrary – but the actual racist words of another man -who Charlie champions – are not racist, merely “a master politician”

              • Hi Charlie-thanks for answering but since you have not answered numerous questions I have asked you through the years-I’m not quite sure how to take the above comment. He He :)

                As far as your answer-I can’t help but feel that you are making allowances for Lincoln being human but not giving that save allowance for the men who wrote our Constitution. I suppose that’s because you like the outcome of Lincolns moves. And you think the Founding Fathers plan is flawed – you don’t like the outcome. Even though the plan started to fail in MHO when we stopped following the INTENT of the Constitution and of the Founding Fathers. they weren’t perfect but just like today there is more than one party, more than one man’s opinion -so the Constitution was a collaboration-no one got to do everything they personally wanted to achieve. 200 years from now-people will probably look back at us and our Government and judge us harshly for numerous things that we have done which they will feel were evil and wrong. Like abortion maybe. I can just hear it-How could these people kill their young. So are we horrible people? Maybe, but we are a sign of the times and sometimes we simply have been taught something evil is okay. So I try not to judge people tooo harshly -When sometimes they simply “know not what they do”.

                As far as the Constitution protecting only the rich-I think that is crap-they simply knew that for man to be free they must be able to own the products of their labor, they encouraged charity and a Moral society, and they tried to instate equal justice for all. Read the damn Constitution it is all about individual men being free to achieve , they attempted to protect the people from their government by separation of powers, and protect the individual minority and majority by creating a Country of laws. If it hasn’t worked out as well as hoped blame it on man’s ability to nit pic the Constitution to the point that we aren’t following it anymore-hell the government are ignoring all kinds of laws, for no other reason than to achieve power over us. Power you want to give them.

                And if all you want to repeat is Slavery, slavery-go ahead but understand- people back then made an argument that black people weren’t really persons, just like they are doing to babies in the womb now. Something which you think is okay. Same reasoning to allow evil, just different centuries.

                And from my reading of your past writings-I would say today’s explanation is a lot less harsh-so maybe it was you -who was talking out of emotion and a desire to push buttons much more than I was reacting out of emotion. I suspect it was some of both. :)

                Oh yea, from what I’ve read Socialism can’t come about without Capitalism. Seems they need the money it produces before they can instate all their programs to take the money away from the people and give it too the government to dole out as they see fit. A few men already have to much power over us-why do you want to give them more? When is to much control to much? It is a question no one has answered, at least in away, I can understand.

  49. Have you heard the one about the three wise men (or women) in Washington, D.C.?

    Me neither. Looks like the joke’s on us.

    As a result of political gridlock, a slew of tax laws will expire at the stroke of midnight on Dec.31 if Congress is not able to come to agreement about the fiscal cliff and our nation’s budget. If no agreement is reached, some tax rates could go up to levels not seen since the late 1970s and early 1980s.

    Although there are just five weeks before the end of the year, there’s a chance both political parties will agree on at least a temporary fix so that businesses and individuals would have some idea of what’s in store for their taxes next year and and plan accordingly. But I’m not holding my breath.

    Moreover, if you have the misfortune of earning an income amount that Washington has arbitrarily declared deems you “rich,” you might not want to wait until the last days of the year to get your affairs in order. That’s because regardless what happens to income tax and capital gains tax rates, the 3.8% Medicare surtax is about the only tax change you can count on– it is locked and loaded and headed your way on Jan. 1.

    Surtax Sir? Madam?

    The Affordable Care Act actually includes two surtaxes. One is a 0.9% additional tax that is applied to earned income; the other is a 3.8% additional tax on investment income. Each is computed separately.

    Let’s take the 0.9% surtax on earnings. This kicks in when your income from a job exceeds a certain amount. If you are single, the threshold is $200,000 and $250,000 for married taxpayers who file a joint return. (You don’t have to be a mathematical genius to notice the “marriage penalty” inherent in this.)

    Wages have been subject to a 2.9% Medicare tax for years: The amount is split, with the employee and employer each paying half, or 1.45%. (1) Starting with your first paycheck in 2013, if your annual salary exceeds the threshold, you will pay 2.35% toward Medicare. There is no increase in the amount employers have to pay.

    When the Bush-era tax reductions expire on Jan. 1, the top marginal income tax bracket will revert to 39.6%. With the addition of the surtax, this jumps to 40.5% for individuals whose earned income exceeds the threshold.

    On the other hand, since the 0.9% surtax only applies to wages, retirees and others who do not receive income from a job don’t have to worry about this additional tax, no matter how much income they receive from other sources.

    Investor Beware

    The 3.8% surtax is a game-changer. It marks the first time that Medicare tax will be assessed on investment income. To determine if you’ll be affected, you need to know your “Modified Adjusted Gross Income,” or MAGI. (2) As defined for the purposes of this law, MAGI is your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) plus any net foreign income that you excluded.

    Translation: unless you work outside the United States, MAGI = AGI. In addition, “net investment income” is one of the items included in your AGI.

    Now here’s where it gets tricky: The additional 3.8% tax is only triggered if your MAGI is higher than the applicable threshold- $200,000 (single) or $250,000 (married filing joint). If this is the case, then the surtax is assessed on either your “net investment income” (gains minus losses), or the amount by the which your MAGI exceeds the threshold amount- whichever is smaller.

    Thus, there are two basic strategies avoid this tax, either: a) keep your MAGI below the threshold, or b) eliminate all investment income. If you don’t have any investment income, you won’t be subject to this tax even if your job pays a million bucks a year. (3)

    It’s important to understand what’s meant by “investment income.” This includes:

    Interest, Dividends, Royalties, Annuities and Rents
    Capital Gains- including any profit you make on the sale of your residence if it exceeds the amount you are allowed to exclude(4)
    Passive Activity Income

    It does not include:

    Income from a business in which you are an active participant
    Distributions from an IRA or qualified retirement plan
    Gain on the sale of an active interest in a partnership or S-Corp
    Gain inside a tax-deferred annuity
    Distribution from a tax-free Roth account
    Interest from tax-exempt municipal bonds (Note: Obama has proposed changing this.)

    Although not considered investment income, some of the above items can add to your MAGI and, thus, could make you subject to this tax by pushing you over the threshold.

    CPA Robert Keebler, in Green Bay, Wisc., has been writing about and holding nationwide seminars on the implications of this law for more than a year, and provides the following examples to help taxpayers figure what these changes mean for them:

    A) John is single. He has $100,000 in salary and $50,000 in net investment income. MAGI = $150,000. Result: No surtax. MAGI is below $200,000 threshold.

    B) Mary is single. She has $225,000 of net investment income and no other income. MAGI = $225,000. Result: 3.8% surtax applies to $25,000 (lesser of MAGI over threshold or net investment income).

    C) Scott and Sarah (married, filing joint) have $205,000 in salaries plus $80,000 of net investment income. MAGI = $285,000. Result: 3.8% surtax applies to $35,000 (lesser of MAGI over threshold or net investment income).

    D) Art and Patricia (married, filing joint) have pension income of $130,000 and net investment income of $115,000. MAGI = $245,000. Result: 3.8% surtax does not apply. MAGI is below threshold.

    E) Same facts as in “D” except that Art and Patricia have to take required minimum distributions from their traditional IRAs totaling $50,000. MAGI = $295,000. Result: 3.8% surtax applies to $45,000 (lesser of MAGI over threshold or net investment income).

    But Wait! There’s More

    Of course, the Medicare surtax isn’t the only thing to worry about. As I wrote in last week’s column a host of common tax rates and tax breaks are set to expire soon. For instance, the top long-term capital gains tax rate will jump to 20% next year from 15% where it’s been for more than 10 years. Tack the 3.8% surtax on that and you’re at 23.8%.

    If you’re retired and living on dividends, those will once again be taxed as ordinary income. In other words, instead of paying a maximum of 15% in tax, you could be looking at 43.4%- that’s nearly triple the tax rate you’ll pay this year.

    Here are some strategies to discuss with your tax and financial advisors:

    1.) Sell appreciated assets this year while the maximum long-term capital gains rate is 15%.

    2.) Consider converting some or all traditional IRAs to a Roth while the top ordinary income tax rate is 35% instead of 43.4%.

    3.) Shift some of the investments in your taxable portfolio into tax-sheltered and tax-exempt vehicles such as annuities, life insurance and municipal bonds.

    4.) Plan to max out your contributions to retirement plans next year; whatever you contribute escapes income tax (for now) and all gains are tax-deferred. (If you are self-employed or own a small business, a defined benefit plan might be attractive because of the larger, deductible contribution allowed.)

    5.) Trust income is also subject to the 3.8% Medicare surtax, but at a much lower threshold: $11,650 (based on 2012 figures). If you are the administrator or beneficiary of a trust, discuss the possibility of shifting the asset mix to reduce this exposure.

    6.) If possible, accelerate income into this year and defer deductions into 2013.

    7.) Either accelerate installment sale income into this year, or spread it out longer to reduce the annual payment so that your MAGI remains below the threshold.

    8.) Consider oil and gas investments which offer and immediate deduction of up to 95% of your original investment (Keebler).

    9.) Certain types of real estate investments provide a deduction for depreciation, reducing your taxable income.

    1. Self-employed individuals currently pay both halves of the tax, or 2.9%.

    2. MAGI has different definitions depending upon the law involved. In this case, it is defined as your AGI, plus any foreign income that you were able to exclude.

    3. In this case your net investment income = $0. This is clearly less than the amount by which your MAGI exceeds the threshold ($800,000 if you’re single; $750,000 if married, filing joint). Thus the 3.8% surtax would be assessed against $0 for a tax of $0.

    4. $250,000 if you are single; $500,000 if you are married.

  50. Very disappointing Friday…..no protests anywhere in Texas…..at the Walmarts where we were.

  51. The life and times of Abraham Lincoln have been analyzed and dissected in countless books. Do we need another Lincoln biography? In Team of Rivals, esteemed historian Doris Kearns Goodwin proves that we do. Though she can’t help but cover some familiar territory, her perspective is focused enough to offer fresh insights into Lincoln’s leadership style and his deep understanding of human behavior and motivation. Goodwin makes the case for Lincoln’s political genius by examining his relationships with three men he selected for his cabinet, all of whom were opponents for the Republican nomination in 1860: William H. Seward, Salmon P. Chase, and Edward Bates. These men, all accomplished, nationally known, and presidential, originally disdained Lincoln for his backwoods upbringing and lack of experience, and were shocked and humiliated at losing to this relatively obscure Illinois lawyer. Yet Lincoln not only convinced them to join his administration–Seward as secretary of state, Chase as secretary of the treasury, and Bates as attorney general–he ultimately gained their admiration and respect as well. How he soothed egos, turned rivals into allies, and dealt with many challenges to his leadership, all for the sake of the greater good, is largely what Goodwin’s fine book is about. Had he not possessed the wisdom and confidence to select and work with the best people, she argues, he could not have led the nation through one of its darkest periods.

    all for the sake of the greater good …. I love reading words like this … don’t yous?

    • It is no surprise you love Lincoln.

      A mass murderer, duplicitous, unprincipled, political, tyrannical who used violent force on anyone who dared get in his way, whether he had them shot down in New York or Atlanta.

      Just your type.

      • Wiki … that’s your source? Have I called you an asshole yet today?

        Just in case I haven’t. You’re an asshole … :)

        • Read the book, moron.

          • I agree with Flag, it is a book review! Besides, Wiki is right more than it is wrong. Always found it a good first place to start and then follow up elsewhere in depth.

            • Yes, and book reports should always be taken as gospel …

              Now, did you go back and do what I asked? Of course not … why should facts get in the way of anything on this site.

              Did that coward asshole call me a name again?
              :)

            • Wiki “usually right”, therefore it’s an authority?

              Interesting … no mention of Lincoln being a racist here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln

              But how can this one be accurate if your God of all assholedom says he’s wiki is the one to worship?

              The Real Lincoln … ha.

              The real asshole = Black (fugazy name) Flag (the coward) …:)

              • Just shows your ignorance.

                History, indeed, has colored Lincoln – he is, of course, the “savior” of the Nation – has a statue dominating Washington and his face immortalized into a mountain. Can’t have him portrayed as the tyranny he was, can we?

                It is a fact he suspended habeas corpus, had innocent people jailed and summarily executed without trial.
                He imprisoned the Supreme Court for ruling against him.
                He ordered troops to fire on unarmed conscription protestors in New York.
                He ordered the looting, burning and destruction of the Southern States civilian population.

                These and other atrocities rarely are told, for it damages the American self-assessment and the (false) moral stance of the Civil War.

                But, go ahead, Charlie, he is your champion!

    • Both of you guys are soooo off the mark. Perhaps I had the benefit of the well rounded classical Catholic education but I never remember Lincoln being portrayed to me as a saint or a devil. He was portrayed as a man confronted with horrendous choices. No matter what he did he would have detractors on either side. One hundred fifty years have passed and we still are a “United States” which according to Br. Patrick was Lincoln’s foremost goal.

      The South, choosing the course it did, set up exactly the strong, centralized Federal Government it supposedly revolted against. At the end of reconstruction, the federal government shrank back a little but the crises of the World Wars then allowed it to grow again. The final nail in the coffin was the “War on Poverty” coupled with the Civil Rights crisis and the Vietnam war This sleight of hand by the left succeeded in changing the dynamic permanently as demonstrated earlier this month. Stuff, stuff and more stuff. In the immortal words of Gene Wilder in the “Producers” , “No way out, No way out, No way out”.

  52. “for the sake of the greater good”

    Never seen such a thing as Greater Good as it is always someone’s idea of what they think is best for others without knowing or caring what the others need or want.

    • Yeah, it must’ve killed you when the south lost Bama … sorry for your loss …. NOT!

      • “Yeah, it must’ve killed you when the south lost Bama”

        How in any way shape or form does your asinine reply define “greater good”?.

        • It is, my friend, that damned Yankee thing. It will never end. You guys are still the “rebels” or the damned secesh and of course, we are the carpetbagging Yankees. Generations yet unborn will fight this battle over and over and over again.

          As an interesting historical aside, I recently read a book called “Duffy”s War” about NY’s Fighting ’69th in WW 1. In the book, when the regiment is formed into a brigade of the 42nd Division, the second regiment in the brigade was an Alabama Regiment (46th?). The last time the two had met was in a place called Gettysburg. That book was followed up by another “the Fighting ’69th” about the regiment in Iraq circa 2005. They were pared up with, I think the 4th Louisiana. The last time they met? You guessed it, Gettysburg. This thing will never go away.

          Walking Gettysburg myself, on the slopes of Little Round Top, imagining Strong Vincent and the 145th NY. and their opponents, I can never get over the deep sorrow I have for all those fine young men. I will always remember that last episode of Ken Burn’s “The Civil War” where I think Shelby Foote reads the quote from the elderly veterans at their 1913 encampment when they talked about meeting again in Valhalla, fighting the battle and then all rising at the end to celebrate themselves.

        • Where in your assinine original post is there a question to me regarding the greater good?

          Not that I’d bother answering anymore. I Learned a long time ago that fighting through the density of brick is more frustrating than it’s worth.

  53. Will the United States ever learn? Sending Hillary Clinton to Egypt to negotiate a cease fire is like putting Charlie in charge of the Fed. (No offense meant, my Plutonian friend except for linking you to Hillary Clinton,,,,,sorry). More signs of an Obama administration not knowing ANYTHING about foreign relations. Geez……..she goes over there, uses the power of money to get the new President of Egypt to help put his name to a cease fire that has no chance of succeeding, then he takes DICTATORIAL power after that, with the UNITED STATES endorsement. Have we learned nothing from Iran of old? So…what has happened…

    You have a Secretary of State, holding billions in aid, over the head of Egypt. Then you have the new Egyptian President endorsing a cease fire, promising millions to Hamas and Hezbollah of US tax money. Then you have the President of Egypt becoming, with self appointed powers, the new “SHAH” (so to speak), taking powers not granted him under the elections (much like Obama). The result:

    The Muslim Brotherhood rioting. Rockets are still being fired into Israel….and a United States endorsement of a self imposed dictator.

    It boggles the mind.

    • D13,

      Such confusion starts with Empire.

      When you want to run the world, you have to be friends with your enemies and enemies to some of your friends – because you have no friends and lots of enemies!

      So you’ll end up supporting terror and destroying peace — all in the name of Empire.

      It won’t change for awhile yet. The money manufacturing is still strong.

      • Oh, I understand it thoroughly, as you know….but history ALWAYS repeats itself……..I don’t get it. And, the people that I talk to are oblivious….modern technology and the internet that brings the reality of the world to life…..somehow think they are insulated. I just don’t get it……..they have no idea what the reality of the world is…….none.

        • Then help us understand the reality. That’s part of the reason I’m on this site to learn about things I don’t have any experience in. I listen to you a lot because you have been there. But I find myself confused sometimes by your comments. On the one hand you say we should just stay out of it. But then something happens and you are talking about what we should do based on the fact that we are involved. Which I suspect is gonna continue to be the reality of our position. So what the hell are we supposed to do, under that reality?

          • Therein lies the conundrum, VH. I say we should stay out of other people’s business and I believe that. BUT….always a BUT. I would never had sent a Hillary Clinton to Egypt. What would be the aim of it if not to try to employ our own brand of democracy in Egypt and use the force of money as the carrot/stick? That is why I am a realist. The fact is, that our form of government is intrusive all over the world. We have become the world’s policeman and all this crap about a moral responsibility just because we are the most successful and baddest boy on the block..is, well……crap. The only thing we owe the world is to stay out of their business. If Iran wants to take over the world…..go for it Iran….do not come to my block or I will kick your ass.

            Our strength is our financial strength and our military. We can and should be the the biggest military power, bar none. We should be bigger and better than any group of Nations combined. That is our deterrent. So, herein lies the reality….we are interventionists…..that is wrong. Plain wrong. We have no right to tell another country what to do or how to act…..until it affects us. We should never turn the other cheek….that will only get it slapped. If some little terrorist group sponsored by, say, Iran, does something nasty to us….do not bother with the little terrorist group….hit the big dog and hit him hard enough to leave you alone. We cannot play in the world with powder puff rules when the rest of the world does not play that way. Trade on equal terms….if the other side wants more…walk away. Equal trade….dollar for dollar. OUR dollar and not theirs. Currency manipulation is a HUGE weapon….counter it by keeping our dollar stronger. We keep it stronger by NOT BEING IN DEBT and CREATING DEBT.

            In the example that I was using on Egypt……we did the same thing with Iran in the 60’s and 70’s. WE….the US..installed the Shah…..we supported a dictator….and we just are doing the same thing in Egypt.

  54. Have a serious question for Todd, Charlie, et al…….Let us make an assumption that the fiscal negotiations (such as they are) do not provide the things that small business’ need….and suddenly you have multitudes of all business doing what a lot of us have already done but on a much larger scale…..for instance: Eliminating employees to under the 50 threshold, sitting on cash and not investing to avoid all the increased investment taxes, reducing full time workers to a plethora of part time workers, eliminating the health care that employers are already providing, eliminating 401 (k) because they are not feasible to keep anymore as they are going to be taxed at a higher rate (read it VERY carefully as the investment income is taxed as occurred not at distribution), not investing in tax free bonds and municipalities because a hidden tax in ACA now taxes the municipals, eliminating the LLC and the Sub S corporation to avoid the increased personal taxes….etc. etc..etc…

    When that happens, as it probably will………what now? What would be the next step you would take if in charge.

    • Do any of you disagree with me that if nothing is done to relieve the tax burdens and regulations that are going into effect….the U/E reported will climb to 12-15% reported and a real U/E rate of 25-30% by year end 2013? And if you do disagree with me….can you explain why you disagree? (Again, assuming that no reliable negotiations come forth). Oh, note to Charlie….you and I both know that no government can run a profitable lemonade stand..so try to put your hat on and think about a reliable solution. :smile:

      • Oh…sorry about the ” reported will climb to 12-15% reported “……….I just came from the Department of Redundancy Department.

      • They tried to run the Chicken Ranch and couldn’t even succeed at that. (Note to Charlie, there are more than chickens at the Chicken Ranch.)

    • Buon Giorno, colonel! You already know how I feel about this. The sooner there’s a full blown economic disaster, the sooner they’ll be justice. I’m all in on it falling apart. It has already … much of it Obama’s fault for not protecting workers during the bailout … Hostess’s management did fine and dandy while asking for workers to reduce their salaries. No jobs means it’s all a step closer to collapse. The way the GOP didn’t learn a thing from the last election (that 47% parasite mentality), that’s the same way the 1% stranglehold will collapse. Just a matter of time.

      But Pluto, like the grasshopper, will still love you all enough to help you out …:)

      • You still did not answer me, my friend.

        • Sure I did, Colonel … I don’t care what happens … capitalism has failed once again … it’s a beautiful thing.

          • No sir…I wanted to know what would you do if you were in charge….after the fiscal cliff….what would you do? You could nationalize but where would you get the workers? In our current give me society…..why would they work…unless, of course, you took away the entitlements or tie them to work, in which case, you become a capitalist in drag. I have never seen, yet, a society nor country where your proposal works……unless you can point me there. There will always be a ruling class which will have the money…..China, Cuba, Russia, North Korea,…..nothing is different. So..what would you do? Create a different ruling class?

            • Oh, okay. I’d nationalize (like Truman once tried to do). I happen not to believe (for a second) that I wouldn’t be able to find workers. Most people want to work, Colonel. You need to quit that capitalistic propaganda about people not wanting to work … or don’t quit it and sound much more ignorant than I know you are. I don’t believe people should get a free pass at all, but that there shouldn’t be an “owners” … incorporate everyone into the process (is one way) … If the owners all left tomorrow, do you really think the workers coudln’t figure out how to keep working? The difference is they wouldn’t have to fork over most of the profits to those who do the least (i.e. investors).

              Now, I’m not going to go back and forth on this one. I don’t have the time or inclination. Life is too short. You’re all mostly as thick as bricks anyway on this. I’m not. I can see a hybrid of capitalism attempting to work out its problems but I doubt it’ll happen before a big time crash. So be it. But if you’re going to argue that nobody will want to work, we have nothing to discuss. It’s an absurd assumption. And I think you know I’m not for people just sitting on their asses and doing nothing with their lives.

    • Colonel,
      Your “domes-day” scenario is not realistic. You’ve talked in the past about all your plans to disengage from the economy, which I find ridiculous. You’re not going to invest just because you MIGHT have to pay a little more taxes on your earnings? You’d rather earn nothing?

      If there’s economic demand, and you don’t want to fulfill it, someone else will. That’s how capitalism works – whether you’re involved or not.

      Congress and Obama will reach a deal – probably a short-term one to avoid the crisis and kick-the-can down to the road. Republicans are already back-tracking on the Grover pledge…

      • Thanks Todd…..for your reply. I used to go to Huffington some and I did read your links……but what I feel is that Huffpo is just as much a part of the problem as anything else is. But to answer your question, yes, we do feel that it is more profitable to sit on cash for now…but that is our decision. we will make more money by staying out of dividend solutions…..we will stay out of the stock market completely…so will smart investors. Just watch. The Republicans will cave….and you will get your increase in revenues but that increase will not go to debt nor will it go to budget reduction. You will still have no budget because it is blocked by the Democratic controlled Senate…not the Repubs. You will have a debt that is not Bush’s fault……Obama is spending twice what Bush spent…Huffpo will even tell you that….but you think that is ok. Huffpo’s own report shows that 65% of the governments income goes to entitlements…….even a first grader in economics knows this is unsustainable. You will get the compromise you seek……increased revenues….and you will get an increase in spending to go along with it. It is what you (meaning the progressives) want and you will get it. The economy now belongs to the progressives……in total. Neither you nor Charlie nor any progressive that I have talked to has answer nor solution. But you will learn that economics drives the ship. I had the experience of living through the interest rates that Carter did and it was not pretty.

        But you answered my question and thank you. Just remember…..this deficit and this debt was NOT caused by Bush….I understand that progressives have to have someone to blame things on…..but you now have three more wars started by this administration….a fourth is looming on the horizon and the spending for these will make Bush look like a piker. What concerns me more than anything is the debt. You can take 100 percent of what the so called rich have and it will not make a single dent. So, I am prepared to see…….more bullshit from the progressive movement on what a Fair share is…….it already is over 50 %……..more is to come. My children know the score and they know they are in trouble. My grand children are way into trouble. No one will be able to sustain the debt…..Even Europe is beginning to wake up and Germany must be beside herself watching us go down the tubes…..they finally have it right and are not going to support the Euro anymore with out drastic spending cuts and rightfully so…..

        When the Progressive movement will tax everyone the same, then I will be on board. But until then….we sit on our cash…we will be around to pick up the pieces of the ones that did not pan properly…you cannot blame investors nor the money people for wanting to preserve their cash. As a progressive, you feel that no one is entitled to have large amounts of money. You want to take away incentive under the false disguise of equality. Ok…..you have it now. Good luck…..when it is all over………..we (our family) will still be around. Smart money will not invest in spending……just watch.

        But, once again…thank you for your time.

        • Neither you nor Charlie nor any progressive that I have talked to has answer nor solution.

          Maybe because we don’t claim to have the answer or solution, but point out that the way it is now is not working either, not unless you’re happy having 1% of the population hold the rest hostage. Todd and I probably don’t agree on a solution either. I think he’s a democrat and believes in capitalism. I don’t believe in capitalism (not at all), but wouldn’t mind seeing some bending of its absurd structure (more toward a hybrid of socialism). Socialist countries you choose to attack with age old propaganda somehow survive. How is that possible? European countries that utilize socialized health and education and general welfare are still in tact. Those that have tasted some dignity for their populations are fighting the sway back to the right that neglects the many for the benefit of the few. You really don’t think that’ll happen here someday? Just wait and see … and will your world really come crashing down when it does? Do you really need to cling to an ideology that is no longer applicable?

          • Hi Charlie…ok fair enough……I know you do not believe in Capitalism…I really do get it. But I have seen nothing other than Nationalize like you think everybody will just pitch in….do you really believe that? If you do…ok….cool….just wondering.

    • And this. Especially this line:

      Were it not for the two Bush wars and the two Bush tax cuts and the House Republican games of brinksmanship with the routine extension of the debt ceiling, there would be no “fiscal cliff.”

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-kuttner/fiscal-cliff_b_2189593.html

      • Todd. I’m not trying to argue,and I didn’t read the links, but if you still think it’s Bush’s fault then you”ll never be able to move forward. There are 544 other people in Washington with more fault than Bush. That part always gets left out. I don’t blame the Colonel. Lot’s of us took a big hit in 08. I personally lost big. My mom lost more than I’m worth. The Colonel has way more to risk than I do..and that’s just it..we can’t count on things being solid investments anymore..everything is a risk. Does MF Global ring a bell? When the fat cats can fumble billions with no accountability, it’s time to fold em and walk from the table. On top of that, why would anyone be willing to pay any more tax to the clowns running the show, Rs and Ds alike, when they will just continue to run money around in circles while not stopping any spending, and still being enablers to the Obamaphone crowd.. It’s a big, wasteful. circular clusterfreak at the moment. I have myself down to one single IRA that was a rollover from before I owned my business, very small..some cash in a MM account, less cash in some bill paying accounts,. Everything else is cash or PMs in my possession. Shoot, I would like to cash out my life insurance and stick that in the mattress too. The kids can sell my properties and PMs and be just fine. I don’t want to play their game anymore. It’s just that simple. I’m finding the idea of just a modern version of homesteading to be the way to go. Why bother with all the other drama? It’s not getting us anywhere. Boil it all down and all you need is food, shelter, transportation, and stay ahead of the property tax man. The rest is all noise.

        • Anita….one saving grace that we have……there is no other currency to take the place of the dollar. The progressives point to the Euro…but the Euros are being cashed in and re-invested in the dollar. The smart money in Europe has figured this out as well. The Chinese currency (yuan) is the master of manipulation….the Chinese have figured this out…..they buy US treasuries and the interest we pay them is buying their new aircraft carrier. It is a matter of economics.

          We used to invest in companies like Hostess, GM, etc. Not anymore. We do not invest in unionized companies because it is not worth the risk any longer. We used to invest in the infrastructure because it was largely funded by tax free municipals. We have divested ourselves of that because of the new hidden taxes in the ACA, that specifically target the municipals. Those of you whom still have 401’s are going to get hammered….and that includes the middle class. The progressive movement is funded by the George Soros crowd…they have fallen victim to that and do not even see it…..that crowd has global aspirations that makes the James Bond movies look like realism. The progressives are victims themselves and do not recognize it. All this crap about greater good….is a ploy. But, they will find it out…..and I am sure that 20 years from now it will still be Bush…………………no one learned anything from the Carter years.

          Obama is getting a free ride on Yemen, Egypt, Libya, and soon to be Qatar, These are his wars but he gets a ride on them. The amount of money we are going to spend in Egypt will eclipse the Iran war by billions. The amount we have already given the Libyan rebels, in the name of democracy, has almost eclipsed Desert Storm. (first gulf war)…..but he gets a free ride. We, the US, are trying to install a dictator in Libya and one in Egypt. The Crown Prince in Qatar used to be pro American and is now pro Muslim Brotherhood…..why? Because they cannot count on us anymore. This does not particularly bother me…..I would personally like to see the ME crash but it bothers me because we are still throwing billions that way.

          There would have to be no tax increases at all…….if the money we are giving these regimes to sponsor their own dictators…was kept at home. But that is the progressive way. They jump up and down and yell and holler about intervention…….and then they do it two fold to anything a conservative has done…..billions in dollars…….BILLIONS….and that adds up to Trillions. Obama has outspent all US Presidents combined…and the progressives cheer. It will come home to roost. They get upset when those that can protect their money and call it greed. Well, greed works two ways…..entitlement mentality is the worse case of greed. But……………..good luck to you. No one has to do what we are doing…..that is an individual decision. Todd is wrong if he thinks that it is better to get something rather than nothing…..he does not understand the economic cycles….and we are in a cycle. Just protect yourself, keep cash handy and try to stay out of debt…you will be fine.

          • Colonel,

            There would have to be no tax increases at all…….if the money we are giving these regimes to sponsor their own dictators…was kept at home.

            Obama has outspent all US Presidents combined

            Show me some facts that prove these. I want links and numbers, because this is just the tip of the ice-berg of all the bull-shit in this post – the same crap you constantly post.

            • Todd-From your perspective what has Obama done or is he talking about doing that you feel will help our economy?
              Do you think not having a budget for 3 or 4 years matter? How do you feel about how he has managed foreign policy? What do you think about the situation in Benghazi ? I know what D13 thinks, I know you disagree, but I don’t have any idea what You think is good or bad about Obama and his policies.

              • VH,
                Do you remember the state of the economy 4 years ago? We were LOSING 1/2 million or more jobs per month. The stock market was in free fall. Banks were failing. Housing market was crashing. Credit markets were frozen. All of these – and many more – have turned around, despite Republicans doing everything possible to make things worse.

                The budget doesn’t matter. All the budget says is “this is what we plan to spend.” Congress has to pass individual bills to actually appropriate the money to be spent.

                Foreign policy has been a mixed bag. It always is. Benghazi was a tragedy that in hindsight should have been prevented – that Republicans are blowing out of proportion for political gain.

              • Yes, I remember. And I am no economist but personally I believe that small recovery, is more in spite of Obama than because of him. I will concede that most likely some money had to be spent to stop a financial collapse. And I understand that the hard times makes it necessary for the government to help people with some temporary additional welfare. But lets face it, if you put trillions of dollars into the economy there is gonna be a temporary boost. But then I look at all his other policies on regulations, energy, heath and it looks like he is trying his best to stop any actual growth-I see nothing he has done to cut spending-actually he seems to be using his we must raise taxes as an excuse not to cut anything but our ability to grow the economy through job creation. The printing of money needs to stop, the unsustainable spending has got to stop-but Obama’s policies seem to be framed in order to make that impossible.

                The budget in my mind does matter. It is Congress’s responsibility by law, so it is an attitude of lack of respect for their jobs and the people, for them to just decide they don’t have to make one. Second it is a guideline and Congress should have to tell the American people at least broadly what they are planning to spend and on what.

                Benghazi-I disagree with you on the blowing out of proportion but JAC has asked you about that-so I’ll wait to read your response to him.

              • VH,

                I believe that small recovery, is more in spite of Obama than because of him.

                I would expect nothing else.

                But lets face it, if you put trillions of dollars into the economy there is gonna be a temporary boost.

                Whoooaaa there VH, the OFFICIAL position from the Right is that the stimulus did nothing.

                But then I look at all his other policies on regulations, energy, heath and it looks like he is trying his best to stop any actual growth

                Yes, I know…

                I see nothing he has done to cut spending

                Yes, cutting government spending will send us into another recession (see “fiscal cliff”).

                actually he seems to be using his we must raise taxes as an excuse not to cut anything but our ability to grow the economy through job creation.

                Well, I guess we disagree on that.

                the unsustainable spending has got to stop-but Obama’s policies seem to be framed in order to make that impossible.

                Exactly what policies are you referring too?

                It is Congress’s responsibility by law, so it is an attitude of lack of respect for their jobs and the people, for them to just decide they don’t have to make one. Second it is a guideline and Congress should have to tell the American people at least broadly what they are planning to spend and on what.

                I’ll agree Congress should pass a budget. The Democrats in the Senate have been avoiding that because it’s a political hot-potato. But Paul Ryan’s budget from the House is not going to pass the Senate. I wonder if the House and Senate could actually pass a budget, based on the debt-limit mess in 2011 and the fiscal-cliff now.

            • Good morning, Todd……I know you disagree with me and our position and I know that you disagree with any of the companies or families that are making financial decisions to sit back and wait. That is ok. i would suggest that you go to the CBO and take a look at the spending currently underway and compare it to the Iran War I and II….look at Afghanistan and add that…..I would suggest that you look are the massive debt that has been accumulated and then apply that to the same decisions that you do on an every day life. If you are mounting your own debt and living off that…that is your choice. I have heard people make statements that without credit cards they would starve. That is a statement of mind and not survival.

              We, our family, understands debt. We understand interest…we understand economics very well. We understand spending and we are of the opinion that no one, governments included, can spend their way out of trouble and then pass it on. I would suggest that you take a hard look at the Carter years. That is a great history lesson and we feel that it is coming again but twice or three times at minimum. All the Carter years did was make the rich……twice as wealthy. The same will happen in the Obama years.

              Now, allow me to correct two things. First, I never said anything about stopping all economic activity. I said, that we, as a family, have made decisions to disinvest in the stock market, the infrastructure under tax free status since it will no longer be tax free. we feel these are sound economic decisions. We have cash and we will “invest” in options that do not fall under the ACA nor the new personal taxes. There are a plethora of avenues to approach to minimize our tax burden. But, we do earnestly not believe that something is better than nothing. Sometimes it is better to fold than to take risk……so we have chosen to not take risks we believe are not in our best interest Pretty simple really..you do the same in your everyday life.

              The second thing that I would like to correct is your interpretation of my military career. I wish that I could say that you paid my salary…..but you only paid a small portion of it. I was active duty for 10 years and reserve duty for 32 years. In my reserve duty to the State of Texas in the Texas National Guard, my salary was paid by Texas…not US funds. I only received US funds when activated by whatever President decided to activate the National Guard Units and then we were on US funds. This is why the Governor controls state militias and not the President…..until activation. Now, I was activated in Gulf One and Bosnia and then Afghanistan. I receive no retirement income from the government because I was on active duty ONLY for ten years. I will receive retirement income from the Texas Guard when I attain the age of 65. (Next October) I was 32 years in the reserves, i am eligible for the VA but carry my own supplemental insurance through USAA. So, very careful on the “dole” statement. The majority of those times that I was not over seas or on duty, I was in the family business and have my income from that.

              At any rate, I can draw social security at age 65 but choose to wait and I will continue to pay into the system until age 70, at which time, I will draw my social security. I tell you all of this ONLY for one reason…..I think that I am well qualified to deal with world situations as well as domestic. I have been in BOTH worlds very significantly. I do not know the answers but I do know realities and that is what I choose to deal in…reality. I am fortunate enough to have seen both sides and be involved in both sides. My education is such that I understand economics and I understand “voodoo” economics. I know how to research and so do you….I suggest you do your own research and I would suggest that you do not do it through Fox or CNN or MSNBC or Huffpo or Politifacts or Wiki…..each have their own agenda. There are plenty of other reliable areas of research….and you can go to the one area you believe in so much…go to government archives. Your answers are there, sir.

              I do wish you and yours a safe and happy holidays.

              • Colonel,

                I would suggest that you go to the CBO and take a look at the spending currently underway and compare it to the Iran War I and II….look at Afghanistan and add that…..I would suggest that you look are the massive debt that has been accumulated and then apply that to the same decisions that you do on an every day life.

                No, that’s your job. You need to back up your comments with facts.

                It is not my job to find the “facts” you based your comments on.

                So once again Colonel, show me some facts and links that back up these comments:

                There would have to be no tax increases at all…….if the money we are giving these regimes to sponsor their own dictators…was kept at home.

                Obama has outspent all US Presidents combined.

                We, our family, understands debt. We understand interest…we understand economics very well. We understand spending and we are of the opinion that no one, governments included, can spend their way out of trouble and then pass it on. I would suggest that you take a hard look at the Carter years.

                Since you understand debt so well, I would suggest you take a hard look at the history of US Debt. It was pretty steady and pretty low until Reagan. Reagan cut taxes promising that the increased economic activity would make up for the tax cuts. It never has. And yet Republicans and Conservatives cling to this failed and disproven policy.

                The only time the deficit has decreased significantly was when Clinton raised taxes.

                First, I never said anything about stopping all economic activity.

                You were pretty close to “no economic activity”.

                The second thing that I would like to correct is your interpretation of my military career. I wish that I could say that you paid my salary

                The point was you’re a government employee. State vs Federal isn’t a big deal.

                I suggest you do your own research and I would suggest that you do not do it through Fox or CNN or MSNBC or Huffpo or Politifacts or Wiki…..each have their own agenda.

                When you start providing your sources, we’ll see about “agendas”.

                Happy and safe holiday’s to you and your family too.

                PS – all your assumptions about me and progressives are wrong. Until you learn the truth, your conclusions will be consistently wrong too.

              • I’m choosing to LMAO at this post instead of getting all worked up about it. But I will say that I’d rather pay 100 colonels as opposed to spending billions on failed green energy. You know, because that is one of the fundamental purposes of our government, funding a national defense. Quesion Todd. Do you have faith that our financial situation is sound and stable for the short term, say the upcoming 5 years? Or you can answer in general terms about what your current portfolio looks like. Any investments, 401k, PMs? I’m just curious how you’re set up. I apologize ahead of time if you think that info is not for me to know.

              • LOL! I’m with you Anita – think it might be another drunk posting.

              • Anita,
                “Sound and stable” might be a little too strong right now, but I have faith that our financial situation is improving and will continue to improve for the short term. Third quarter growth was revised up today.

                http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-57556104/u.s-economy-growing-faster-than-forecast/

                It would be even better if they ended the political games with the debt ceiling and the fiscal cliff.

                We have a pretty broad portfolio of investments – stocks, 401ks, IRAs. I don’t remember exactly what – my wife does most of that!

        • Anita,

          if you still think it’s Bush’s fault then you”ll never be able to move forward

          I did not say and the article does not say it’s “Bush’s fault.” But the policies enacted during the Bush Administration (and many continued by Obama) by all 544 people have contributed greatly to our current economic situation. If you keep denying this, you’ll never be able to move forward.

          I don’t blame the Colonel.

          I don’t blame the Colonel for anything either, but he was not talking about limiting risk, he’s talking about stopping all economic activity. I don’t believe that.

          On top of that, why would anyone be willing to pay any more tax to the clowns running the show, Rs and Ds alike

          Maybe because his taxes and your taxes and my taxes have paid his salary for his entire career.
          He’s been on the government dole his entire life.
          He’s the problem he complains about.

          still being enablers to the Obamaphone crowd

          And you still think this is our problem…sad.

          I have myself down to one single IRA that was a rollover from before I owned my business, very small..some cash in a MM account, less cash in some bill paying accounts,. Everything else is cash or PMs in my possession.

          So you’ve taken the right-wing scare-tactics to heart. How’s that working out?

          I’m finding the idea of just a modern version of homesteading to be the way to go.

          You can join G-man! Have fun!

          I actually agree with simplifying life, etc. Just not for the same reasons.

      • Todd

        I do not know why anybody pretends that it was anything other than the real estate shell game that brought this economy down. If, across the board, every single home in America took a 25% hit in value, then the ripples passing through the society permeate, to this day, every aspect of society . Ask Jamie Gorlick, currently representing BP, former Deputy Attorney General of the United States under Bill Clinton, former Vice Chairman of Fannie Mae who “earned” over $26,000,000 during her tenure at Fannie Mae by apparently keeping up the fiction that “the sky was not falling”. Ask Christopher Dodd, (D) Conn. or Barney Frank (D) Mass. who gave us Dodd/Frank to protect us from the banks after they got theirs playing footsie with the financial services industry via Countrywide and were members of the exclusive “friends of Angelo” VIP club at Countrywide.

        Japan’s real estate market melted a decade before ours did. They have not even begun a recovery yet and I expect they won’t any time soon. The damage was too great. We are following in their footsteps and there is no quick fix possible.

        Bush was and as far as I am concerned still is a schmuck. His “hands off management” style, allowing Rove, Cheny and Rumsfeld to run wild gave us, if nothing else Obama through the Anybody but Bush (or someone like him) vote. But the one and only thing he and his administration did see coming was the real estate bubble and melt down. Those of us worker bees in the industry, not the high rollers, saw a replay of ’89-’91 coming but I am ashamed to say, never imagined that the endemic fraud was as great as it actually was nor that the Real Estate/Banking/Legal complex had so successfully infiltrated the government at all levels.

        Two wars, tax cuts? We have done that before and survived, hell, we even survived the simultaneous wars on Vietnam and Poverty! Republican brinksmanship? Really? when the brinkmanship is supposedly and I emphasize supposedly over tax increases for the rich which won’t even cover the debt service on current borrowing for a decent length of time. Your “expert” Kuttner is following in that fine old tradition of mis-direction. It will probably work. The reason the Wizard of Oz got caught when Toto pulled back the curtain in the Great Hall was because, the wizard was probably a closet Republican, unable to convince anyone of anything no matter how true.

    • Nope….no buttons to push. The Repubs don’t get it.

      • Little more specifics would be appreciated :) do you disagree with everything he said?

        • Cannot say that I disagreed with him at all…….the RHINOS that have been around for ages do not get it. The American people do not get it….that is why I am in favor of the fiscal cliff. Let it happen. It will not be the Repubs fault and it will not be the Dems fault,,,,,it will be the gridlock of lifetime politicians. The people that voted this time have no concept of what they voted for….the good people stayed home and did not vote. The masses that voted Obama did not give a mandate….they voted for free stuff and they voted for whom they were told to vote for…..Let me repeat that…..THEY VOTED FOR WHOM THEY WERE TOLD TO VOTE FOR……..well, they got him….so….let the fiscal cliff happen. Let this man in the White House do everything he wants…..it will be the end of freedom and the end of individualism as we know it for awhile……but the conservatives got what they asked for……nothing. So, yes, I agree with him. Specific enough?

  55. The asshole continues to argue his lost point … consistent, yes; asshole, yes … does he take things out of context (always), yes!

    Which is why he’s such an ASSHOLE …:)

  56. Bottom Line says:

  57. Buona serra, asshole …:)

    Swords would mean you’d have to be in the same space as me … something tells me you don’t show up. :)

  58. BF quoting Stella! How cool is that. Or is it desperate?

    All those neat Lincoln quotations he has, yet the same guy managed to pass the 13th amendment. I guess it couldn’t be he was a politician when saying what those standing in front of them wanted to hear … unless, of course, he was talking about religion.

    BF, you make a BIGGER AND BIGGER ASSHOLE OF YOURSELF WITH EACH NEW POST.

    But you always, ALWAYS, make me smile …:)

    • Yep, you are amazingly …. wrong, as usual.

      You glorify some man who – you are astounded at his political acumen to have ended slavery, yet, you do not wonder why ever other industrialized nation managed to do the same thing without slaughtering 700,000 other their own people to do it? Where was this great political master?

      And, as usual, you get your facts backwards.
      Lincoln did not manage to pass the 13th Amendment, unless you believe in ghosts.
      He died in Aug 1865, and the amendment was passed 5 months later, on December 18, 1865.

      If you are thinking about the Emancipation Proclamation, issued in 1863 – that was merely a crass political move to try to rise up the blacks in the Southern States to rebel against their masters at a time when the North was losing the war. Lincoln never believed in black freedom – he was trying to use their naivety as a war weapon.

      • Flag, do not forget to mention that the Proclamation only affected the states in secession. Places like Maryland were exempted. Slavery ended nationwide only after the war concluded except in the Indian territories where the tribes kept slaves well into the 1870’s I believe. History is a fascinating thing all the little oddball stuff that when examined calls into question things you might have believed all your life.

      • Hey, asshole … http://www.sethkaller.com/freedomdocuments/13th-amendment/

        I guess he had nothing to do with it … because was busy being a racist, right?

        And the question returns. Does BF EVER tire of being an absolute asshole?

        The answer: Nope, not ever.

        • Dumdum,

          You said he passed it – he didn’t.

          Do you ever tire of making up lies and stories?

          Colonization After Emancipation: Lincoln and the Movement for Black Resettlement
          History has long acknowledged that President Abraham Lincoln, the Great Emancipator, had considered other approaches to rectifying the problem of slavery during his administration. Prior to Emancipation, Lincoln was a proponent of colonization: the idea of sending African American slaves to another land to live as free people. Lincoln supported resettlement schemes in Panama and Haiti early in his presidency and openly advocated the idea through the fall of 1862. But the bigoted, flawed concept of colonization never became a permanent fixture of U.S. policy, and by the time Lincoln had signed the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, the word “colonization” had disappeared from his public lexicon. As such, history remembers Lincoln as having abandoned his support of colonization when he signed the proclamation. Documents exist, however, that tell another story.

    • Oh yeah, don’t forget the Proclamation – so championed as ending slavery – didn’t free a single slave; it only applied to Confederate territory and specifically exempted areas of the U.S. such as the entire state of West Virginia where the U.S. Army was in control at the time.

  59. :) (smile) asshole … smile :)

  60. Just A Citizen says:

    Tragically, Lincoln did not live to see the amendment become law. He had, by the end of his life, evolved toward a new understanding of the status of black Americans. He now supported giving the vote to literate black men and to black veterans, as he made clear in a speech from a White House balcony on April 11, 1865. On hearing it, John Wilkes Booth angrily told a companion, “That means nigger citizenship. Now, by God, I’ll put him through. That is the last speech he will ever make” (McPherson, 852).

    On April 14, 1865, when Arkansas became the 21st state to adopt the 13th amendment, only six more states were needed for ratification. That evening, Lincoln was fatally shot by Booth at Ford’s Theatre. Lincoln died the next morning. With Georgia’s ratification on December 6, 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment became part of the Constitution.

    • evolved toward a new understanding of the status of black Americans

      There is absolutely nothing to support this assertion.

      In his private notes, letters, conversations and statements – to the day he died – he had no want for Blacks. To the last days, he was earning support for law to arrest them and deport them all back to Africa.

      It is the myth of Lincoln, repeated over and over, that echos in the modern history account of him.

  61. Just A Citizen says:

    Charlie

    What exactly was the nature of your question regarding ever being “Democrats”, re the Lincoln movie?

    I don’t understand what it is you are asking?

    • JAC, I was just being a wiseass (stirring the pot). BF took the bait, swallowed the hook, as usual.

      He did okay, that Lincoln, fella, for being such an avoid “racist” ….

  62. Having fun with both you guys, I submit for your approval an interesting “take” on Abraham Lincoln. Most interesting, and I think nailing both your asses is when, where and who it comes from.

    Enjoy!

    Abraham Lincoln - A Big, Inconsistent, Brave Man - July, 1922

    • Just A Citizen says:

      SK

      From whom did it come?

      • This Flikr site is dedicated to clips from Black Newspapers during the teens, twenties and thirties. I had the exact paper once but seem to have misplaced the file or, it went up in electronic smoke when the computer crashed twice last year. What a great take though. It is Abe Lincoln, warts and all but shows him for the extraordinary human being he really was. Should make, if I am correct, neither Flag nor Charlie happy. This is a good thing.

    • Stephen, why are you buying into BF’s assessment of what I believe? Seriously, dude, the guy not only “assumes” he knows everything on the planet, he “assume” he knows what everyone else thinks.

      I am a Lincoln fan, make no mistake. I understand what he was confronted with and accept some of his decisions as a man in his position might have felt he had to deal with protests, the war, etc. I don’t idolize him. I think he was one of the best, if not the best, President. I’m also a Truman fan (so BF can now go nuts over his decision to use the bomb), but I’m a Truman fan (compared to other Presidents) because of his decision to nationalize the steel mills during a war. Yes, it was overturned, but I like the fact he went in that direction (obviously, I like it).

      BF uses wiki for his point. I do the same (not even contesting his insanity) but somehow his pointing to Lincoln as a politician is more authoritative (to prove his point)? Really? Me thinks yous need to keep from accepting the asshole’s arguments already. He’s so full of shit, it stinks all the way here in NJ …:)

      • I go with the assessment of the editorial in the Black newspaper back in 1922. A complex man to say the least.

        Abraham Lincoln - A Big, Inconsistent, Brave Man - July, 1922

        • He was a tyrant, a liar, a political manipulator who said what ever needed to be said and did what ever needed to do to seize total megalomaniacal power for himself.

          Nothing he did strayed from this single minded goal.

          The roots of the Great Lie which undermines the Nation can find its seeding at his feet.

      • Contrary to your limited capability, I know more than my name.

        You are a Lincoln fan – it symbolizes everything you seek – naked violent power over others. And you have no issues repeating the lies that cover such violent men.

        Your wiki is devoid of fact – it is repetition of the same baseless statements repeated. Repetition of assertions does not make them fact.

        Present his notes, letters, documents that he wrote as I did. You can’t because he didn’t do anything as you pretend.

        His guiding action – political power – and if meant to say “this” at this time, he did. And if it meant to do the opposite, he did. He did whatever thing, at the time, was necessary to expand his power – and he did it without hesitation nor conscience.

        • And good morning to you too asshole!

          it’s good to see you remain the biggest asshole I’ve ever come across in my LIFE. That’s saying a lot, BF. Be proud. Wear it on your sleave. Right, you already do that.

          If you knew half of what you assume to know, you’d be intelligent. Right now, you’re a buffoon. And everybody I send here to take a look-see (mostly people like me, those who “seek naked violent power over others” (what a dick), laugh their asses off at just about every single comment of yours … and they say to me: “Why even go there? What’s the point?” Valid as that is, asshole, I just love pointing to your unrelenting hubris (because it exposes you daily for the asshole you really are). Now, you have a nice day! :)

          • Why you waste your time with vomit from the mouth?

            You have no fact?
            You live only by making up stories that fit your fantasy world-view?

            You are psychopathic – live by lying, promote lies, and justify lying to so you can keep lying.

            Sad, sir.

            • Oh, christ, BF … find some new material already.

              “vomit from the mouth”

              How clever

              for a buffooon …. AND an asshole!
              :) Smile, ralphie-boy!

              • Can we stop with the asshole thing. You said it the first time and I understood you were frustrated. The next 50 times are just annoying. If you don’t want to engage him based on the relevant facts of whatever subject started this discussion, then ignore him. Spending this much time contributing nothing to the conversation other than name calling is beneath you Chaz. You are smarter than that and better than that. BF gets under everyone’s skin now and then. But name calling won’t win you any points. When he used to annoy me I would engage the discussion. If I felt it got to the point that we were no longer having a discussion that I thought was productive, I said so and made it clear that I was done discussing that issue for now. We were able to walk away disagreeing but not devolving into silly behavior. It just isn’t productive.

                EVERY opponent to your position has things you can learn from when you open your mind BEFORE you open your mouth. Start from the position of “I am wrong,” and work from there. Judge your position against logical reasoning and critical thinking paths instead of starting at the false point of “Everyone else is wrong.”

                I don’t remember who first said these things to me, but I have learned tons over the years by following this sage advice.

                The reality is that when you engage a number of people, you will be wrong more often than you are right. Realizing that this is a fact and moving forward trying to identify which category each engagement falls in for you is the path to true enlightenment. The only people who are never wrong are fools and tyrants. You know which you are by assessing the amount of power you possess.

                Chalk that one up to sage Buddhist who whispers in my ear…

  63. There must be some jokes about the anarchist and the communist. Or maybe we can come up with some :) Really when you think about it, we shouldn’t expect anything but fireworks.

  64. Bottom Line says:

  65. New CBO estimates out today…….the new EPA regulations that go into effect in 2013 adds 53 cents to a gallon of gasoline. Add that to your new tax bill.

    • New CBO estimates out yesterday…….Unemployment Benefits Extension Would Create 300,000 Jobs

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I’m calling Bull Shit on their “estimate”.

        You can’t CREATE something new by simply MAINTAINING something that already exists.

  66. Why are the Republicans allowing themselves to get pigeon holed on the Benghazi debacle ? Personally, I think the administration lied-but concentrating on Rice, while I do think it should be brought up, is in my opinion the least important issue. Many questions need to be answered about the whole situation. But it seems Rice coming out and making some comments is the only thing really being discussed.

    • Just listen to McCain and the gang, all the righteous indignation they can muster for the TV cameras. Last night on O’Reilly, McCain refused to use the “liar” word! This is all BS, all crap, they want their 15 minutes on the news and then they want it to all go away. If they keep it up, there are certain very important cocktail parties they probably won’t get invited to over the Holiday and they miss out on a few rounds of golf at St. Andrews. .

      These guys don’t have what it takes to take anyone down. Lord how I miss Goldwater.

      • Between their backing off just because some “asses” throw out the word racist or sexist and their letting the democrats narrow the conversation for their benefit. I just want to throw them to the curb. Get some backbone or just shut up. Their weakness just hurts us.

        • November 23, 2012 12:00 A.M.
          The GOP and Racism, Yet Again
          Expect the cries to get louder.

          By Jonah Goldberg

          If the GOP wants to win more black votes, it will need to get a lot more “racist.”

          The scare quotes are necessary because I don’t think the Republican party is racist now (and, historically, the GOP has a lot less to answer for than the Democratic party does). But that hasn’t stopped a lot of people from slandering Republicans as racist for one reason or another. Right now, many in Washington — particularly the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus — insist that Republican attacks on U.N. ambassador Susan Rice are racist and, yawn, sexist. The basis for this claim is that some Republicans are calling Rice unfit for the soon-to-be-vacated job of secretary of state. More specifically, they’re cross with Rice for what they contend to be her dishonest and incompetent handling of the Benghazi scandal.

          And, because Rice is a black woman, well, bla, bla, bla. Racism! Sexism!

          Advertisement
          Never mind that Republicans haven’t had a white secretary of state since Lawrence Eagleburger concluded his term two decades ago. Never mind that Republicans appointed the first black secretary of state ever (Colin Powell) and the first black female secretary of state ever (Condoleezza Rice, arguably the star of the GOP convention in August). Also, never mind that Rice’s handling of Benghazi — and several other matters — can quite defensibly be dubbed incompetent.

          That doesn’t stop Democrats or liberal pundits from crying racism.

          Just consider some recent examples from over the summer. When Mitt Romney visited Michigan, he joked about not needing a birth certificate to prove he was from there. Not very funny? Okay, sure. Poor taste? Eh, maybe, I guess. “The basest and the most despicable bigotry we might be able to imagine”? Errr, no. And yet that’s what one respected “expert” on race, Michael Eric Dyson, called it on MSNBC. Rather than show some skepticism at the claim, MSNBC host Alex Wagner agreed that Romney was “scraping the very bottom of this sort of racist other-ist narrative.”

          At the GOP convention, MSNBC host Chris Matthews explained that “Chicago” was a racially loaded code word. Fellow host Lawrence O’Donnell said Republican-convention speakers were reaching “for every single possible racial double entendre they can find.” His sole proof? Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell made a joke about Obama playing a lot of golf.

          Now, the cynical motivations behind this relentless drone of slander and stupidity are too numerous to count. Such moral bullying makes white liberals feel better about themselves. It scares moderates and centrists away from the Republican party, and it no doubt helps dissuade wavering blacks from even thinking about giving the GOP an honest look. Obviously, it helps boost black-voter intensity on Election Day. It also does wonders to stifle journalists terrified of having their racial bona fides questioned in any way. And it helps a feckless left-wing black political class explain away its own failures. Racial slander is like duct tape: There’s no limit to what you can do with it.

          It’s worth pointing out that such slander isn’t used to get blacks to vote Democratic in the first place. They already do that.

          But can you imagine how much worse it will get if Republicans actually do reach out to the black community (as they should)? One of the points of racial slander is to signal that only liberal policies are guaranteed to be non-racist (even when such policies were forged with racist intent, like the Davis-Bacon Act). This is why the Congressional Black Caucus insists on calling itself the “conscience of the Congress.”

          That’s why policies like school choice are routinely denounced as racist, even though they are largely aimed at improving the lives of inner-city blacks trapped in bad schools. Teachers’ unions don’t like school choice, ergo it’s racist.

          Any serious attempt by the GOP to win black votes won’t involve Republicans copycatting liberal policies. It will require going over the heads of the black and white liberal slanderers to offer a sincere alternative to failed liberal policies on schools, poverty, crime, etc. The more effective that effort, the more the GOP will be called racist.

          When Romney, whose father marched with Martin Luther King Jr., spoke to the NAACP, Michael Tomasky of the Daily Beast dubbed him a “race-mongering pyromaniac,” primarily for using the term “Obamacare” — a term Barack Obama used himself.

          Just imagine the desperate, pathetic attacks in store for a more effective Republican.

          http://www.nationalreview.com/author/56454/latest

          It’s about time we give the democrats and their baseless racist claims the “Respect they Deserve” Ignore them!!!!!! Or just follow the democrats modus agendi and tell them to stick it were the sun don’t shine!!

  67. Just A Citizen says:

    Funny how so many decisions had to be made AFTER November 6th.

    Spotted Owl is BAAAAAAAAAACK.

    http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2012/11/obama_administration_increases.html

    • Bottom Line says:

    • Howdy JAC….I once saw a three star general lose his command over the spotted owl (or something similar, I think it was the owl). This occurred at Fort Hood, Texas. This critter had nesting areas in the impact zone of artillery and tank gun ranges. It also had nesting areas in some of the thickly covered training areas for infantry and helicopter zones. The nesting time was also during the National Guard training time in the late spring and early summer. Now, picture this……40,000 soldiers at Fort Hood and 32,000 National Guard troops, all utilizing the same training grounds and firing ranges. This owl was in the area for 5 months. The general opined that it is more important to train our troops for defense than to worry about some damn bird that could go elsewhere. He lost. This was during the Clinton Administration and he was fired for not observing a 5 month moratorium over a bird stupid enough to haveits nesting areas in the firing zones of an army fort that had been there since before WWII….not to mention that the same birds have been there and seemed to be just fine. Crazy.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        d13

        Yes, in fact it was crazy as are most things dealing with “endangered species”. And of course in those days the Algorians were running the show. Science was subject to their whim on a daily basis.

        For your future reference, that would have been the “Mexican Spotted Owl”. A different variety than the one in the Northwest.

  68. In surprise move, Intrade shuts down for US traders
    5:51 PM 11/26/2012

    Intrade, the futures trading website, will no longer be available to residents of the United States as a result of “legal and regulatory pressures,” the Dublin, Ireland-based site announced Monday.

    The website allows people to buy and sell shares in possible outcomes. For example, before Election Day, users could buy shares that President Barack Obama would be re-elected. Those who did were paid out for those shares when Obama defeated Mitt Romney. Users who held shares in Romney becoming president lost money on those shares.

    “We are sorry to announce that due to legal and regulatory pressures, Intrade can no longer allow US residents to participate in our real-money prediction markets,” Intrade said in a Monday release.

    U.S. users must quickly close their accounts and settle their bets, the site said.

    “We strongly urge you to begin this process immediately,” the release added. Users have until Dec. 23 to “close out open predictions.”

    If users do not do so before the deadline, “Intrade will close out your predictions for you at what we consider to be fair market value as of the daily session close of December 23, 2012.”

    “Fair market value will be determined using current and historical price information, including daily close prices and recent trades. Values will be set at the absolute discretion of Intrade and will not be open for review, discussion or argument – our determination of fair market value is final,” the release said.

    Users then have until Dec. 31 to withdraw all of their funds from their Intrade account. Intrade is waiving the fee normally charged for a withdrawal, as well as the monthly fee for December. (RELATED: Could Intrade be manipulated to swing elections?)

    “We understand this announcement may come as a surprise and a disappointment, and we apologize for the short notice and haste required to deal with this,” the release concludes. “We would like to sincerely thank all US customers for their custom, support and loyalty over the years.”

    The decision comes the same day that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission sued Intrade’s owner, alleging that the website “allowed unauthorized trading by U.S. customers,” Reuters reported.

    The suit claims that Intrade allows U.S.-based traders to buy shares in subjects that are banned by the CFTC, and that Intrade was notified of the alleged violations in March, but “has failed to cure, or attempt to cure, its violations.”

    The reaction on Intrade’s forum was one of surprise and irritation. Posters expressed shock at the suddenness of the site’s decision, while others lamented the difficulties of closing their accounts.

    “[I] don’t even know how to begin trying to unload some large positions, might be better off taking whatever gains and losses intrade gives on the 23rd,” posted WashingtonTrader.

    “Yeah it will be impossible for me to unwind my Oscar bets right now. Impossible,” responded another user called Domer. “And how will they expire the contracts if one party is a US member and the other is not?”

    Nate Silver, who runs the FiveThirtyEight blog at the New York Times and often cites Intrade in his predictions and analyses, tweeted earlier on Monday, before Intrade announced it would close down: “Out of all things the CFTC could be doing to protect consumers and investors, it chooses to sue Intrade?!?”

    Silver has not tweeted since the site announced its decision, but one Intrade user suggested he should come to the website’s rescue.

    “Ask Nate Silver for lobbying help,” suggested a poster called Ingen Angiven in Intrade’s forum.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/26/in-surprise-move-intrade-shuts-down-for-us-traders/#ixzz2DTLJBmXB

    • Commodities regulator sues Intrade over trading in U.S.

      WASHINGTON | Mon Nov 26, 2012 12:39pm EST

      (Reuters) – The Commodity Futures Trading Commission on Monday sued the owner of the prediction market and betting website Intrade, alleging that the company allowed unauthorized trading by U.S. customers.

      The civil suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., said Intrade offered trading to U.S. customers on the future prices of commodities such as gold and crude oil despite a 2005 agreement not to offer trades on those and other items.

      Intrade, based in Dublin, Ireland, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

      The electronic exchange offers a wide array of subjects to bet on, such as which film will win the Academy Award for Best Picture or whether Syria President Bashar al-Assad will remain in power into 2013.

      Intrade is not supposed to accept or execute orders from U.S. customers on subjects that fall within the CFTC’s ban on trading options off-exchange, but it did so from September 2007 through June 2012, the suit said.

      The suit further alleged that the company misled the CFTC by submitting a form each year certifying that it limited trades to eligible participants when it did not.

      The commission notified Intrade’s parent company, Trade Exchange Network Ltd, of alleged violations of their 2005 agreement in March, but the company “has failed to cure, or attempt to cure, its violations,” the suit said.

      The suit asks a federal judge to find Intrade in violation of federal commodities law, issue an injunction against any illegal conduct and fine the company.

      http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/26/us-cftc-intrade-idUSBRE8AP0P220121126

      Why is making trades on the possible future prices of commodities like gold illegal?

  69. Just A Citizen says:

    Sickly little girl gets reaction from Obama Voters after telling them what Obama Care will REALLY do for them.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/ghost-elevator-prank-brazil-tv-show_n_2197560.html

    Bwahahahahaahaa

    • JAC…..you should know better than go to Huffpost…unless you are doing it for amusement.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        d13

        I had seen the video earlier in the day and HP was the first source I could find.

        The headline came to mind the minute I saw it. :wink:

        Best to Texas this find morning.

        P.S. I admit I do get a kick out of stirring things up a bit in “their” world.

    • Okay I have to say this prank was so out of line, could have been actually dangerous to the ghost child and if someone had done this to me, after I stopped shaking if I didn’t have a heart attack- I would have resorted to physical harm on somebody. But with all that -I laughed so hard watching it, it actually hurt :)

      • Actually, I still laugh every time I think about the first time that child screamed at the top of her lungs and the woman screamed with her.

  70. Just A Citizen says:

    Todd

    Re: ” Benghazi was a tragedy that in hindsight should have been prevented – that Republicans are blowing out of proportion for political gain.”

    How do you personally determine when they are using an event for political gain as opposed to doing their job of oversight?

    And of course, are we to ignore the BS from the white house just because it might make R’s look good or at least the Pres. look bad?

    Seems to me we are seeing a classic double standard being played out here.

    The D’s for covering the White House’s trail after having excoriated the Bush Administration officials for their failures.

    And the R’s for going after Rice while having covered the Bush White House trail during their failures.

    However, the R’s duplicity in what happened during the Bush years does not negate what is happening now or the fact that the White House’s handling of this whole thing stinks to high heaven.

    • JAC,

      How do you personally determine when they are using an event for political gain as opposed to doing their job of oversight?

      The preponderance of the evidence. For 4 years the Republicans have been against everything and anything “Obama.”

      And of course, are we to ignore the BS from the white house just because it might make R’s look good or at least the Pres. look bad?

      Of Course! Haven’t you been paying attention???

      Seems to me we are seeing a classic double standard being played out here.

      I disagree. The Republicans attitude toward Obama is exponentially worse than the Democrats attitude toward Bush.

      However, the R’s duplicity in what happened during the Bush years does not negate what is happening now or the fact that the White House’s handling of this whole thing stinks to high heaven.

      I agree the “White House’s handling of this whole thing stinks to high heaven.” But a big part of that is driven by the Republicans attacks from the start.

  71. Just A Citizen says:

    North American Union anyone, anyone………………???

    Hey Colonel…..there are a couple nuggets in this one for you as well. Should make you laugh, or perhaps choke on your Pepper.

    http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/27/politics/mexico-president-us-visit/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

    • LOL…you gotta love his (Pena’s) comment of ” accumulated neglect”…..you also have to love the opinion of a President over a country that has no middle calls………claiming that it should be the focal point of the United States to provide the jobs for Mexico as opposed for Mexico to change its policies to build its own country……it boggles the mind.

  72. @USW: Can we stop with the asshole thing. You said it the first time and I understood you were frustrated.

    Nope. The asshole doesn’t get to take potshots without a response, not from me. Frustrating would be attempting to engage him. I don’t. I hope (can only hope) you’re second set of comments were directed at the all knowing one and not me. But you never do that, do you? Not that I’m aware of.

    So, no. When an asshole insists on being one, I’ll point that out. Sort of like his stated desire to confront ‘evil’ when he comes across it (me).

    • But you never do that, do you? Not that I’m aware of.

      Then you are simply unaware of the history between BF and I. He and I used to have knock down, drag outs here at SUFA on an almost daily basis.

      As for who my comments were for…. both of you and everyone else. They are wise statements to work from. They have worked for me. Should he heed them? Absolutely. Should you? Absolutely.

      • I already do, as you’re well aware. How many times does somebody (even from the left) have to state they don’t have all the answers? Or do you just ignore those statements. For instance, where up above, did I state “I know what Lincoln was thinking”?

        Having a knock down, drag out with BF is akin to batting one’s head against the wall (see Mathius last debate with BF). I’ve done with that for a while now. I’ll only address those I respect. For him, sorry, there’s none. If he (or anyone else here) feels the same for me, God bless them (coming from atheist, of course) … I don’t care how much respect he gets in here (a very conservative site), he’s a single-minded, full of himself, asshole. And, of course, a coward.

    • Pot shots? Nothing but more Charlie nonsense.

      I don’t take pot shots – wild loose aim at “Everything” you say – I target your ignorant stupidity and irrational behavior.

      You’re the fool who – instead of arguing your point – responds like a spanked child. I know you have serious issues trying to think clearly and rationally – it is not your nature to think with reason.

      But I don’t debate you about football – I don’t know much about the game strategy to know a good team from a bad, other than the score – you seem to, baseball too – so, I don’t engage you there, do I?

      If I was to start spouting about book writing and publishing, you’d probably call me on all the stupid stuff I’d say about that – why? Because YOU KNOW about book writing and publishing and earned a buck or two from it – so your knowledge would probably be a hellva lot more accurate then mine, who has done none of that.

      Your problem is you are out of your league in most areas of dialogue on this board. You are politically immature, economic illiterate and a lot of the time devoid of factual knowledge. So you say a lot of stupid stuff.

      But unlike how I’d react to you telling me about being an author – you resort to childish blubbering.

      • Actually, BF, I’d never call you stupid for not knowing something (whatever it might be) about book publishing (or anything else). When people don’t agree with your assumptions (and that’s all they ever boil down to), you call them names. And safely from wherever you’re hiding. That’s why you’re a coward first and an asshole second. :)

        And i’ve checked some of your facts, asshole … and they’re flimsy to say the least. Lincoln was a racist? Let me add “stupid” in front of asshole today …
        :)

        • Actually, BF, I’d never call you stupid for not knowing something (whatever it might be) about book publishing (or anything else). When people don’t agree with your assumptions (and that’s all they ever boil down to), you call them names. And safely from wherever you’re hiding. That’s why you’re a coward first and an asshole second. :)

          And Charlie, I never call you stupid for you not knowing something either. Ignorance is no sin.

          I call you stupid when you hold on to ignorance as if it was a hero’s medal and when you refuse to budge from your irrational positions.

          When you are so exposed, the best you do is schoolboy insults.

          Lincoln was a racist, but there ya go – you hold to your ignorance like a badge of honor.
          And that is just stupid.

          • You’re a fool, dum-dum …:) And a blowhard, but you’re scaling down the insults (good boy).

            I don’t think you or anyone else knows what was truly in the man’s heart regarding racism. You can’t cherry pick a political speech and claim it’s anything more than a political speech (being said to those he wants to influence standing in front of him (or anybody). That is the nature of politicians and politics in general. To claim he was a racist is a pretty big assumption (i.e., you know what he was, as opposed to what he did, etc.). I don’t doubt the man wasn’t a humanitarian in the purest sense of the word, but I feel pretty safe in assuming he wasn’t a racist (and that based on my readings of him–not cherry picking anything). Right now I’m reading DKGoodwins latest on the fight for the 13th amendment. Yes, she’s a liberal and is invested in American history/propaganda, but to assume your sources don’t have their own agenda is kind of silly, don’t you think? Are your sources the only pure source? Were they inside Lincoln’s mind?

            And to go one further and assume he was an intentional usurper of power, rather than “Maybe” doing what he thought needed to be done is more than reaching. Yes, to any anarchist anyone assuming such power may be viewed as a megolomaniac, but dealing with the real world is where he was/what I’m looking at; not some ideological fantasy you assume can be in place (it can’t).

            That’s my two cents for this evening … I have stupid books to write … stupid books to read … stupid music to listen to … and so on.

            • You continue to post nonsense, Charlie.

              You are the one cherry picking. You ignore his letters, his notes, the conversation with others — he hated blacks, and made no misstatement that he claimed them inferior.

              Assume he usurped power?!@?

              No assumption, Charlie – that thing you ignore with a passion … it’s FACT.

              He raised troops without the approval of Congress and expending funds without appropriation.

              He suspended the writ of habeas corpus and interfered with due process, imprisoning thousands of citizens without charge or trial, and closed the Supreme court by military force.

              He waged a war against women and children and civilian property as the matter of policy.

              He was as evil as Hitler or Stalin, Charlie.

              But because he is American, you make him your hero.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                As I said a while back. There is a reason that Obama idolizes Lincoln, and I think it goes beyond freeing the slaves.

                I believe an objective look at HOW Lincoln governed will give us insight into HOW Obama governs.

              • And you, moron, continue to take facts out of context (because you’re a moron).

                See, USW? I know you don’t, but what’s the point? BF knows all (out of context or not–he knows the intent of every individual whose ever walked the planet).

                “Hated blacks” … “Hated” … seems strange that he’d let so many white men die for their cause, but you know best, BF.

                Seriously, at times I wonder just how deranged your need for this site is.

                And JAC: nice transition. If Obama liked Lincoln, Obama must be … what? That was the shit-stirring little poke I took at your guys once having been democrats (in Lincoln’s day). Unbelievable. Sometimes I think some of you here are just so full of yourselves, you’re funny. Other times I think you’re nuts. This kind of stuff veers toward the latter.

                So my question is: And BF’s last assumption aside (that because he (Lincoln) is American, I make him my hero–I’m the least nationalistic of all you lunatics, so that’s just as uninformed as most of his proclamations), but … if all this progressive government agenda is so disheartening, why not do what YOUR heros did and pull up stakes and find a new land to conquer? It’s not like you have a prayer of winning your non-government fantasy here. Why not take off and put all your little brains together and form the perfect society? Then we can see how a “truly free market” really works. You can enlighten the entire planet. You can be the Gods you trust yourself to be.

                I know, I know … you’re here to defend it to the death … it’s your country you want back, etc., etc. … reminds me of a moronic statement, something akin to: “because he (it’s) America(n) …

                I’m still reading away at the undoubtedly propaganda laced Doris Kearns Goodwin book (which can’t possibly be accurate because she is a democrat, parasite, commi, etc., etc.), but so far finding nothing that validates the Lincoln “hated blacks” statement. I fear those were strong words from the mind of a small thinking man (or woman, because we really don’t know, do we?)

              • “seems strange that he’d let so many white men die for their cause”

                Very few from the north died for a black mans cause, they died for the outright takeover of states by the Federal Government and political spin of the facts. Very few men from the south died to keep the black man in slavery, they died defending their homes from the invader. As fought by the north, the Civil War began the period of total war not only on the military but citizens living in the south on a scale not seen since the middle ages.

  73. As to winning points … do you really think that’s what I’m attempting here, USW? There’s no point to be made here … rarely at best. And with him? Good luck with that.

  74. Just A Citizen says:

    A little change of pace this morning. I found this quite interesting, as our family is beginning to deal with some of these issues.

    “The holiday season usually means more quality time with the in-laws, and according to recent research, it’s imperative that everyone get along.

    A 26-year longitudinal study found that when a husband reported having a close relationship with his wife’s parents, the couple’s risk of divorce decreased by 20 percent. Conversely, when a wife reported having a close relationship with her husband’s parents, the couple’s risk of divorce increased by 20 percent.

    Terri Orbuch, psychologist and research professor at the University of Michigan, began the study in 1986 with 373 couples in their first year of marriage, and followed up with them over time. She told the Wall Street Journal that she believes the findings are due to the different ways husbands and wives approach their relationships with their in-laws.

    “Women value a close relationship with their in-laws but may ultimately view them as meddling, while men are more interested in providing for their families, and take their in-laws’ actions less personally,” Orbuch said. “Because relationships are so important to women, their identity as a wife and mother is central to their being. They interpret what their in-laws say and do as interference into their identity as a spouse and parent.”

    Wives also pay close attention to their own parents’ relationships with their husbands. In the video above, Wall Street Journal columnist Elizabeth Bernstein suggests that when a husband makes an effort to get along with his wife’s parents, his wife feels taken care of, too.

    “He has forged a relationship with them, and that reads to his wife as if, boy, he cares about me if he’s going to bother with my parents. If he’s going to take care of my parents, he’s going to get to know my parents, [then] he really cares about me,” Bernstein said.

    Orbuch advises parents of sons to be mindful of behavior their daughter-in-law may interpret as “meddling,” while parents of daughters should be open to bonding with their sons-in-law. Wives should maintain boundaries with their in-laws, and husbands should remember to take care of their in-laws and treat them as important.”

    Clipped from HP, if you want to see the video that went with the story summary.

    • I happen to like my mother -in-law a lot. And as far as I know hubby and I are not getting a divorce. But I will say that my in-laws were real good at not offering unasked for advice. :)

  75. Hmmmmm-Moving towards a free-er market!

    In Communist Cuba, the Tax Man Cometh
    Published: Wednesday, 28 Nov 2012 | 3:55 AM ET
    Text Size
    By: Reuters

    Most Cubans have not paid taxes for half a century, but that will change under a new code starting January 1.

    The landmark regulations will change the relations of Cubans with their government and are a signal that market-oriented reforms, launched since President Raul Castro succeeded his brother, Fidel Castro, in 2008, are here to stay.

    The recently published code constitutes the first comprehensive taxation in Cuba since the 1959 revolution abolished just about all taxes.

    In the 1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the country’s main benefactor, the Cuban government imposed a few scattered taxes, but mostly preferred to maintain low wages so it could fund free social services.

    The government’s free market reforms introduced over the last two years, are designed to encourage small businesses, private farming and individual initiative, along with plans to pay state workers more. Under the new tax code the state hopes to get its share of the proceeds.

    The government also envisions replacing subsidies for all with targeted welfare, meaning that the largely tax-free life under a paternalistic government is on its way out.

    “This radically changes the state’s relationship with the population and taxes become an irritating issue,” said Domingo Amuchastegui, a former Cuban intelligence analyst who lives in Miami and writes often about Cuba.

    The new code covers 19 taxes, including such things as inheritance, environment, sales, transportation and farm land, various license fees and three contributions, including social security.

    A sliding scale income tax – from 15 percent for earnings of more than 10,000 pesos (about $400) annually, to 50 percent for earnings of over 50,000 pesos, (about $2,000) – adopted in 1994, remains in the new code for the self-employed, small businesses and farms, but it also includes a series of new deductions to stimulate their work.

    Tax Deductions

    For example, farmers may deduct up to 70 percent of income as costs, and small businessmen, who are taxed by income not profit, up to 40 percent, plus various fees and secondary taxes they pay.

    A labor tax of 20 percent will gradually be reduced to 5 percent by 2017, and small businesses with five employees or less are exempt.

    Eventually all workers will pay income taxes as well as a new 2 percent property tax, but both measures are suspended until “conditions permit” them to go into effect.

    The government admits, with an average pay of about 450 pesos per month, or $19, many workers do not earn enough to make ends meet.

    “They collect taxes for all these things around the world, it’s normal,” said Havana economist Isabel Fernandez.

    “But here we face two problems. On the one hand we are not used to paying for anything and on the other our wages are so low we can’t spare a single peso,” she said.

    Under the old system, large and small state-run companies, which accounted for more than 90 percent of economic activity, simply handed over all their revenues to the government, which then allocated resources to them.

    The reforms call for large state-run businesses to be moved out of the ministries and become more autonomous.

    Under the new tax system they will pay a 35 percent tax on their profits, but can take advantage of a myriad of deductions ranging from amortization and travel to sales taxes, insurance and environmental protection.

    Many smaller businesses will become cooperatives or be privately leased and taxed based on income.

    The state-owned Cuban National News Agency said Cuba had studied the tax systems of a number of other countries, including several with capitalist economies.

    “The experiences of China, Vietnam, Venezuela, Brazil, Spain and Mexico were taken into account, but they were refined to the particularities and conditions of the island,” the new agency said.

    The new code is not etched in stone – it can be amended each year as part of the annual budget passed by the National Assembly, and temporarily modified for different reasons by the executive branch of government.

    “Like the reforms, it is a work in progress, a work that has barely begun and will take time to put in place,” said a Western businessman who has worked in Cuba for almost two decades.

    But, he added, “this is of course a major step forward toward the 21st century and a modern state.”

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/49989684

  76. Just A Citizen says:

    Hey Common Man, GMan, etc.

    Any of you guys want to join me in working for the Feds?

    New Jobs coming soon………….. Govt OWL HUNTERS.

    Lots of time in the woods, shotgunning and paid a good wage with benefits. Can’t go wrong.

    Bwahahahahaha.

    http://michellemalkin.com/

  77. Just A Citizen says:

    INSIDE PARTY POLITICS

    Every now and then an insider gives the rest of us incite into how Party Politics works. I stumbled on this article by Eric Erickson last night and figured it would be best to put the whole thing here. But credit is given to Eric and his Red State blog.

    “A Primer for Rich Donors Who Got Taken to the Cleaners by Republican Consultants

    By: Erick Erickson

    When consultants told rich donors who were funding them that they were not making money off the Super PAC’s that the rich idiots . . . er . . . donors funded, they were being honest. They probably were not.

    But ad heavy Super PACs outsourced the ad buys, the mail, the data collection, etc. to other groups that got commissions and you can be sure that a lot of these supposedly noble consultants working for free were making a killing off of commissions, referral fees, etc. through their relationships with the commissioned vendors doing the actual work. Read this old post of mine for a sampling of how these consultants can make money without actually making money.

    Just as important as making money for these guys was control over the data. In fact, in singular importance this campaign season has been the buzz word “data.” But what the hell is that data and why is it so important?

    Well, for starters, let me fill you in on one piece of technology that flew under the radar this season. It is called Gravity and it is probably the only major piece of campaign technology to come out of 2012 with a proven track record. About the only major donor on the right to have come into contact with it was Joe Ricketts. And Ricketts only came into contact with it because he was smart enough to direct Ending Spending, his group, to work with existing, small groups on the ground. About the only major group to use it was FreedomWorks, which, unlike a lot of other big groups on the right, decided not to go proprietary, but to go for winning at all costs. [See update in the next paragraph regarding Heritage Action for America]

    It was the existing small groups like American Majority Action and the Madison Project using Gravity primarily and those groups were instrumental in its creation. With the exception of FreedomWorks, virtually everybody else went out to build their own thing. In fact, several of the very well known consultants as seen on TV and others you never see did their best to kill Gravity, stop it from being built, and convince donors who came into contact with it to defund the groups or pressure those groups to move away from Gravity. [UPDATE: I’m told Heritage Action for America joined FreedomWorks as two of the only major groups to use Gravity.]

    Gravity, in fact, explains a lot about how the donors got so screwed in much the same way the RNC screwed itself with Voter Vault.

    To understand Gravity, you rich donors need a basic primer. You may think you know this stuff, but I bet you really don’t. Let me break it down for you.

    Of the 100% of Americans who exist, about 66% are eligible to vote. These are all rough estimates.

    40% are actually registered to vote.

    25% of the total American population will probably, actually go vote.

    Therefore, a candidate needs 13% of the population to win.

    But, and this is a big but, of the 25% of the population that can and does vote, 9% will vote straight Democrat usually and 8% will vote straight Republican.

    That leaves 8% left.

    2% of that 8% of people will be single issue voters. Of that 2%, most of the single issue voters will tilt slightly to the GOP on issues of guns or abortion, but there are also single issue pro-choice voters, single issue anti-gun voters, single issue gay rights voters, etc.

    That all leaves 6% of the population. In other words, to win an election, a candidate must really get 4% of the population to support him because that is the majority of the undecided 6%. A Republican must get a bit more, but then can draw from single issue voters a bit more than Democrats.

    Those percentages are the foundation of the data. But the data is more complicated than that.

    To win a campaign, a campaign must win a state or a lesser division of a state.

    Each state is broken down into congressional districts. Each congressional district covers parts or all of counties or, in Louisiana, parishes. Each county is further divided in precincts. Each precinct is divided into census tracts.

    A campaign can determine a pretty solid estimate of how many votes it needs to win by going down to the precinct of each county in America.

    Every precinct has a “dead dog” race that defines who the yellow dog Democrats are and who the pure Republicans are. These are the voters for either side who will vote for the dead dog over someone in the other party. A great example of this would be Angela E. Speir in Georgia.

    Ms. Speir ran for the Georgia Public Service Commission as a Republican in 2002, when Democrats still controlled Georgia. She spent roughly $7,000.00 for this statewide office and won. For a long time, her race was the dead dog race. If someone wanted to see what a generic Republican and a generic Democrat would get in a particular precinct, her race was the one to establish that number given it was a statewide race in which she had no name ID and spent less than $10,000.00.

    Find that number in each precinct for each party and that is the base number each side needs in a district.

    Now, take a comparable race to the one you are running. Let’s say the 2008 Presidential race for the 2012 Presidential race.

    First, population will have to be adjusted based on population growth or decline in registered voters in a precinct. Then start with the dead dog election numbers as a base of support and see how many votes Barack Obama and John McCain got in the precinct compared to that dead dog election. The variance from the dead dog election gets the margin of persuadable voters for 2012.

    If, for example, the dead dog election established that 5,000 voters will always vote Democrat no matter what and Barack Obama got 8,000 votes in the precinct, then there are probably 3,000 persuadable voters in 2012.

    Factor in new voters in the precinct whose voting history is not known, newly registered voters, etc. and suddenly you have a number. That number is the number of persuadable voters in the district beyond the base of the party you are working with. Those are the people volunteers must reach out to.

    But how to reach out to them?

    Well, one great way to start is consumer information. Does the person subscribe to Field & Streams? If so, probably an outdoorsman. Check NRA memberships. If both line up, you probably have a persuadable who leans GOP. The same works on the other side.

    Take the voter data, lay consumer data and direct voter contact information on top, and suddenly the job of winning a campaign becomes very manageable. There is a defined, quantifiable list of voters to reach out to, keep up with, and track toward Election Day. More importantly, you will know what issues will resonate best with that persuadable voter.

    That, my rich friends, is the data.

    And every damn thing you fund should be targeted at collecting that data.

    That is what Gravity did and does. That is why so many rich Republican consultants tried and are trying still to kill it. Why?

    Because the folks behind Gravity chose not to control the data. All the consultants want to control the data. That is where they make the money. If they control the data, they are in charge. Again, go read this from January of 2009.

    See, my rich friends, you think you are in charge. But go ask your Super PAC friends where the data is. Tell them you want the data. More importantly, ask them how they did the layers for the data. Did they layer consumer information on top of voter data or the opposite? Surprisingly, you can get completely different results putting voter data on top of consumer data, instead of adding consumer data to a known, quantifiable pool of voters. The latter is more accurate, saves time, and is what the Obama team did that the GOP largely did not do. It is what the Democrats did with their Catalist program.

    Instead, you rich donors funded a bunch of Super PACs that spent a lot of money on ads, making killer commissions for the ad guys, did a lot of mail that made killer commissions for the mail guys, and did a lot of technology smoke and mirror baloney that made you feel like you were reaching persuadable, when really you were peeing money down a rat hole.

    You got played.

    Now I’ve just explained how to do real voter outreach to you. Now I’ve explained what the real data is and why it is so valuable. There are groups out there like Gravity doing this with smart donors and giving it to Tea Party groups so everyone can use the data, instead of setting up some consultant to be the king maker and power broker.

    So rich guy, you want to win or you want to be the gate keeper? Right now, you are a gate keeper and you aren’t even keeping your money. Time to do better. Time to understand what the data is and that you want it collected, but not hordes if you want to win.

    I don’t make a penny off Gravity, have no business relationship to anyone affiliated with Gravity, but I know the guys involved and I know they did it right, I know it worked well, and I know many of the very same consultants you rich guys funded tried to kill Gravity because it would end the consultants’ monopoly on the real data.”

    Now how does that make everyone feel?

    • I feel smarter. Not surprised. And more than a little bit angry!

      It is also really interesting to know how they figure out who these voters are. And very disappointing that such a small percentage of the people care enough to vote. Anyone who says we are a right or left of center Country obviously don’t really know anything beyond the fact that too many people simply don’t care enough to participate.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        V.H.

        Don’t put them all in the category of “don’t care enough”.

        Obviously some just don’t think it will make a difference.

        But also remember that NOT VOTING is a long held American Tradition. It tends to go with the concept of Freedom and Liberty.

        It translates into “Leave me alone”.

        This of course comes around to bite them in the backside when those who want to control the “levers of power” do vote.

        • Nope, I’m sticking with Don’t care enough-people didn’t care enough throughout our history-thought we were safe, we were free-well I woke up in horror one day to realize that wasn’t true and hasn’t been true the entirety of my life. And people who believe it makes no difference are wrong. If enough people stood up and voiced their opinions throughout our history maybe things would be different right now. But if they don’t stand up and fight now-things are gonna be real different and maybe irreversible. And I’m not at all sure that people today are willing to have a real revolution. So sit home-the Progressives win. The economy collapses-the Progressives will still win. I’m thinking, at this point that hurting the economy is part of their friggin plan. Only possible way to win is to fight now, using every tool we have including voting. Sitting at home proclaiming it’s a waste of time is wasting the little bit of time we have to save her. Or at least to give it the OLD American try.

          I’m tired of giving people the benefit of the doubt. The outcome will be the same whether they are good people who are just wrong or evil people who really want to hurt the Country. People are out there successfully destroying this Country. Don’t care if their intentions are good. They are Wrong and they are contributing to our downfall.

  78. Just A Citizen says:
    • Secession-hmmm-always thought this would be a really bad idea-beginning to wonder if it is the only answer which might not end with millions dying. We are such a divided Country now or maybe we aren’t, who knows, all those silent people out there not making their voices heard.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        V.H.

        I am not convinced we are as “divided” as many would have us believe. No doubt there are some deep divisions but there still remain some common and fundamental threads that hold the cloth together. It is the threat to those that I fear more than the others.

        Among these are the “re-defining” of the concepts of freedom, liberty and justice. The new meaning of “fairness” as an economic “equalization” phrase. The growth of the Progressive view that not only should Govt must direct our lives but that it is APPROPRIATE and JUST.

        Frankly I think secession would be VERY BAD for all Americans. But there may well come a time when it is the only way to resolve the conflicts. I just don’t see either side allowing it to happen PEACEFULLY.

        • I’ve always thought so too -that we aren’t as divided “as many would have us believe “. The last election shook that belief. But even if that belief is still true-what damn good is that fact if people who believe as we do sit at home.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            V.H.

            I am not convinced they will stay at home if given a clear choice. I am not sure they thought they had that choice this time around.

            However, I am still not sure they actually stayed home. I have yet to see any real data showing WHO stayed home and WHO voted third party.

            Your “shaken belief” may be just as misplaced as “their” belief that they got a “mandate” of some kind. While those who felt strongly about getting Obama and the Progressive out of office shared their beliefs they did so primarily with those that agreed with them. This was the “confirmation bias” that Matt and others made reference to.

            What was missing was a compelling argument made by the R candidates that:

            a) Obama and the Progressives have BAD, BAD ideas, and
            b) That the R’s, namely Romney, had GOOD, GOOD, ideas.

            BOTH arguments had to be made.

            All of this while the DNC was muddying the water with racism, womens rights etc, etc, AND the R’s were fallling into the trap with all the STATE initiatives on gay marriage, and abortion that surfaced after the 2010 elections. The R’s won 2010 on the economy and jobs. But the headlines generated by the R’s after 2010 had little to do with Positive action about jobs.

            Remember my warning of two years ago. The R’s LEADERSHIP was fully capable of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?

            Because of all this, I am not as “shaken” about where AMERICANS stand. Not yet. It is possible we have fallen farther than I think but to many other issues are making it hard to determine just where most people are standing. Although, I must concede, it is much closer to the Progressive model than is healthy.

            Stay strong V.H., stay strong and resolute.

        • But remember, JAC, first you must dispell the rumor/myth that Lincoln was a good man. You must get it through all our thick heads how much he “hated blacks” … good luck with that.

          You people are so paranoid (and insane), it is like watching/reading an SNL skit.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            charlie

            How Lincoln actually felt about black people has nothing to do with the issue of secession.

            Is this now going to be your new “We killed the Indian” response to every issue?

  79. @ Todd……”You were pretty close to “no economic activity”……..Hmmm..trying to see where you are coming from here. We got out of the stock market in its entirety some time ago and we preserved the integrity of our investments without sustaining any loss. It is far too volatile, in our opinion, to take the risks. There is no long term stability to the market right now that supports the risk. There are lots of investment opportunities out there, that will increase our base without increased taxes and without the 3.8% surcharge that comes on top of the taxes. We have chosen to save money by eliminating those areas where the taxes are targeted. This also keeps the integrity of our financial base intact without substantial risk. We eliminated the 401k risk as most of 401′s are dependent upon the stock market. People who lost 40 % of their value in 2008 have not regained their loss even yet….and more is on the horizon, in our opinion. We are as good as any economist out there and we have done just fine and will continue to do just fine. If sitting on our money is zero economics…ok we are guilty. But preserving capital intact for future earnings…is not zero activity. If not wanting to pay additional taxes is zero economic activity….we are guilty but getting out of costly tax issues is not zero activity. We have made the decision that saving money in increased taxes is not zero economic activity….it is preserving a base. We did not lose 40% of our asset values in 2008 as most people did….we increased our values. We saw the housing bubble coming as did most responsible money people. The only ones that missed it were those in Washington and the greed of financial planners who rolled the dice……..and lost. We have made the decision NOT to invest in unionized companies any longer…..the reason is the GM bailout that preserved the union salaries and unfunded pension plans over that of the secured creditors that are supposed to take priority. IT was a nationalization of GM…….that is how we see it. This particular issue is a progressive stance. It by passed secure creditors. We have now decided that investing in heavily unionized companies is no longer a safe investment. If this is zero economic activity, we are guilty. We have elected to not hire new people to the point of triggering the ACA or reducing our salaries to 1$ under the cap to not fall under the ACA is zero economic activity…then we are guilty. We feel that the economic prosperity of the United States is not going to do well in the short term (next 2 years) so we have elected to channel our investments and save our money to pick up pieces later…..that is what business is about….long term activity and not short term. If this is zero activity…again, we are guilty. If investing in overseas ventures to increase our capital base is considered zero economic activity, we are guilty. If avoiding the highest corporate tax rates in the world is zero economic activity, then we are guilty.

    We would much rather increase our economic activity in the United States but the spending levels and debt is a major…..consideration. We choose to measure prosperity on the trends. Trending is very important. Trending is history. It is important, in our opinion, to measure debt to GDP and debt to per capita income. Most progressives (correct me if I am wrong) love to compare Obama to Reagan and Bush. So, we, as a family very adept at predicting economic future, has looked at trends. Business is driven by two areas……interest expense and debt percentages. You cannot exist in business without paying attention to these areas, All the profit in the world will not offset debt and interest until spending is curbed. So let us look at the trends since Carter…that is over 30 years. As a percent of GDP, Carter presided over a percentage of debt to GDP of 33.3%. Reagan presided over a debt to GDP of 62.6%, Bush I presided over a debt to GDP of 69.9%, Clinton presided over debt to GDP of 57.7% (we will examine why further on), Bush II grew it back to 74.1%, debt to GDP, Obama has grown the debt to GDP 101.7%. Debt to equity is the hallmark of prosperity and the basis of stability. Now, it is important to look at the Clinton years. He dropped the number significantly but why…….in the second term of his administration he not only lowered taxes but did entitlement reform…or CUT SPENDING. The trend under Obama in three short years has been to triple spending and borrowing money to do that. Hence, we now have a debt greater than GDP…..and an interest rate of 3% on that debt as it pertains to GDP…..the interest rate is sustainable but the debt cannot be repaid.

    The next thing that any prudent businessman will look at to determine trends is the debt to per capita income. When Reagan left office, the debt to per capita was 84%, Bush I was 110%, Clinton was 90%, Bush II 130%, and Obama is 183%. Again, Clinton put in reforms that trended well in the numbers.

    Now, it is popular for the left to blame Bush for Obama…..but, again, prudent businessmen understand politics from economics. The increase debt is not a result of Bush, it is a direct result of spending and eliminating the welfare reforms of Clinton/Bush and increasing the so called entitlement (we call it freebies) program. In view of this, and NO trend in reducing or eliminating any portion of the entitlement programs, the trend is continued spending, increased per capita spending with a lessening of per capita personal disposable income, is a trend that says….do not invest and do not spend. Not until the United States regains some fiscal responsibility.

    Therefore, we read trends. Long term planning is based on trends and history, not guesswork and hope. Please note, that these same reports show, that given our current trend, raising taxes to 100 % does not bring the debt down. In other words, if the government took every dime from every person…nothing comes down.

    Since, I have to do your research for you, please refer to the following:

    (1) http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
    (2) http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm
    (3) http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
    (4) http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/SelectTable.asp?Selected=Y#S2
    (5) http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/people/index.html
    (6) http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm

    PPS: I understand thoroughly the Progressive Movement. I agree with parts of it but disagree with the spending of it. As a matter of fact, the progressive movement will make money for us…..we just change our philosophy and move our capital base.

    PPSS: I think you told me once, but my feeble brain cannot recall….may I ask where you reside? What state?

    • Colonel,
      For the “No Economic Activity”, I believe this was your original post:

      http://standupforamerica.wordpress.com/2012/11/06/a-very-sandy-reality-check/#comment-147518

      d13thecolonel says:
      November 9, 2012 at 8:45 am

      Good Morning, JAC……..I have been reading along on all of this and well, there is only one thing to say…..the American people are going to get what they deserve and I am glad to see it. I am prepared. When the stock market goes to hell in 2013, we are prepared for we are not in it any longer…when the taxes go up we are prepared because we are liquid and we will not invest for the foreseeable future (next three or four years anyway), unless we see a good bargain to pick up for pennies on the dollar. With no investments, there is no tax. We all have positioned ourselves to not increase our incomes and since we are independent we can control our own destiny. We are going to continue to get $80,000 per year to NOT grow corn that we do not grow any way. We are a ranch, not a farm, but that does not matter to the Federal Government. They do not let us NOT take it…they keep sending it to us and we NEVER applied for it to begin with. In the past, we have given it to charity……figure this, the government gives us tax free money to not grow corn, they won’t stop, refuse to let us give it back, and then we give it to charity and are allowed a tax deduction on tax free money…..go friggin figure. For the next foreseeable future, charity is going to lose. We are going to keep it now. What the hell, it is tax free and we will not need the offset reduction for our own taxes. They will be minimal and far less than they have been. We will cherry pick any charitable contributions and give directly. What we have seen growing, is the “something for nothing crowd” going to charity claiming poverty and all the while they are driving nice cars, have food stamps, government housing, free medical care, and all the stuff responsible people pay for….enough is enough.

      In this thread:

      We used to invest in the infrastructure because it was largely funded by tax free municipals. We have divested ourselves of that because of the new hidden taxes in the ACA, that specifically target the municipals.

      we sit on our cash…we will be around to pick up the pieces of the ones that did not pan properly

      we will make more money by staying out of dividend solutions…..we will stay out of the stock market completely…so will smart investors.

      ….it will end shortly…there will be no money. Protect yourself and stay out of investments.

      Not only cap gains…but the AMT as well……..not a good time to invest in anything.

      Doesn’t seem like there’s much left to “invest” in. That’s where my “No Economic Activity” came from. If you are investing in other things, that makes my point – I thought it was ridiculous that you seemed to be advocating for “No Economic Activity”.

      I understand your position – and that’s fine. You can do whatever you want with your money. But your previous posts were short on details about what you meant, and they sounded like “No Economic Activity”.

      interest expense and debt percentages

      Yes, I understand all of that. I think your “blame” is misplaced, but that’s minor. Do you think the economy would be any different if McCain had won in 2008?

      Most of the entitlement increase is because of the economy. More people are un/under-employed, which causes more entitlement spending and less government revenue, so you get bigger deficits. The solution is improving the economy, which has been occurring, just way too slow. Massive cuts in government spending would send the economy back into recession, and make the deficits even bigger. Since many in the private sector are not willing to increase spending (you, for example!! ;) ), the government needs to take that role to get the economy going.

      Since, I have to do your research for you, please refer to the following:

      No Colonel, it’s not my research – it’s YOUR research.

      I don’t see anything that supports these two comments:

      There would have to be no tax increases at all…….if the money we are giving these regimes to sponsor their own dictators…was kept at home.

      Obama has outspent all US Presidents combined.

      You’ve also made comments similar to this many times:

      you now have three more wars started by this administration….a fourth is looming on the horizon and the spending for these will make Bush look like a piker.

      Could you list out the wars started by the Obama administration?

      I live in northwest Wisconsin.

  80. hmmm…my comment awaiting moderation

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13

      I just checked. I think you used to many links in one post. I remember someone saying more than two causes wordpress to hold the post.

      If you saved a copy I suggest you just clip out some of the links and post them separately.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13

      I went ahead and approved your post. Will delete the second copy. Remember the two links rule next time and it will post on its own.

  81. Just A Citizen says:

    RESPONSE to the accusation that some of us don’t know what Progressives are really all about. Consider this a “beginning”.

    http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/07/the-progressive-movement-and-the-transformation-of-american-politics

  82. Just A Citizen says:

    Dispelling the myth that the Rich got all the tax breaks. Irony of all ironies included. If it were not for the rapid increase in Income of the “Rich” our total debt would be much larger than it is now.

    http://usbudget.blogspot.com/2008/06/you-cant-soak-rich-response-part-3.html

    • One saving grace JAC…..maybe…JUST MAYBE……..people will try to understand what drives economics instead of wondering where their next I pad is coming from. I understand that the majority (99.9%) of the academia know nothing about the academia of simple economics. Hardly anyone looks long term, much less our politicians. Why a sudden rush to emulate Europe is astounding……it is the worse of economies to emulate next to North Korea and China.I was talking, yesterday, to a very good friend of mime whom I have known for 40 years. He is a dedicated democrat. I can concede that but what was astounding as well, was his comment about investing in business ventures not intended to maximize profit. He works for GM in Arlington, Texas and asked me why we, and others, have not invested any further in GM. He thought it the moral thing to do was to use stimulus money and fully fund a pension plan that was underfunded and guarantee worker contracts to GM. He thought that the bankruptcy proceedings and the resultant devaluation of GM stock and the disregard of secured creditors was the thing to do because it preserved his retirement. And in the same breath says that it is a moral responsibility to reinvest in GM. He does not understand why no one is except the incredibly stupid. I tried to explain to him that sticking ones hand in the fire only needs to be done once…I do not have to stick my hand in the fire again to know that it burns. He also really thinks that GM has paid its money back when it has not even come close. It is the propaganda that is incredible. He does not understand the relationship to the reason why GM is continuing to lose money. It is incredible but this is the mindset I am running into when I talk with a progressive….they simply do not understand the dollar.

      • It is so interesting to end the conversation with them, just keep asking, “Where is the money coming from?”

        While I tend not to usually fall for conspiracy theories, I cannot believe that they are all so dumb as not to understand basic theory. Certainly they can relate on a personal level to overuse of credit cards and lack of equity. So then I have to wonder if there is not an ulterior motive and a deliberate attempt to crash the country and usher in …..what? They should try to remember is what ultimately happened to Robespierre and Danton and also remember that for every successful Lenin, there are a thousand less successful Trotsky’s and always a Stalin sharpening the dagger behind you.

  83. MSM falls for “New Coke” poverty con
    5:42 AM 11/16/2012

    You know those headlines you read recently?

    Census: U.S. Poverty Rate Spikes, Nearly 50 Million Americans Affected

    Alternative Measure Sees More People Living in Poverty

    Millions More Americans Living in Poverty Than Previously Estimated: Census Bureau

    The new poverty measure is out and it’s grim

    The headlines are all based on the Obama Administration’s new “supplemental” poverty line. ”New” is not necessarily “improved.”

    The regular old, still-official poverty line is simple and understandable. It is the level that bought a minimal market basket of food in 1963-4, adjusted for subsequent inflation and multiplied by three. As such it measures what people think a poverty line measures–how many people fall below certain absolute living standards, whether basic human needs are being met. We’ve been using it for decades, so while it may be too high or too low people have a rough feel for what it is and what it isn’t.

    The new “supplemental” poverty line is a complicated measure produced by formulas that are barely understood by poverty experts. It takes into account in-kind government benefits, which is fine, and regional costs-of-living. But at its core it is a deception: it measures not absolute poverty but relative poverty–i.e. inequality.

    It’s pegged to the expenditures of the 33d percentile rather than a fixed amount of purchasing power …Under the old poverty line, “poverty” could be eliminated as society got richer–an achievable and widely shared goal. But the new poverty line will rise as society gets richer (“adjust for rising levels and standards of living”). The newly measured poor will always be with us in substantial numbers … That will yield a permanent, inextinguishable stream of NYT front page “poverty” stat stories–even if “poverty” no longer means ”poverty” in the sense we now understand the term.

    The only way to reduce poverty under the new, relative measure–as Robert Rector notes–is to have those at the bottom gain income faster than those around the 33d percentile. The Times‘ favorite “poverty” line is now a measure of inequality, not absolute want–when its moral and political force derives largely because it’s thought of as a measure of absolute want, not inequality. If I were inclined to be paranoid–and I am–I’d say it’s an audacious, slimy bait-and-switch by liberal activists inside the government anti-poverty bureacracy.

    Of course, the activists and bureaucrats can only get away with it if the MSM cluelessly or deceptively reports the new “supplemental” numbers as if they were simply a more precise version of the regular poverty numbers. And we know the MSM … well, OK, that’s not much of a roadblock. In fact, the MSM has fallen for the New Poverty con like Taylor Swift at a Kennedy clambake! It’s almost as if they’re in on the conspiracy! None of the stories linked above notes the controversial, qualitiative difference between the two poverty measures–not even the Washington Post’s self-proclaimed “Wonkblog.” What good is a wonkblog if it doesn’t tell you what the numbers it reports mean (and how the measurements might have been politicized)? …

    Most scandalously, the Census’ own official press release explanation doesn’t let Americans in on the secret of the new numbers. The key paragraph begins:

    “There are several important differences between the official and supplemental poverty measures,” said Kathleen Short, a U.S. Census Bureau economist and the report’s author …

    Short then talks about adjusting for geographic differences in housing costs, while the release adds, “here are two other major differences …” Those differences, we’re told, are including the “ value of in-kind benefits” such as food stamps, and deducting the cost of “necessary expenses” like taxes and medical care. Apparently it’s not a “major difference” that the measure people thought was a measure of absolute poverty is now a “quasi-relative” measure of money inequality.**

    Maybe it’s just me, but the Census’s deception seems more flagrant than anything Susan Rice did in the wake of the Benghazi attacks. They can’t say they were badly briefed. It’s their report. Like General Petraeus, they know what they did.

    If Republicans weren’t shellshocked they might make an issue of this. …

    P.S.: Here is veteran federal poverty analyst Richard Bavier’s short screed, posted on the Brookings Institution website, describing how the New Poverty Line is “carefully designed so that the public will think it is one thing when it really is something else.”

    _______

    ** — Short’s full Census report also hides the ball. I could only find one bit of language even indirectly acknowledging that the New Poverty Line rises as the income distribution rises–a buried, opaque sentence saying, “Adjustments to thresholds … reflect real change in expenditures … at the 33rd percentile of the expenditure distribution.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/16/msm-falls-for-new-coke-poverty-con/#ixzz2DaijXtFR

  84. SUFA Poll: How many of you lunatics, almost reasonable and fair minded wingies (and devout Democrats) believe Lincoln “hated blacks”?

    Be honest now …

    The last few passages from the Kearns book continue to advance the myth that he was a master politician, but no evidence that he “hated blacks” … reminds me of that idiot singer (forget his name–some rapper) who said, “George Bush hates black people.” I was about to donate money to the Katrina victims, saw that and didn’t send any (my bad). My wife took up the cause and sent money. I was too “emotional” in defense of Bush, no doubt …:)

    • Don’t know if he hated blacks but he only championed their cause when it became a political advantage for him. Remember Charlie the victors write history and tell the story how they want it to be told.

      • So you “don’t know” is your answer (even with the qualifier)?

        To be fair, he defended a slave owner and slaves while lawyering (more facts for BF to cherry pick from (I wonder which one he’ll point to)?

        So far SUFA an abstention … the totals thus far read: 1 “he hated blacks”, 1 “he didn’t hate blacks” and 1 “I don’t know.”

        Come on, people, express your liberty given right to be honest already. Vote on, brothers and sisters, vote on …

        • If the man was alive and running for office today it would matter. In the meantime mark me down for what ever will make this conversation go away the fastest! :evil:

          • Another non-vote. Boy, oh, boy … for liberty lovers, you all sure don’t like to take a stance.

            And having just read Stephen’s vote (or non-vote) … there you go … only BF has an opinion thus far … and it’s as wrong as it usually is, but you all seem kind of shy about disputing his claim that Lincoln “hated blacks” …

            This kind of reminds me of Mr. Obama’s 131 “present” votes in the state legislature … :)

      • Way back at the beginning of time, when I was a young buck I remember being told that there is no one cause for anything. I daresay, there were several solid reasons for joining the Union Army. Among them were a desire to keep the union, a desire to free the slaves by ending slavery and in the case of many newly arrived immigrants, especially the Irish, the chance to eat, get paid and demonstrate loyalty to their new home. Now, my High School History teacher listed “States Rights” as the primary reason both sides fought. In the South this was very personal at every economic level. Think of the lyric of “Bonnie Blue Flag”….”fighting for the property we’ve won with honest toil…and when our rights are threatened we’ll come from near and far….Hurrah! Hurrah for Southern Rights Hurrah! Hurrah for the Bonny Blue Flag that bears a single star!” In the North, the issue of States rights was more intellectual and political. Slavery was the driving force in many instances, Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain’s writings show this and also those lines from the Battle Hymn….. “As he died to make men holy, let us die to make men free”. I know that in most modern versions this line has either been changed or eliminated but on the rare occassion when I get to belt it out, I always, loudly, throw it in.

        Everybody here should back off a bit and stop the name calling crap. Lincoln was all the things that all of you say about him. A very complex man.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      charlie

      “Hated”? I don’t know. But by DEFINITION he was a RACIST as were the vast majority of Whites in the Country at the time. Including many of those pushing for abolition.

      Just ask yourself Charlie, what would you call someone who suggested shipping all the Black People in the US to Haiti, or to send them back to Africa.

      And as for you comment aimed at me regarding Obama’s idolizing of Lincoln. His high opinion of Lincoln is a matter of record. I believe it has to do with Lincoln’s political gamesmanship, his willingness to use any means necessary to get what he wanted. It is the “ends justify the means” mentality he considers heroic.

      This is why Progressives often cite Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt as examples of GOOD Republicans.

  85. @ Bama dad Very few from the north died for a black mans cause

    Obviously, you took a poll, correct?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      charlie

      You know the irony, or contradiction if you will, of your defensive posture over Lincoln can’t be missed. I wonder why you don’t apply the same standard to the American interactions with the Natives? Which by the way, continued under Lincoln as well as his favorite General.

      Could it really be this is all about your opinion of Black Flag and little to do with the actual history of Lincoln?

      • Actually, Lincoln signed up to fight native Americans … my beef with the founding fathers (which is what I’m assuming you’re referring to), remains how they wrote slavery into the document you all worship. Nothing more. It doesn’t mean they were all racists, but that they were protecting “their” property … another argument for another day, JAC. In the meantime, care to vote?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Already did, along with discussion.

          “You all worship”??? Apparently you have not been paying attention to my many comments on this subject. So would this not make you guilty of the same thing you accuse our resident pirate? Namely, generalizing and over stating others “beliefs”!

          • Another non-vote, point to a strawman, JAC? Are you saying “you also don’t know” or are you saying “he hated blacks”. Answer the question, sir (pretty please) …

            it looks to me as though SUFA can’t take a stand … so what’s the point of liberty, I ask, if you can’t speak your minds?

          • JAC: Here’s what I’ll tell you regarding Lincoln’s “racist” comments/speeches, etc. I believe (my opinion only), he was a politician who would say whatever he believed helped his cause (his personal cause, so if it was to appease voters, so be it. If it was to try and keep a country from splitting and going to war, so be it). I don’t agree with that particular methodology, but I can understand it. What I’m unwilling to do is claim he “hated blacks” but not because of the counter arguments to BF’s “sources” but because of his actions (i.e., emancipation (for whatever you believe the reason to be), the 13th amendment, etc.). Now, BF can get petty with wording (he didn’t “pass” it, etc.) but that’s just another bullshit argument and you all know it. He was instrumental in everything regarding the freedom of slaves. So, the call is a simple one, JAC. Either you believe he “hated blacks” or you don’t believe he “hated blacks” … any other answer is as fugazy as the idea that BF is the source of all legitimacy (talk about friggin’ scary) …

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Charlie

              The answer is NOT as simply as you want to portray it in this case. Because to say “I do not believe he hated blacks” is as equally wrong as “I believe he hated blacks”. I do NOT KNOW whether he “HATED” or “DID NOT HATE”. All I know is that his actions and words are RACIST. Therefore, I “believe” he was a racist as were most people of those times. They simply felt the White race superior to the Black race.

              The interesting thing is that despite this belief in racial superiority many still felt “slavery” an abomination. So in this sense the issues of slavery and racism are separate. When one realizes this our reading of History makes much more sense.

              All the rest of what you just posted I agree with, that is regarding the nature of Lincoln and what he did.

              • JAC

                And I agree (AGREE, DO YOU HEAR?) with what you said. So, my question is, where’s your arguments pointing out his actions on behalf of blacks vs. BF’s insistance (because he knows ALL) that Lincoln “hated blacks?”

                I understand if you can’t bear the thought of challenging the all knowing one … but I’m still holding this vote to see if anyone “KNOWS” what BF claims is FACT.

                Now, the rest of you SUFA-ites, where’s the votes?

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Charlie

              Why are you demanding arguments from me on a subject I don’t care to engage in?

              As I said, this is starting to appear to be more about your personal issues with Flag than about the facts of the subject.

              You have your personal “opinions” as does Flag. Once you get to an impasse on “OPINION” why can’t you just recognize that and move on?

              I have challenged Flag on many an occasion, so once again your accusations fall into the same category as your condemnation.

              I think you have your answer to your question. Nobody here claims to “KNOW” for certain whether Lincoln “hated” blacks. Most of us recognize “hate” for a very personal emotion that is not often identifiable from someone’s actions.

              Hitler was one of those, for example, whose words were filled with “hate” and whose actions followed those words. Lincoln’s words, in my opinion, were not as much about “hate” as simple “racial superiority”. But the fact remains, I simply don’t know if he did hate or did not hate. Which is probably a statement in itself about how clever he was as a “politician”.

              Did he HATE the Southerners? He sanctioned TOTAL WAR against them.

              • Nobody here claims to “KNOW” for certain whether Lincoln “hated” blacks

                BF, in fact, does claim to “KNOW” that Lincoln “hated blacks” …

                I’m just sayin’ …

                My person issues with flag should NEVER confuse. I think he’s an asshole.

    • No poll but the war began in April 1861 and the emancipation proclamation came along in January 1863. Lincoln’s call for volunteers was to preserve the union not to go fright for a slave.

      • Bamadad … and why did he have to preserve the union? Egg or chicken, which came first? Think about it … who fired on fort sumter? Why did they fire on fort sumter. Use caffeine this morning. The war was over slavery couched in a states rights argument, but make no mistake, it was slavery the south was fighting for/started the war over.

        • “who fired on fort sumter”

          South Carolina.

          “Why did they fire on fort sumter”

          Lincoln ordered the resupply and reinforcement of the fort occupied by Federal troops on what South Carolina considered their territory. They began by firing on the resupply ship.

          “The war was over slavery couched in a states rights argument”

          I have never said that slavery was not part of the war but to claim slavery was the one and only reason for the war is false. Of the States that left the Union only three made mention of slavery in their succession bills passed by their legislators.

          • See, USW. All I can say to this is: Oy vey.

            So when South Carolina fired on fort sumter, was it an act of war or not? Couldn’t they have found some other way to express their discontent? Maybe they were looking to start a war? And all those union soldiers from all over the north and western territories who either joined or were conscripted (those who didn’t opt to avoid the war) … they were fighting for what some legislators politically left out of their bills?

            I feel okay assuming the war (and the entire states rights issue) was faught over slavery. Perhaps we just disagree.

            • When an armed aggressor puts troops on your territory and refuses to leave – what do you think SC should have done?

              • Personally? Since they were in a fort off the coast? Nothing. Firing on them (violence, you surprise me, BF) was an act of war.

              • So i can grasp your understanding here.

                If China seized Hawaii, you think the Continental US attacking the Chinese in Hawaii as the act of the war, and not the seizure of Hawaii itself – because…Hawaii is an island…. *blink*

            • It is historical fact that South secession was due to the high tariffs imposed by the federal government that disproportionally hurt the southern economy, and violations of state sovereignty, especially regarding the institution of slavery.

              • And here, dum-dum, I am, I always thought it was Lincoln’s electoral victory that chased the south into secession. Or maybe it was one big coincidence that SC didn’t do so until after his election.

              • Do you thin they left because of Lincoln, the man – like, they didn’t care for his beard and that weird hat- or because of the policies of Lincoln?

  86. The funny thing is, none of you will believe this.
    JAC will write paragraphs on why it’s wrong.

    And that’s just fine by me… :)

    Keep up the good work SUFA!!

    This has been a difficult election season for Fox News. Among the most enduring media images of the last few days of the election are Karl Rove late on election night angrily denying that Ohio, and thus the presidency, had gone to President Obama, and Dick Morris only a few days before the election confidently predicting a Romney landslide. Morris later tried to explain away his mistake after the election by claiming he had done it to create enthusiasm among Republican voters. The incidents involving Rove and Morris, both of whom work as both commentators on Fox and political consultants to conservative clients, are obviously embarrassing for Fox, but also raise the question of whether the network has outlived its value, even to the Republican Party.

    Because Fox generally reports news based on partisan talking points and ideological certainty rather than focusing on pesky things like facts, information and events, it has, in the past, been effective in encouraging misperceptions about President Obama’s background, nurturing the growth and development of the Tea Party movement and covering economic policy by referring to any spending by the government as socialism. These things have helped mobilize and misinform the right wing base of the Republican Party. Similarly, during the Bush administration, Fox helped increase support for the Gulf War by repeating White House positions on weapons of mass destruction, almost without question.

    Over the last several years, this has been very helpful to the Republican Party, but during 2012, particularly in recent months, this has begun to change. Fox has now become a problem for the Republican Party because it keeps a far right base mobilized and angry making it hard for the party to move to the center, or increase its appeal as it must do to remain electorally competitive. For example, Bill O’Reilly’s explanation of why the Obama was reelected may, in fact, resonate, with the older and heavily white viewership of Fox, but it is precisely the wrong public message and messenger for the Party.

    Moreover, while Fox helps the Republican Party when it slants its news coverage to the right, it damages the Party when its news coverage becomes too shoddy. A network that cannot get election night right because one of its star pundits simply refuses to accept defeat offers very little reason for potential viewers to watch it. Similarly a network whose pundits are so off in their election predictions will ultimately marginalize itself completely, as Fox is beginning to do.

    One of the bigger challenges facing the Republican Party is that they are perceived as the, to phrase it nicely, less smart of the two major parties. The anti-science perspective, unwillingness to speak out against absurd sounding conspiracy theories, and even the attacks on Nate Silver, presumably because Silver did somewhat sophisticated math, have contributed to this and are damaging the party. It is no coincidence that the Obama campaign had a more sophisticated targeting and turnout operation and better statistical modeling. A party that refuses to take a firm stand in support of evolution or recognizing climate change is not going to draw too many people with advanced statistical training as advisors and consultants.

    Fox contributes to that environment by creating a climate where partisan rantings of people like Dick Morris are indulged while criticism by serious people like Tom Ricks is shut down and attacked. There is no inevitable link between conservatism and stupidity, but one could be forgiven for coming to that conclusion while watching Fox News. As it is currently constructed, Fox News is going to bring in almost no swing voters in the coming years. It will more likely continue to repel them through poor analysis and rants that strike the precise tone the party should be trying to avoid.

    It is in the interest of the Democrats, not the Republicans, for there to be a loud, extremist, heavily white faction in the Republican Party, constantly pushing that party rightward. One of the reasons Mitt Romney was so unable to pivot back to the center was due to the drumbeat at Fox which contributing to forcing him to the right during the primary season. Even after the primary season, when Fox became a big supporter for Romney, the rift between official editorial position and the political feelings of Fox viewers and hosts, was clear.

    Unfortunately for the Republicans, while this is bad politics, it is good business for Fox. By positioning itself as the place where angry Republicans can go for their rhetorical red meat, Fox guarantees itself a sizable viewership, so the incentive for Fox to keep doing what it is doing is substantial, as is the potential damage to the Republican Party.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Todd

      Are these your words or those of someone else? If the latter could you share the source?

      While I may disagree with many of the conclusions on “details” there is a general truth in the commentary.

      1) Beware of living in an echo chamber. Which of course applies to everyone. :)
      2) Fox News has a bias, and may have suffered some damage, even among its fans.

    • You see the glass as half full, I see it as half empty. We are both right. But lefties won’t allow us to see it as half empty. We must see it as half full or we are labeled. And labeled loudly. And clearly. Fox sees it both ways. I’m gaining more and more respect for Kirsten Powers. Juan Williams is more left than I prefer but you can at least have a discussion with him. Alan Colmes went from tolerable to get him outta my face immediately. Dr. LaMont Hill is a fasttalking blame throwing racist. Sean Hannity is in your face with facts but I can’t stand him. Greta, a closet lefty. O’Reilly love him or hate him but he is def king of the hill. I don’t hear anyone at SUFA worshipping Fox. I think we all have less respect for them as the years have gone by. Nice try though.

      • We must see it as half full or we are labeled.

        Calling us “lefties” kind of does the same thing, Anita my love.

        I don’t see how any of the media does anything aside from speak their own agenda. I didn’t read Todd’s post yet, but I can’t barely watch anything more relating to U.S. politics anymore from any source. I do believe the mainstream media is slanted left (but that really depends on your definition of left–to me it’s center-right, but I am a pinko). Fox has it’s slant/MSNBC or MSLSD (I really get a kick out of insane Marc Levin’s nicknames) is the same shit. CNN slants left but isn’t one-hundredth as bad as MSLSD or FOX NOISE.

        • Fact is we ARE different. Lefty is way more respectful than teabagger, Charlie, my love.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Anita

            I never saw the outcome of the Sparty Boise State basketball game.

            I assume the Broncos left severely trounced. Yes, no??

            • Noooooo!. It was hard fought all the way. Had me nervous. Neither team ever got more than 8-10 points out of sight. Broncos had nothing to be ashamed of. But of course..SPARTY RULES! :)

          • So long as I’M still your love, Anita!

            Now, as to Lefty being more respectful … depends on who is issuing the moniker … I suspect some of the Ayn Randers in here think being called a Left is much more disrespectful … can you think of anyone?

            It’s all nonsense in the end. left, right … we all need to get alone (ask Rodney King) … and it’s as likely to happen as BF admitting he’s wrong some day.

      • Sounds like someone watches an awful lot of Fox News!!

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Todd

      Never mind, I found the source.

      Lincoln Mitchell; Harriman Institute, Columbia University

      Presented as an editorial posted on Huffington Post.

    • For example, Bill O’Reilly’s explanation of why the Obama was reelected may, in fact, resonate, with the older and heavily white viewership of Fox, but it is precisely the wrong public message and messenger for the Party.

      Only read this far so far, but … bada-boom, bada-bing.

      • Charlie,

        Americans have just become a whole lot more stupid than they used to be. That’s all. They have become incapable by and large of engaging in debate. When facts which are contrary to their beliefs are produced, they tend to say something akin to “whatever” and walk away. They have developed, thanks I think to they way they were raised, a very short attention span. It has become a moment to moment society. 99 percent of what is out there is nothing but the equivalent of mental “spam”. If you don’t believe me, just look at the quality of entertainment. Woah! Vampires and Zombies!

        There is nothing out there anymore that anyone can wrap themselves around and worse there is nothing they want to wrap themselves around. You would have a better chance today having an intelligent conversation with one of Gregor Mendel’s fruit flies than the average 17 year old. Not to mention the fact that probably one tenth of one percent of high school grads today could identify who Mendel was. Not the case when I went to school.

        The society we have created has made, “thinking” and “feeling” equivalent to demonstrable fact. Empiricism has flown the way of the Dodo (pardon the pun).

        I said a long, long time ago that Rove and Morris were useless. Bush 2’s victories were more the result of right place, right time than any “grand strategy” of Carl Rove. Obama’s first victory, the same. He won on not being Bush. Second time around is much more complicated and I suspect may have the largest number of variables involved that we have ever seen including the “Cult” of personality which only FDR had in the past 100 years. I’ll also throw in:

        Romney’s Mormonism
        Romney’s wealth,
        Romney’s venture capitalism
        Romney’s reputation as a liberal among conservatives
        the “afraid to be a racist” vote
        The I need stuff vote
        The Republican war on women
        The Republican war on science
        The Republican war on blacks
        The Republican war on Hispanics
        The Republican war on immigrants
        The Republican war on the elderly
        The Republican war on the poor
        The Republican war on the sick and handicapped
        The Republican war on the gays

        Just reading that list would make any sane person want to laugh but it is all in perception and the perception is in those sound bite things thrown at you by the MSM. No facts, just repeated shots across the bow never answered by the Republican Party which I suspect has adopted that old Democratic Party aphorism from before WW 1. “Too proud to fight!”

        • Stephen,
          Honestly, it sounds like you’ve been watching too much Fox News…

          Maybe this will help:

          Dear Fellow White Men:

          C’mon guys, I keep thinking that you’re going to get it. You can’t still be holding on to that nostalgia for the 1950s when separate was equal, everyone was heterosexual and nice girls didn’t work. I’m not talking to all of you. Just the ones in the party that runs the House of Representatives. Looking at the newly-announced Republican House committee chairs — all of them very, very white men — I’m wondering why this hasn’t sunk in at all?

          I hoped the sea of white faces at the Republican convention was something maybe out of your control. I mean you didn’t pick all the delegates yourselves… you didn’t, right?

          I wanted to believe it when you said that Todd “Legitimate Rape” Akin was just one bad apple. OK, well Richard “Something That God Intended” Mourdock made it just two very bad apples. All right, then Paul Ryan became a silent bad apple since he agreed with Akin and Mourdock on policy. But still…

          When you held a Congressional hearing on women’s health and there were no women on the panel, it seemed that some junior staffer must have made a mistake in scheduling. Only men on a panel regarding women’s health? — I know that at least a few of you must have said: “There’s something missing here, but I just can’t put my finger on it.”

          With all your hand-wringing and analysis after an election where women and people of color decisively rejected you , it started to sound like the you got it. But then I took a look at these committee chairs.

          Now, I know you didn’t have too many choices for leadership. Out of 234 of you, there are only 19 women, five Latinos and one African American. And none of you is (at least openly) gay. But you didn’t think that even one of those members of Congress was qualified to run something? Anything?

          Take a look around you. There are more women in the country than men. White people make up 97 percent of your caucus, but only 78 percent of the country. We have an African American president, who was reelected by a coalition in which white men were a minority. And, thanks to his nominees, there are more women and people of color on the Supreme Court and federal courts around the country than ever before. The other side of the aisle looks more like America.

          Just give it a shot.

          Or at least, try.

          • Obama, bi-racial
            Holder, Black
            Biden, White
            Pelosi, White
            Reid, White
            DWS, White
            Hillary, White
            Bill, White
            Sibelius, White
            Napolitano, White..or is that white hispanic?
            Geithner, White

            Pot/kettle

          • Mostly Todd, we used to call this window dressing. Some call it a Potemkin village, others are reminded of Thieresenstat The “show” camp for the Red Cross in Germany.

            Just one more thing, how about putting together an entirely new entitlement program, Obamacare ( one sixth of the economy?) with absolutely zero input from the other side. I stand by my stupidity comments made earlier. If you like being led around then enjoy it. I just want you or anyone on your side to answer that one little question I have been throwing out for months now, “Where is the money coming from”?

          • Todd, you’re lifting from HuffPo again. Please give site when you post.

    • for there to be a loud, extremist, heavily white faction in the Republican Party, constantly pushing that party rightward

      Is this the reason so many SUFA-ites won’t vote anything other than: “I don’t know.”?????

      • Just for the hell of it, compare the Republican platform of the past year to JFK’s platform from 1960. Of course, you have to leave off the Gay thing and abortion and even contraception because they were so far off the mainstream that nobody would have even thought to question the status quo. “Extremist”, “Rightward” my ass. For the past forty years the Republicans have been swimming upstream against the current and not even managing to stay in place.

        I wonder what my reception would be in a Reform Democrat club if I walked in and announced I was a proud JFK Democrat?

        • Stephen,
          Do you see the obvious in this? Maybe the Republican platform is…a little out-of-date?

          Maybe it would help if they started moving towards the 21st Century?

          Or wait – you all want to take back our country.

          Is 1960 now your goal?

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Todd

            It seems those on the “Left” don’t understand the difference between the words “BACK” and “BACKWARDS”.

          • It was not a terribly bad time for us in the country. There was the matter of integration which Eisenhower started working on and Kennedy followed up on. A hell of a lot less kids were “fatherless”. Drugs were confined to the bottom of the Barrel and music was at least intelligible. People worked hard, made slow but steady progress. Many had defined pension plans, unions were respected. We were going to reach the moon in ten years and had goals as a nation. And of course, there was. “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”.

            JFK is still the “gold” standard for many, I just wonder how many know what he stood for. Todd, your president’s favorite word is “unsustainable” would that he’d understand the meaning of that word.

            Where’s the money coming from my friend? Answer me that.

  87. Just A Citizen says:

    CHANGE UP:

    Written by Rob Natelson on 23 November 2012

    The federal budget plan of Rep. Paul Ryan has been repeatedly characterized as “extreme.” (I Googled, “Ryan plan extreme” and got over 43,100,000 hits.)

    In reality, several Western democracies have enacted far more “extreme” deficit elimination plans in recent years—and with great success. In the early 1990s, Canada was laboring under about as much debt as the U.S. now is, measured as a share of the economy. In a new article, former Canadian prime minister Paul Martin (a Liberal Party prime minister, no less) tells us how his government cut federal spending in absolute terms, balanced the budget in about five years, and lowered taxes.

    The Canadian reforms were preceded by similar successes in places like Alberta, New Zealand, and Great Britain. All required absolute drops in spending, with no sacred cows. Everyone has to feel that he or she is making a sacrifice for all.

    Ryan’s plan would only slow the increase in spending, not cut it. It would exempt people over 55 from Medicare changes, a political as well as a budgetary mistake. And it would not balance the budget until at least 2040—if at all.

    In other words, a fundamental flaw of the Ryan plan is that it is not sweeping enough.

  88. Just A Citizen says:

    A very good one and worth complete duplication here: from American Thinker.

    The Governing Class and the Decline of America
    By Steve McCann

    The United States will not reverse its descent into the abyss of financial and societal bankruptcy until the current political and governing establishment is replaced. That will not happen until the American people, who have been deliberately ill-educated and deceived, experience first-hand the early stages of the turmoil and suffering extant in Europe and elsewhere.

    While professing to care for the interests of the average person, the underlying motivation for the vast majority of the governing class or Establishment is first and foremost self-aggrandizement and the acquisition of wealth. While a few may be motivated by ideology, the preponderance are not.

    There are no offices on Connecticut Avenue in Washington D.C. with signs reading “The Republican Establishment” or the “The Democratic Establishment”; rather it is an amalgam of like-minded groups with one common interest: the control of the government purse-strings and the attendant power contained within.

    The Republican and Democratic political establishments are made up of the following:

    1) many current and nearly all retired national office holders whose livelihood and narcissistic demands depends upon fealty to Party and access to government largesse;

    2) the majority of the media elite, including pundits, editors, writers and television news personalities based in Washington and New York whose proximity to power and access is vital to their continued standard of living;

    3) academia, numerous think-tanks, so-called non-government organizations, and lobbyists who fasten onto those in the administration and Congress for employment, grants, favorable legislation and ego-gratification;

    4) the reliable deep pocket political contributors and political consultants whose future is irrevocably tied to the political machinery of the Party; and

    5) the crony capitalists, i.e. leaders of the corporate and financial community as well as unions whose entities are dependent on or subject to government oversight and/or benevolence .

    The current iteration of the Democratic establishment was begun during Franklin Roosevelt’s 12 years in office as the Party chose to follow the lead of those such as Benito Mussolini in Italy, who promoted government as the source of all salvation and survival. This philosophy fit in nicely with those whose egos and drive was directed toward the aggregation of power and wealth.

    The Republican members of the governing class, with the exception of the presidency of Ronald Reagan and the Republican controlled House of Representatives from 1995 to 1998, have been content since 1946 to merely slow down the big-government policies of the Democrats, while publicly decrying their tax and spend policies. However, in truth, many have been comfortable with reaping the financial and ego-gratifying rewards of such indifference.

    Since the1950’s this overall scenario has been tolerated and generally ignored as the nation was experiencing overwhelming and seemingly endless prosperity. The Democrats, with the tacit consent of the Republican establishment, promoted an ever-increasing litany of government programs to ostensibly help the people, under the rubric that the nation could not only afford it but was, in fact, obligated to guarantee a “decent” standard of living for everyone. Further, in the 1960’s the American left, as the Republican establishment turned a blind eye, began to dominate the education agenda. The public’s children were no longer taught American history and the importance of individual liberty; instead, the basics of capitalism and wealth creation were demonized. Additionally, the essential characteristic of a flourishing republic — a society wedded to honor, decency and integrity — was demeaned and ridiculed.

    Thus the citizenry has become more willing to not only vote for whoever promises the most financial security, but they are now easily susceptible to unconscionable demagoguery and are increasingly tolerant of dishonesty as well as unethical behavior. Today, with the advent of welfare, food stamps, near endless unemployment benefits, free health care (Medicaid), and a myriad of other state and federal programs, the Democrats have succeeded in creating a virtually permanent voting bloc. One the Republican Establishment now claims, if they wish to win future elections, they must pander to as part of a new strategy of inclusion. Yet, by their acquiescence and indifference over the years, they helped create their electoral dilemma.

    How have all these promises and deceptions perpetrated on the American people placed the nation’s financial future in jeopardy? Since 1956 the United States has seen a phenomenal growth in its Gross Domestic Product from $3,700 Billion (inflation adjusted) to $16,100 Billion (+335%). However, government spending at all levels has grown from $978 Billion (inflation adjusted) to $6,400 Billion (+554%) and the nation’s debt, $2,250 Billion in 1956 (inflation adjusted) is now $16,300 Billion (+625%). (source: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com)

    As of today, the nation’s true indebtedness (promises that have been made for spending obligations, less all the taxes the Treasury expects to collect) exceeds $222,000 Billion. The indebtedness to Gross Domestic Product ($16,100 Billion) is a staggering 13.8 to 1. The United States is not facing bankruptcy, it is bankrupt.

    Yet there is no sense of urgency or desire on the part of the governing class to level with the American people. This nation is living on the residue of the economic growth begun in the 1950’s and accelerated in the 1980’s. That tidal wave of prosperity has ebbed. The United States has entered into a death spiral of unrestrained spending, excessive taxation, printing near worthless money, and stagnant economic activity. Rather than be straightforward with the populace, the governing class is content to paper over the problem by the usual shell games of phony long-term spending cuts, more borrowing, and prevarications about the efficacy of raising taxes on “the rich.”

    The true nature of the GOP establishment’s motivation has been exposed by their reaction to the Tea Party movement. This grassroots rebellion was the first manifestation of the awareness by a large portion of the American public of the nation’s problems and ultimate consequences. Despite the overwhelming success of the Tea Party working within the Republican Party in the 2010 mid-term elections, nearly all of the Republican elites downplayed their success and fell-in with the mainstream media and the Democrats in their well-worn and gratuitous aspersions against these concerned and patriotic Americans. The Tea Party movement poses a threat to not only the accumulated power of the governing class but their livelihoods, thus the concerted effort to marginalize them by any vile or preposterous means possible.

    The United States finds itself in a circumstance once thought unthinkable. An ill-educated and near morally bankrupt society increasingly made up of those dependent on government combined with a governing class whose primary interest is themselves. The nation cannot, therefore, make any meaningful course correction unless and until the people finally understand they have been lied to and conned by the current establishment. That will, in all likelihood, not occur until America faces imminent collapse and the citizenry turns on those who brought the nation to its knees.

  89. Just A Citizen says:

    And a follow up, which also tackles Charlie’s rant against “old white men”. Again from the Thinker:

    Target: Old White Men
    By Selwyn Duke

    While modern society prides itself on being unbiased, it’s no exception to the rule that every age has its fashionable prejudices — and unfashionable people. Among the latter today are white men, and the closer they are to “dead white male” status, to use a favored leftist descriptive, the greater the disdain in which they’re held.

    Thus do we see sneering at “old white men.” Earlier this year, Senator Harry Reid — one well acquainted through experience with old-white-male machinations — complained of “angry old white men” who bankroll conservative causes. More recently, the old-white-media paper the Guardian published a piece about America’s changing demographics titled, in part, “No country for angry old white men….” Ah, yes, it’s not just that they’re old, white, and men, that Triad of Turpitude. They’re “angry,” too. So just dismiss them out of hand, with their agenda born of blinding, irrational hatred. It’s another example of projection, from the group (leftists) that makes intellect-clouding emotionalism an art.

    If we’re to define matters based on group identification, however — and the left makes clear we will — there is an irony here.

    You could roughly say that old white men built the whole modern world.

    You can precisely say this if you include in the category the budding old white men known as younger white men. Who were all the great inventors, innovators, and philosophers from ancient Greece and Rome up through medieval and modern Europe and the United States? Who forged the West? Who birthed democracy? Who improved upon it, giving us our Constitution and modern republican government? There is a reason why most of the busts and pictures of legendary figures portray old white men.

    We might also note that while old white men probably weren’t the first to practice slavery, they were the first to eliminate it. The same can be said of human rights: old white men had lots of company trampling them. They were alone in crafting the modern conception of them.

    And is America really advancing as old white men’s cultural and political weight wanes? During what group’s hegemony were our national finances, morality, culture, and economic growth healthiest? Is there a group with a better track record of running successful civilizations? As to this, if only old white men had voted during the last 50 years, we likely wouldn’t be facing the fiscal cliff that hangs over us like a sword of Damocles.

    Of course, much demonization of old white men is mere artifice, an effort to sell an inferior product (liberalism) by discrediting its opposition. “Hey, why buy from these white-prune Willy Loman salesmen when you can patronize skilled salespeople? We’re young, we’re hip, and quick with the lip!” Yet this appeal only works by playing on very real prejudices. Exposition of the anti-white variety has been done to death in the Reality Media. It was epitomized when Susan Sontag said, “The white race is the cancer of human history” and thus proved that some white people certainly are. But far more interesting and less discussed is the other bias relevant here: that against the aged.

    For most of history, old was gold. There is the stereotype of the wise old man, and, historically, societies would be governed by “elders.” For example, ancient Sparta had a council of elders, and only men of at least 60 years of age qualified. And, of course, insisting that children respect their elders was once common.

    This now has been turned on its head. One underappreciated reason why John McCain lost the 2008 election is that he appeared old — an old-looking candidate hasn’t won the presidency since the TV era’s advent — whereas Barack Obama seemed young and hip. And while fear that the person may die in office and our eye-candy culture certainly explain this in part, an increasingly significant factor is that many view seniors as they do our Constitution: old and yellowed and not relevant to our time. Just consider how the only consistent stereotype the hit show Seinfeld played upon was that of older people — and it was wholly unflattering. They were portrayed as doddering, out of touch, dishonest, egotistical, argumentative, and petty, too engrossed in trivial matters to ponder what’s truly important (such as, apparently, figuring out how to find someone more attractive to sleep with).

    Of course, as George Soros, Warren Buffet, Noam Chomsky, and many others prove, “Wisdom doesn’t always come with age; sometimes age just shows up all by itself.” Yet even if the two are joined at the hip, it won’t matter among a people who devalue wisdom. Note that the definition of the word — until dictionary writers lost their wisdom — was “knowledge of what is true or good.” But there is no such thing in a relativistic universe, that realm with favored mantras such as “That’s your ‘truth'; someone else’s may be different” and “Don’t impose your values on me!” There can be no objective “good” if there is no God; nothing can be truly “true” if there is no Truth. And what is left when people no longer perceive Truth’s existence and thus cannot use it as a yardstick for behavior? There then is just taste, preference, and what do we call the moment’s consensus tastes?

    Fashions.

    And this is where the elderly cannot compete. People who believe in Truth understand it’s timeless; that those who have lived longer will generally have apprehended more of it; and that it doesn’t matter if older people aren’t “with the times,” only whether the times are with the Truth. But the young will always be more with the fashions. And owing to that dislocation from Truth, they will often embrace fashions even when they’re fallacies. They won’t know they’re fallacies, either, as moderns’ only perceived standard for judging such things is the fashions themselves. And they won’t care what elders have to say about tried and true “wisdom.” It would be much like telling them that they should dispense with pizza in favor of their grandparents’ 1940s biscuits and gravy. It’s all a matter of preference, so why should they subordinate their tastes to those of the past?

    This gets at the insidiousness of modern liberalism. The French revolutionaries sought to erase the past by starting history anew with their revolution’s first year, 1789; the Khmer Rouge sought to do so with their “Year Zero.” But revolutionary change is too obvious; it doesn’t gently boil the frog as does modern liberalism’s evolutionary change. Progressives don’t make any major pronouncements, dear citizen, about the first year of the rest of your life. They simply disconnect each generation from the last — from the past — with the message that, hey, ya’ gotta be with it, which means being nothing like grandpa. And the “it” is change, not tradition; current tastes, not Truth; fashions and not fact. Just convince the young to ignore the old or dead — especially if they’re white and male — the people who formulated Western civilization’s recipe, and that Occidental delicacy is history. Then you will have started history anew not with an iron fist, but sleight of hand that keeps the frog simmering soundly.

    Roman philosopher and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero once said, “To be ignorant of the past is to be forever a child. For what is the time of a man, except it be interwoven with that memory of ancient things of a superior age?” Demonizing white men old or dead keeps the young and alive disconnected from them and hence from the past. This gives us a civilization of children, just the kind of people a pied piper can lead.

    • We might also note that while old white men probably weren’t the first to practice slavery, they were the first to eliminate it.

      I glanced at this one line and thought … Yep, that explains “logic” all right. Have you any idea how absurd a statement (while factually true) is? Of course not … because you’re still wearing the blinders you put on, probably, 50 years ago … oy vey.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I am interested in your explanation of how a “factually true” statement is “absurd”.

      • Charlie, you are way off the mark on this one my friend. This is allowing your “feeling” side to overwhelm your Factual thinking side. Watch out or you will become Flag. .

      • See Charlie…. there is where you are in error. You claim the statement is factually true and at the same time absurd. How do you rectify that in your mind. Absurd is, quite literally, almost the complete opposite of factually true. Absurd means without relation to reality. Something without relation to reality cannot, by definition, be factually true.

        I understand you are a partisan guy. As such, you often are unwilling to concede any points at all that refute your position (even if those points are “factually true,” apparently). And this is where your credibility breaks down. Allow me to expand on this, hopefully without upsetting you too much.

        During those days when I argued voraciously with BF, my main complaint with him was that he was unwilling to concede a point regardless of its validity. He is set in his mind as to what his beliefs are. As such, I posited that he was either unwilling, or unable, to expand his mind and learn and grow from the discussions that he had with others. Over time, I have seen BF remain consistent in his positions, and thus, knowing that he is unwilling to acknowledge any truth that he doesn’t believe in, I stopped debating him on issues where we differed in opinion. He is a smart guy but often bull-headed and certainly idealistic on many topics.

        You, sir, despite your extreme dislike for BF, are absolutely no different when it comes to your maxims being challenged. It doesn’t matter what is real and what is not when arguing with you. All that matters is what you choose as your reality. You are every bit as bull-headed and every bit as idealistic. But the difference between you and BF is two-fold. First you are more caustic, more abrasive, if you will. You choose ridicule as your primary defense against what you disagree with. Your very statement here is a great example. You first ridicule “logic” on the right, despite that having no basis in reality, and you conclude by insulting JAC’s character, with what seems to me to be a thinly veiled claim that he is a racist (I could be wrong on this). Your consistent asshole routine with BF is another great example. When you can no longer pursue the debate along logical lines, you resorted to name calling and ridicule.

        The second difference is more of an opinion than anything else… when compared to BF, you are more often WRONG and when you are wrong, you are far more often VERY wrong. BF can be abusive, caustic, and demeaning. And you may think he is a heartless and mean individual, but he is arguing along lines that are both fact-based (in many cases) and logically sound even if they are not right. You may not agree with him, but what I have seen thus far is that you lack the ability to out-DEBATE him. Your beliefs are (admittedly on your part I believe, but you can correct me if I am wrong) on the fringe of what most Americans believe. So are his.

        BUT…. his are on the fringe in that he moves away from government power and control towards individual liberty. Yours are on the fringe in the opposite direction. You believe a free country with men who rise to power due to wealth or privilege is somehow worse that a country where men rise to power through the means of who has the bigger gun. I believe that both are bad, but your ideal is FAR worse than BF’s ideal. Both are equally screwy, in my opinion. His in that man is not capable of achieving his ideal on a grand scale even though man is capable of it on a micro-scale. Yours in that history has shown time and again that it is both destructive and damaging to the vast majority.

        Do you see the difference that I am making with this? I don’t mean it to be insulting. BF often places too much faith in human nature. You place too much faith in government, somehow believing that by taking a corporation, changing its name to government and giving it better weapons it will work in some magical different way than the corporation did.

        I understand you will take this posting the wrong way, that you will be offended and feel I am attacking you while defending BF. That isn’t my intent. But you have to take a step back and see the similarities between your positions and understand that, for those reasons, you are probably taken less seriously than he is when you make your statements. My view is that you have determined that by acting like the stereo-typical “New Yorker,” (abrasive, loud, and using ridicule and attempts to belittle those who disagree with you) you will win the day. And while you will claim that “BF disrespects me so I offer him the same,” the fact is that you treat EVERYONE here that way who disagrees with you, not just BF.

        But the reality is that until you are able to back up arguments with fact based discussion, engage those you disagree with with respect and hold those discussions with an honest look at reality, you won’t be taken seriously by those that you discuss with. As a general rule, Todd and I agree on little, but when he debates with me he generally sticks to the FACTS as he sees them and we can agree on some things while disagreeing on others. He seems (at least I think) to at least respect that I am smart and willing to debate reasonably. I certainly feel that way about him, despite our (both of us) sometimes rude escalations in the past.

        And the thing is, Charlie, I know you are smart. I know that you are a nice guy, at least you were when we met each other when you were in NC for the blues festival those many years ago. I think you could bring a lot to the discussion if you were willing to do what I am stating here. I am certainly not attempting to be on a soap box. I am far from perfect and have been as guilty as anyone here of all the things that I am laying at your feet. But I am really, truly trying my best to practice what I am preaching. Take my advice for what it is worth (perhaps nothing). You don’t have to respond. We don’t have to have some war of words over this. Just mull it over.

        BF still granted me one of the best compliments that I can imagine in political discourse when he stated that I am willing to cast aside any position that I have if someone can provide me with facts that show I am wrong, that I am ruled by logic, not ideological boundaries. I took that to heart and take great pride in always attempting to continue doing what BF said. I have taken to heart every single criticism leveled at me here at SUFA and attempted to be better today than I was yesterday. I offer these thoughts with the same intention for you. You can be better than what we have seen here. I know that. I hope you will choose to be. You have too much to offer for me to give up on you yet :)

        • Hey man, don’t drag me into this!!! ;)

        • Okay, so I read through this condescending commentary and although it started off with the potential for debate, it ended where it had to end … so it goes.

          But the difference between you and BF is two-fold. First you are more caustic, more abrasive, if you will

          Only if you accept being called names by a coward. I don’t. I call him an asshole when he acts like one. Why would I debate someone so bullheaded as to assume he knows a) what was in the mind of a man who lived 150+ years ago, b) everyone else he argues with and/or c) myself? Anyone with that level of hubris, who is never wrong, is not worth “debating”. I have friends (lefties, of course) who peak in here from time to time and think I’m nuts for engaging. Most lefties do not believe in the black/white scenario of logic. It simply isn’t realistic (pay attention to this realism thing because it sure pops up further down in your presentation).

          You claim the statement is factually true and at the same time absurd. How do you rectify that in your mind. Absurd is, quite literally, almost the complete opposite of factually true. Absurd means without relation to reality. Something without relation to reality cannot, by definition, be factually true.

          So, if a rapist captures a woman (or man), rapes her/him repeatedly, then lets her/him go, by your logic, he is her savior. Factually, true. Realistically, absurd.

          It is factually true that white men ended slavery, yes. It is an absurd argument because a) it was white men who put blacks into slavery (physically and legislatively), b) the time it took for them to “free” blacks; c) the method by which it happened and d) the 100 plus years it took to transition slavery into voting rights. It is the gray area we argue here often. To proclaim white men as the black man’s hero (how I view “the white man ended slavery” argument) is an absurd argument because slavery was written into the constitution, literally, by white men. It is a much more absurd argument to proclaim the white man as the black man’s savior based on the mitigating facts of the argument.

          I do see your points, but again; factually true is the black and white of it. the mitigating circumstances (like another hundred years before the voting rights act) puts a hue of gray all over the canvas.

          But, if the white man was the black man’s savior, much of the credit would therefore go to Mr. Lincoln (who we all know by now, benefit of BF) “hated blacks” …

          couldn’t resist that one

          When you can no longer pursue the debate along logical lines, you resorted to name calling and ridicule.

          Nonsense and I think you know it. I respond to name calling, usually at the point where “debate” is pointless and almost ALWAYS after someone does it first. We handle it differently. You choose to not engage. Someone calls me a name, they get it back. I don’t let the asshole keep going without response. I don’t have the time or desire to “debate” bull-headedness. You may choose to believe BF out-debates me (or anyone else) with logic. Since you use a similar tract (logic/reason, not abrassiveness) and have a similar ideology as he does, it only makes sense what you believe. You’re wrong, but that’s okay too :)

          I refuse to engage him when his assumptive world is the source of his FACTs. We (you and I) once debated free markets and I stopped because I felt your arguments were also based on complete assumptions (that little businesses would eventually eat away at corporations, etc., and restore some equality to the economy) I believe we did so cordially, without name calling. There comes a point in any debate when black and white vs. gray is pointless. I refuse to see the world as simply black and white. BF (and many of you in here) can’t see the gray (or refuse to). That’s your choice, your option.

          You claim I ridicule as a first defense. That’s baloney. I ridicule when someone (in my opinion) is being abrasive or caustic. The Lincoln “debate” is the best and freshest example.

          Here is BF’s first response to my shit stirring about seeing the lincoln movie and asking how you lunatics on the right were once democrats:

          Let me guess -you believe a movie about Lincoln is the truth.
          ahahahhaha

          Lincoln was a racist, he hated blacks, he want all of the shipped back to Africa.

          FACTS: Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, had the army in NY fire on protesters, etc, etc. All factually true; the “apparent” signs of a usurper of rights … except for the gray areas; the fact there was a war that had split the country going on, etc. See up above; factually true, absurd to lay claims that have mitigating circumstances; black and white vs. gray.

          Lincoln “Hated Blacks” … where’s the debate on this? Where are the facts? Where do you stand on this, USW? Did he hate blacks or not? Even JAC saw the gray area in this “debate” that the time in which Lincoln lived (until well into the 20th century–even Truman used the word “nigger” to describe blacks) … of course there are mitigating circumstances and those mitigating circumstances shade the black and white of an issue. Unless, as BF, you believe they don’t and Lincoln’s off-color comments are labeled “racist” and/or the assumption is made that “he hated blacks”.

          when compared to BF, you are more often WRONG and when you are wrong, you are far more often VERY wrong

          I think BF speaks more to your positions so it’s natural for you to accept that. My left friends feel the same way about BF’s (and your) positions; that he is wrong (often insanely wrong), but that’s the difference in where we all stand on politics in general. Anyone taking a black and white argument (to me) couldn’t be more wrong most of the time. My lefty friends agree. I don’t expect a conservative site to find agreement with lefties, USW. If you guys were to take your arguments to a liberal site, you’d probably get the same treatment lefties get in here. But that’s what makes this more fun for me. When there are points to be made, I engage. Once it gets absurd (as I see it), there’s no point in engaging. It’s just foolish to do so. A year or more ago, BF claimed George Bush was a genius for how he made out personally financially when some of the businesses he ran collapsed. Factually, Bush made a ton of money. You really don’t think there was more to it than that? If not, you’re choosing not to. The man simply isn’t all that bright, certainly no genius.

          By the standard of financial success, the two people who won the lottery yesterday are the true geniuses (what I believe our American dream has become–a lottery ticket). They may not be able to read, but they hold the winning tickets. Geniuses, really?

          You believe a free country with men who rise to power due to wealth or privilege is somehow worse that a country where men rise to power through the means of who has the bigger gun. I believe that both are bad, but your ideal is FAR worse than BF’s ideal. Both are equally screwy, in my opinion. His in that man is not capable of achieving his ideal on a grand scale even though man is capable of it on a micro-scale. Yours in that history has shown time and again that it is both destructive and damaging to the vast majority.

          Boy, are you making some assumption as to what I believe here … and I do not agree for a second with the propaganda you choose to cherish about what “history has shown”. Not for a second, but I don’t have time for this debate today. I think I’ve done that one a thousand times here. Your ideology, it seems to me, cannot accept that some of your historical facts are nothing more than propaganda.

          BF often places too much faith in human nature. You place too much faith in government, somehow believing that by taking a corporation, changing its name to government and giving it better weapons it will work in some magical different way than the corporation did.

          You were doing great until these last few paras … oy vey, do you guys like to assume what people believe and then use typical propaganda talking points to belittle a position. I’m not offended, so don’t think that. But there’s nothing “magical” about it, USW. Do you really think the hostess workers couldn’t continue making those dopey cupcakes and twinkies if the government reopened the factor tomorrow? I’m positive they could.

          I understand you will take this posting the wrong way, that you will be offended and feel I am attacking you while defending BF. That isn’t my intent. But you have to take a step back and see the similarities between your positions and understand that, for those reasons, you are probably taken less seriously than he is when you make your statements. My view is that you have determined that by acting like the stereo-typical “New Yorker,” (abrasive, loud, and using ridicule and attempts to belittle those who disagree with you) you will win the day. And while you will claim that “BF disrespects me so I offer him the same,” the fact is that you treat EVERYONE here that way who disagrees with you, not just BF.

          Me thinks the thin skin argument has found its way to the surface. Pure nonsense. As to “being taken seriously” … come on, do you really believe my intent here is to win you people over to my side? And do you EVER see yourselves as doing the exact same thing you’re claiming I do? EVERYONE? Really? I disagree, but if you need to cling to that, so be it. Stero-typical New Yorker … you need to get out of the country more, USW. Your view, quite frankly, is wrong. I’m a liberal you guys can’t handle, is my view. The 10-15 regulars in here (if that many) like to be on what they consider is “the winning side” of all arguments. You really think that is an objective debate? Lefties aren’t going to “win” or be taken “seriously” in here once push comes to shove. Hell, many of your regulars are defending seceding from the union. As they say on ESPN: Come on, man!

          But the reality is that until you are able to back up arguments with fact based discussion, engage those you disagree with with respect and hold those discussions with an honest look at reality, you won’t be taken seriously by those that you discuss with

          I think even Todd has noticed how you guys seem to have your own set of FACTS and until you guys realize there are other FACTS (actual facts), there’s no point in debating a brick (or set of bricks). If Todd chooses to be the “reasonable” lefty in the crowd, God bless him … but I’ve seen him frustrated from the nonsense as well. But when lefties call your (in general, not just you) tactics nonsense, we’re not to be taken seriously. Trust me, we understand that much better than you think.

          An “honest look at reality” … seriously, dude, are you kidding me? I can see SUFA from my porch on Pluto (as far as “reality” goes).

          I’ll have to somehow live with me not being taken seriously here. I think I can manage.

          I do not aspire to whether or not you (or anyone else in here) thinks I am “smart”. Please save the condescending attitude for someone who needs your approval. It isn’t me, USW.

          BF still granted me one of the best compliments that I can imagine in political discourse when he stated that I am willing to cast aside any position that I have if someone can provide me with facts that show I am wrong, that I am ruled by logic, not ideological boundaries.

          He “granted” you this, huh? Wow … you’re a fortunate man (sarcasm intended). BF, who wouldn’t admit he was wrong with a gun to his head, told you that? Think about what you just said … oh, boy.
          But I’ not offended, so please don’t think that. I’ll do my best to point out why I’m responding like a typical New Yorker in the future, if that helps (but I doubt it will). :)

          • Charlie,
            First, you are profane and, to use your words, a coward. The best you can do is attempt to slander others to cover your rather large lack of competence. Typical school yard bully.

            I am “never” wrong because
            1) I pick the topics of discussion where I have a tremendous amount of knowledge and background – I do not dabble in topics where I do not have such a background, like football.
            You on the other hand pick topics where your background is spotty and incoherent.Except when you talk about football, it seems.
            2) I uses facts often. You rarely use facts and instead you make things up.
            3) I use reason. You rarely use reason – indeed, it appears you actually use anti-reason; if it doesn’t make sense, you champion it.

            But once in a while I get a fact wrong and lots of SUFA take great score in correcting me. One thing I don’t do when they find that is slander them, unlike you.

            “Most lefties do not believe in the black/white scenario of logic”

            Boy, isn’t that the most telling comment and admission you’ve made. There is nothing like admitting that an entire political class is irrational.

            ” slavery was written into the constitution, “

            *cough* Where do imagine this?

            This is what I mean – you make stuff up.
            I don’t know why you do this.

            Do you think your points are so weak that you have to try to fool others by making stuff up so to bolster your weak position? Do you not have the guts to either 1) admit your position is weak or 2) simply have trust that your position as it stands on facts and reason is strong enough to make your point.

            To give “credit” to someone who actively worked to keep the enslaved is bizarre.

            The ones you should be giving credit to are the ones that constantly fought against slavery long before Lincoln, against Lincoln from before the war and after.

            But you don’t. You do not even know who they are because you have glitter in your eyes over Lincoln.

            . You may choose to believe BF out-debates me (or anyone else) with logic.

            But I do, because you rarely bring reason and logic to a debate.
            You don’t even give yourself a chance.

            I refuse to engage him when his assumptive world is the source of his FACTs.

            No, it is Facts, not assumptions.
            You can’t tell the difference!~! Maybe that’s the problem – you do not know what a fact is and what an assumption is.

            I refuse to see the world as simply black and white.

            …and instead see it as a single color of grey.

            Lincoln “Hated Blacks” … where’s the debate on this? Where are the facts?

            There is no debating facts.
            You believe I should entertain your “debate” on whether 2+2=4 or =5??
            I gave you facts but you went potty mouth and began beating your head. Facts do tend to do that to you, sir. It is a common reaction we have seen from you.

            I show his own words and his own actions. But that is not good enough for you.
            But for others, you don’t even have any words or show any actions, and you make massive nefarious claims about them – you call the cowards and make up stories.

            So this is Charlie, he defends the immoral tyrant by refusing to read the tyrant’s own words, and condemns others based on mere fantasy.

            A year or more ago, BF claimed George Bush was a genius for how he made out personally financially when some of the businesses he ran collapsed.

            And you lie. You are blatant, bald face liar.

            His in that man is not capable of achieving his ideal on a grand scale

            This is where you are ignorant.

            I have no desire to rule your life or anyone else’s live. There is no “grand scale” to achieve.

            You want to run everyone else’s life, your grand scale is to sit at the top of the heap and have your weight lifted by others. You need a grand scale because you and your ego are so huge.

            I don’t.
            Those that seek freedom, don’t need you or that grand scale to sit one

            It is not a fault I don’t seek it, Charlie, it is a virtue.

            • I won’t read beyond the normal bullshit, so here you go, USW. I’ll keep it short and sweet. Slavery is IN FACT written into the constitution (provisions regarding the return of slaves Article IV, Section 2 … ) then blow it out your ass, asshole.

              • The following is the text of the Fugitive Slave Clause:

                No person held to service or labour in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labour, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labour may be due.

                As in the other references in the Constitution dealing with slavery, the words “slave” and “slavery” are not specifically used. Historian Donald Fehrenbach believes that throughout the Constitution there was the intent to make it clear that slavery existed only under state law, not federal law. On this instance, Fehrenbacher concludes:

                Most revealing in this respect was a last-minute change in the fugitive-clause whereby the phrase “legally held to service or labour in one state” was changed to read “held to service or labour in one state, under the laws thereof.” The revision made it impossible to infer from the passage that the Constitution itself legally sanctioned slavery.

                So, no sir, it was NOT written into the Constitution.

                Try again, Charlie

    • We might also note that while old white men probably weren’t the first to practice slavery, they were the first to eliminate it.

      First, is this statement even true? There’s that word probably in there?

      Were “old white men” the first to eliminate slavery?

      Even if this statement is true, it’s still “absurd” because, after oppressing people in slavery for hundreds of years, taking credit for eventually freeing them is absurd. And it was not, for the most part, the slave owners who decided to free the slaves. The slave owners had to be forced to end slavery. And even after slavery was ended, the former slaves were treated as second class citizens for 100+ years. Hardly a reason to pat yourself on the back.

      It would be the equivalent of me holding you guys in slavery, and when someone forces me to free you, I take credit for setting you free…

      You can send your expressions of gratitude to Todd’s-Such-A-Great-Former-Slave-Owner.com…

    • This is another little gem:

      And is America really advancing as old white men’s cultural and political weight wanes? During what group’s hegemony were our national finances, morality, culture, and economic growth healthiest? Is there a group with a better track record of running successful civilizations? As to this, if only old white men had voted during the last 50 years, we likely wouldn’t be facing the fiscal cliff that hangs over us like a sword of Damocles.

      Seriously? So all our problems started when Obama took office? Does anyone remember a little thing called 2008? Or 2007?

      Does this guy think the earth is 4 years old?? I thought it was 6000 years old?

      Come on, the problems in today’s society are a direct result of the “old white men’s” actions of the past 50 years. They’ve been in charge. They raised the “spoiled brat kids” they’re now complaining about…

      This has become common among conservatives: Play the victim. It’s not my fault.

      Shameful.

      • Careful, Todd … you won’t be taken seriously …:)

        As per my reponse to USW above: The world is NOT black and white and to view it as such is AB-FUCKING-SURD!

        • Just A Citizen says:

          charlie

          Todd made a very valid point. And he made a silly point as well. But the substance is correct.

          The man’s comment about the last 50 years is absurd. But that was not the discussion of yesterday when you claimed something factual and absurd at the same time.

          This man’s statement is absurd because it conflicts with reality.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Todd

        While I agree that the 50 year view is incorrect, that is because the author is to shallow.

        WHO voted for those “white men” that then voted for ever expanding Govt living off the credit card?

        I will grant you it included white folks, but you must look to history to see when the “social” view started to take hold.

        It was the WOMEN voting. Then we add the impact of a new “social” contract with increased minority voting and you get a “socialist” party represented by both minorities, as minorities, and a bunch of white men who accept the “socialist” view.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Todd

        Additional: Why do you claim he is blaming Obama when he stated 50 years?

        I do agree his statement is “absurd”, however. As you point out, it was White Men who were in control. Although as I said above, all white men are not created equally. And this goes much deeper than just raising spoiled brats.

  90. Just A Citizen says:

    Mises spoke about loopholes in similar terms but at greater length at a conference in White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia, April 5-8, 1951. There he said:

    What is a loophole? If the law does not punish a definite action or does not tax a definite thing, this is not a loophole. It is simply the law. . . . The income-tax exemptions in our income tax are not loopholes. The gentleman who complained about loopholes in our income tax . . . implicitly starts from the assumption that all income over fifteen or twenty thousand dollars ought to be confiscated and calls therefore a loophole the fact that his ideal is not yet attained. Let us be grateful for the fact that there are still such things as those the honorable gentleman calls loopholes. Thanks to these loopholes this country is still a free country . . . .

  91. Just A Citizen says:

    Just came across this statement buried within an paper on Women in the Judiciary. Thought some might find it interesting and related to other discussions over the past couple of days.

    “Elite Mobilization and the Emergence of Affirmative Action
    Historically, personal agenda appointments largely filled vacancies in the federal judiciary, but this pattern began to shift in the 1950’s (Scherer, 2005). According to Scherer (2005), presidential agendas of judicial selection became more partisan-oriented during this time period for two reasons. First, the “old party system” broke down. Amateurs, who were “ideologically driven political activists” and unwilling to compromise replaced professional organizers who had once controlled the political parties (Scherer, 2005). The amateurs widened the ideological gap between the Republican and Democratic parties. In addition, they decreased the focus on political activism at the local level and set out to achieve national policy goals (Scherer, 2005). This disgusted many Americans, and fewer continued to identify themselves as a Democrat or a Republican. Consequently, interest groups took on the former role of parties, and they began to mobilize voters to support certain candidates. This entangled interests groups and specific ideological values with political parties. Thus, liberal groups like the ACLU and NAACP became intertwined with the Democratic Party, and conservative groups intertwined themselves with the Republican Party (Scherer, 2005). Interest groups then looked to the courts as the perfect venue to further their national policy objectives.
    Interest groups would not have injected their policy goals into the judiciary had there not been a transformation of jurisprudence in the federal courts. In the 1950’s, under the judicial activist style of the Warren Court, liberal interest groups increased the amount of litigation they brought to the federal judiciary (Scherer, 2005). Since the Warren Court was more sympathetic to constitutional protections for individuals than courts in the past, these interest groups felt comfortable bringing more cases. The increase in individual and constitutional rights litigation “transformed the federal judiciary into the principal political institution where the disadvantaged could seek redress that they could not otherwise obtain from the elected branches” (Scherer, 2005). Consequently, interest groups began to get more involved in the selection of lower court judges, so they could ensure that these cases would continue to be decided in a way that was favorable to them.”

    • Makes perfect sense. My only question is where they name the ACLU and NAACP as special interest liberal groups but do not name any conservative groups. I don’t remember that the John Birch Society ever got very far in the Republican Party. Who were the others, or were there none? Personally, I feel that the Democrats have this one all to themselves. The Republican party has “wings” within the party but, no driving force from outside and has demonstrated a reluctance to bring on or support under their banner, court challenges.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        SKT

        “National Rifle Association”???

        • Thought about that but don’t think so. It would depend a great deal on interpretation. If you believe the NRA takes a “traditionalist” approach then they are merely offsetting what the ACLU types are doing on the other side. It is an action vs reaction situation. For example if Chicago and DC were not so proactively anti-gun, something that is historically contrary to the framers intent, then there would be no NRA reaction. Whereas, our friends at the ACLU and NAACP sue to create new interpretations of old law or some (including me) would create new law by judicial fiat.

          The NRA seems to find a natural ally in the Republican party since the party seems more inclined towards traditional personal freedoms rather than “collective” rights. In the 2012 congressional races the NRA surprisingly endorsed some 58 pro 2nd amendment democrats. See below.

          http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/06/AR2010100606329_3.html

          • Just A Citizen says:

            SKT

            I don’t think the point was who took action vs. reaction but that special interest groups moved INTO the Two Parties displacing long time Political types.

            Another on the Con side was the Christian Coalition and its related groups that came on board with Reagan’s election.

            • Again, not so much an advocacy group as one that feels “spiritually” at home with a party representing more traditional values. I don’t think that you can divorce the action/reaction effect. Had the democratic party not gone overboard the way it did, would there have been a Christian Coalition at all?

              You can be convinced if you would like that these changes the democrats pushed needed to happen and they needed to happen now but I would argue that throwing the baby out with the bathwater has never been a particularly good strategy.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                SKT

                The argument is not about whether changes did or did not have to happen.

                It is about whether Special Interest groups displaced the Good Ol’ boys in the two major parties. And of course, that this then leads to more entrenched political parties.

                You know darn well the “Christian Coalition” was an ADVOCACY group and created great influence during the Reagan years. They helped him get elected for crying out loud. Although the force of this advocacy increased later it was the coalition that helped get out the vote he needed.

  92. When I first saw the “Bias Alert” headline on Fox News a month or so ago, I figured they were finally admitting the obvious…

    But no, they’re pointing the finger at anyone who doesn’t agree with their right-wing agenda. Now it’s GQ!

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/11/29/really-gq-names-romney-least-influential-person-2012/

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Todd

      Quite frankly your example doesn’t seem to fit with the point you are trying to make. It is an editorial piece. The author makes his point. Do you have a different one?

      I found the quote from GQ to be obviously biased, but then it is GQ so what should anyone expect.

      • JAC,
        I just haven’t seen the “BIAS ALERT” on Fox News in a little while. I thought it was humorous they would revive that for GQ.

    • Now this is the same GQ that when interviewing Marco Rubio asked when he thought the world was created? An obviously unbiased report on a pressing issue much more important than the 15 Trillion dollar budget deficit..

      You folks have your heads screwed on backwards.

      Hey Todd, Where is the money coming from?

      • Stephen,
        15 Trillion dollar budget deficit??? Wow, Obama’s really out-doing himself!!

        Who has their head screwed on backwards?

        • Hey! Todd Van Winkle, Wake up!

          http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/mass_roundup/2012/09/us-national-debt.html

          Perhaps you don’t believe in the concept, perhaps it can be disavowed? It’s only money, right?

          Actually thank you for your comment above regarding taxes and borrowing. To proceed with the conversation where I admit to being on shaky ground due to my lack of economics training. I merely helped run a small company and ran a home with four hungry little mouths in it. Let’s take the borrowing off the table as a revenue source. The reason I say this is because borrowing comes with the implication that the debt must be repaid with interest. That borrowing then merely gets translated into more deficit spending. So, we are then left with “Taxes” I don’t feel like doing the math. Can someone out there tell me what the tax rate should be across the board for everyone making any income at all to dry up a 15 Trillion dollar deficit? Not tomorrow, not next year but let’s say in a generation, 20-25 years.

          Now, Todd, there is a third possibility, printing money. This has been part of the equation up until now. Geitner says print and they print but, there is one minor problem:

          http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_the_Weimar_Republic

          There are those that would argue there is no parallel that Germany deliberately devalued to avoid reparations etc. but the reality is they spent money that was printed during and after the warm, that had nothing backing it. Sound familiar? Now things started to get under control in the mid ’20’s but the bad memory associated with destroyed lives led to the rise of National Socialism.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            SKT

            Todd was picking on your use of the word “DEFICIT” instead of the proper word “DEBT”.

            You have done it again with this post. It is a 16 Trillion DEBT.

            But lets just talk about how to address the 1.3 Trillion DEFICIT. Because until that is eliminated there is no way to reduce the DEBT.

            By the way, you one of the methods of paying it down.

            Breaking the debt promises. ie. DEFAULT

          • $16,000,000,000,000 debt / 325,000,000 people = $49,231 per person / 25 years = $1,969 per person per year for 25 years.

            Wanna start the ball rolling?

  93. Just A Citizen says:

    Here is a great example of how to use media to PUSH an agenda item by “forming public opinion” in advance of the actual policy effort. I have seen similar analysis before but this is the first one recently. Anyone want to bet that we see the home mortgage deduction put on the chopping block for those making over 250K? Just read the comments that reveal opinions already conditioned to react in that direction.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ben-hallman/mortgage-interest-deduction_b_2213304.html

  94. Just A Citizen says:

    D13

    Colonel, I have serious inquiry.

    I have been involved recently in reviewing and trying to get my congress critters to oppose the Senates attempt to ratify the UN conventions on the disabled and children.

    I was just told that the Veterans are writing letters of support for Ratification. Can you confirm this? Is it national or maybe just local?

    The conventions include a long list of stuff on “Children with disabilities” that could pose serious problems for Parents. Namely, State Takeover of decisions, like deciding what is ” in the best interest of the child”.

    Here is a link to a group who has raised the alarm bells in case you want to pass on the concern.

    parentalrights.org

    Hope all is well with you and yours.

    JAC

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13

      Ooops, forgot proper link; here it is.

      http://www.parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={5518816F-CE05-4294-8F90-C41AD67C94D2}#.ULgKjmfrR8E

    • JAC, if there is ANY Veterans group supporting any type of UN resolutions on anything, I would be amazed. The United Nations is “persona non grata” among any sensible American Veteran. However, in response to your inquiry, I checked with the Veterans groups that I am associated with in Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana, In addition, a close personal friend of mine runs a Veterans group in Connecticut and he has heard nothing of any support for this type of action. There is no letter nor support among any of these….and that is approximately 56000 vets.

      I followed your link and have to admit this is the first time I have heard of this group so I linked to the Texas group to see who is supporting the amendment the link shows. I found no Texas representative that supports the UN position.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        d13

        Thanks for the help.

        You might want to sound the alarm. Apparently Reid wants to get this approved next week.

        Senator Wyden, Oregon, is using the Veterans as part of his cover for supporting this. Also the standard claim that the USA needs to lead and what the hell, it has no binding provisions anyway. When asked then why do we need to ratify it? Well the Veterans and others think it a good idea.

        I think you get the picture.

  95. When, when, when, when WHEN is the BS going to stop? You people in Congress and all you who voted for Obama OWN IT!
    God help us all……….SECRET NEGOTIATIONS: A PATH TO DISASTER http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/11/secret-negotiations-a-path-to-disaster.php#comments

    • It will stop when you stop supporting it and stop voting for it.

      But not until then.

    • Walk Away, Republicans

      Carol Platt Liebau
      Blogger, Townhall.com

      Nov 29, 2012 10:43 AM EST
      Negotiations over the fiscal cliff are not going well for Republicans. Why? Because they are losing control of the narrative. Today’s Politico gave away the Obama administration’s game:

      There is only one way to make the medicine of tax hikes go down easier for Republicans: specific cuts to entitlement spending. Democrats involved in the process said the chest-pounding by liberals is just that — they know they will ultimately cave and trim entitlements to get a deal done.

      A top Democratic official said talks have stalled on this question since Obama and congressional leaders had their friendly-looking post-election session at the White House. “Republicans want the president to own the whole offer upfront, on both the entitlement and the revenue side, and that’s not going to happen because the president is not going to negotiate with himself,” the official said. “There’s a standoff, and the staff hasn’t gotten anywhere. Rob Nabors [the White House negotiator], has been saying: ‘This is what we want on revenues on the down payment. What’s you guys’ ask on the entitlement side?’ And they keep looking back at us and saying: ‘We want you to come up with that and pitch us.’ That’s not going to happen.”

      Got it? In other words, Obama wants Republicans to fight among themselves about the shape and size of a tax increase; THEN he wants them to be the ones who come up with the structural entitlement reforms that will be necessary to solve the US’s long-term financial crisis — so he can tell Americans that Republicans WANT to cut entitlements on the poor and middle-class IN EXCHANGE for tax increases on the evil rich.

      ”Scuse me, but what exactly is in this for the Republicans? Why should they play this game? Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan already put forward some structural Medicare changes during the campaign, only to have Democrats try to wage a Mediscare campaign against them. And Obama’s “plan” is a joke; as John Stossel notes, if the IRS took 100% of income over $1 million, it would only pay off 1/3 of THIS YEAR’s deficit and do nothing to solve the national debt.

      So far, the President has done NOTHING but offer one inflexible, entirely ideological ultimatum designed to divide Republicans: Raise tax rates on the rich, which will sustain the US government for approximately 8 days. At that point, he abdicates all pretense of leadership, and asks the opposing party — whom he routinely vilifies — to do the hard work of proposing entitlement cuts across the board . . . and offer proposals that will allow him to pose as a friend of the middle class and paint the GOP as heartless enemies of “working people” in the 2014 campaign.

      No thank you. As Reason’s Peter Suderman points out, in the unfortunate circumstances that the country goes over the fiscal clif and into recession, it’s not the Republicans’ agenda that will be stymied. And it isn’t ultimately the Republicans’ legacy that will be endangered.

      Republicans need simply to parrot endlessly that

      (1) they are willing to consider revenue increases;

      (2) Republicans have already offered suggestions to promote the long-term viability of programs like Medicare;

      (3) the President’s “plan” to raise taxes on the rich only raises enough to fund government for eight days;

      (4) they are simply waiting for the President’s ideas on how to address the other 90% to negotiate.

      If the President comes up with nothing between now and the deadline, over the cliff we go. He knew this issue existed. He asked for four more years to lead. So lead.

      This is not a time to permit the President to vote “present.”

      http://townhall.com/tipsheet/carolplattliebau/2012/11/29/walk_away_republicans

  96. @ V.H. I can’t help but feel that you are making allowances for Lincoln being human but not giving that save allowance for the men who wrote our Constitution. I suppose that’s because you like the outcome of Lincolns moves. And you think the Founding Fathers plan is flawed – you don’t like the outcome. Even though the plan started to fail in MHO when we stopped following the INTENT of the Constitution and of the Founding Fathers

    Perhaps allowances, V.H., yes, but why? Because of his actions. He was ESSENTIAL to the freedom of slaves.

    I do believe the founding fathers has a flawed plan, even if they didn’t believe it to be flawed. I’ll grand them their “best intentions” but factually, they did write slavery into the constitution. I don’t believe anyone can ever TRULY know the true INTENT of the founding fathers; that will always be subject to interpretation and lets’ face it, depending on whose ox is gored, such interpretation will be deemed true or revisionist.

    As far as the Constitution protecting only the rich-I think that is crap-they simply knew that for man to be free they must be able to own the products of their labor, they encouraged charity and a Moral society, and they tried to instate equal justice for all. Read the damn Constitution it is all about individual men being free to achieve , they attempted to protect the people from their government by separation of powers, and protect the individual minority and majority by creating a Country of laws.

    I don’t think it was crap (we disagree). Wealthy, educated men wrote the thing but the average citizen was not represented (probably didn’t know what was going on, quite frankly). Your points are well taken, but

    Read the damn Constitution it is all about individual men being free to achieve , they attempted to protect the people from their government by separation of powers, and protect the individual minority and majority by creating a Country of laws.

    who was “their government”? Wealthy white men, correct? Did the guy working the fields have anything to protect? Think about how many in the country were against the revolution. Not saying they were right, but they obviously didn’t have a say in the writing.

    If it hasn’t worked out as well as hoped blame it on man’s ability to nit pic the Constitution to the point that we aren’t following it anymore-hell the government are ignoring all kinds of laws, for no other reason than to achieve power over us. Power you want to give them.

    This is an assumption you (most of you) continually make about “MY” position. I wouldn’t give this government anything but the boot. MY government wouldn’t be comprised of the people sitting there now (except, maybe, for Bernie Sanders).

    And if all you want to repeat is Slavery, slavery-go ahead but understand- people back then made an argument that black people weren’t really persons, just like they are doing to babies in the womb now. Something which you think is okay. Same reasoning to allow evil, just different centuries

    Oy vey, with the slavery argument already. As for abortion, ONCE AGAIN, I’ll state my position. I believe live begins at conception; but that a woman should have the right to decide. Not because I’m pro murder, but because I am a man and do not have to carry, and can walk away much easier from a birth than a woman. I am not pro abortion, just the right of women to decide. If that is too gray an answer, you’ll have to ignore it. People literally in chains is quite different as I see it (probably because I can see it).

    And from my reading of your past writings-I would say today’s explanation is a lot less harsh-so maybe it was you -who was talking out of emotion and a desire to push buttons much more than I was reacting out of emotion. I suspect it was some of both

    We’re all passionate about our politics, V.H. No harm, no foul. When you call me Dum-Dum, I might respond in kind … but maybe not. When you declare what my positions are, I can guarantee I’ll call you a name back. :)

    Oh yea, from what I’ve read Socialism can’t come about without Capitalism. Seems they need the money it produces before they can instate all their programs to take the money away from the people and give it too the government to dole out as they see fit. A few men already have to much power over us-why do you want to give them more? When is to much control to much? It is a question no one has answered, at least in away, I can understand.

    Much of this is pure propaganda, but it’s too much to get into today. There are several businesses in the U.S. right now started via co-opting of workers; equal pay, responsibility, risk. Since the profits (as I see them) were made off the backs of workers, I don’t feel they “need” capitalism to produce.

    • I believe live begins at conception; but that a woman should have the right to decide.

      Before yous fill this with more paras attacking my illogical position on abortion. I don’t believe abortion is a good thing, but I refuse to tell a woman what she can/can’t do with her body … and until the birth itself, the life is within her body.

      • also for VH … Sorry I don’t answer all your questions. Many times I just don’t see them. I try to answer reasonable questions but I won’t repeat the same answers over and over. Don’t have the time or inclination. I usually come here weekdays either early in the morning (3-6 am) during breaks in my work or at work when there’s downtime or at lunch. Weekends depends on my schedule. I won’t engage a brick, however. Some in here are thick as bricks. Often, in my opinion, as VERY WRONG as USW claims I often am. We come from opposite poles, I guess, so each will often view the other as WRONG or VERY WRONG. :)

        • It does not matter which direction you approach a problem, Charlie.

          There are many paths up a mountain, but from the top we all see the same moon – Zen.

          You are wrong when you are irrational. It doesn’t not matter what path you choose if you think up is down, white is black, day is night, you ain’t going to make it to the top of the mountain.

          Your position isn’t wrong because of where you start – its wrong because it is unreasoned. You hold contradictions and false knowledge to be truth.

          It’s when you do that that you fall off the rails.

          • Then let us agree to disagree. If your reason requires a black and white scenario, it is at least equally wrong (perhaps more so).

            • Most things are black and white, Charlie. The only shades that exist are in preference not in facts and not in reason.

              You can prefer other men paying your way – as far as I know most people would rather have others buy them lunch then pay themselves.
              This is not where we debate, Charlie – frankly I don’t give a hoot about your preferences one way or another.

              But you are not arguing preferences – you are advocating ACTION and all action is black and white; You do or you do not.
              This is where it becomes black and white, Charlie and it is never grey.

              • This will be my last attempt at civility with the guy who ALWAYS STARTS IT (pay attention, for once, USW). There are ALWAYS mitigating circumstances behind all action, BF. We disagree vehemently. Try, for once, to understand that not everyone holds your opinion; that not everyone believes what you claim to be fact as fact; that there are more than enough counter-arguments to any single position (even yours). The actions taken on Fort Sumter, for instance … an act of aggression and violence. Suddenly you see a mitigating circumstance in that (the occupation of a territory). Now, are you being duplicitous in your black and white argument or what? There are ALWAYS mitigating circumstances, whether we approve, agree or disagree. It’s as simple as that … and quite frankly, for someone with your intelligence to deny it, reduces YOUR credibillity (pay attention again, USW) no end.

                Now, this is posted at 10:33 … I’ll be civil if you’re civil. If you can’t control yourself, so be it.

              • There are ALWAYS mitigating circumstances behind all action, BF.

                There are NOT “always” mitigating circumstances behind all action, Charlie.

                There are rationals.
                You act for a purpose.
                You want to achieve something you do not have right now.
                This is not a mitigating of anything.

                Those that respond to your initiation MAY claim against your action as the mitigation.

                “Charlie hit me, so I hit him back”
                You cannot claim “mitigating” as you initiated – I can claim mitigating because I responded.

                We disagree vehemently. Try, for once, to understand that not everyone holds your opinion; that not everyone believes w/hat you claim to be fact as fact;

                I do not claim “fact”
                Facts stand alone, Charlie. They are the same to me as to you.
                Because facts often undermine you, you pretend facts are merely assumptions and preferences. They are not.

                If you find a fact I have offered to be wrong, show it so. Many at SUFA have done that. Facts are facts, and a wrong fact is still a wrong fact even if I presented it.

                I do not need you to hold any opinion but your own. That is never a conflict.

                The conflict is on conflict. You believe you beating another man for his wallet is wrong or right is a matter of opinion.

                that there are more than enough counter-arguments to any single position (even yours). The actions taken on Fort Sumter, for instance … an act of aggression and violence. Suddenly you see a mitigating circumstance in that (the occupation of a territory). Now, are you being duplicitous in your black and white argument or what?

                Nonsense!
                My position has been crystal clear and consistent since the day you came, it has not changed a micron.

                I have never said that violence in defense is immoral. To call me duplicitous is a lie you repeat often.

  97. Here comes the talk of 1.4 trillion in new taxes over 10 yrs. 4.whatever trillion spending cuts over 10 years. We know all these numbers and more numbers are all just play numbers. Is it too much to ask to put plans out for only what will happen for the next 12 months and just play ball on a yearly scale? Seems like everything would be brought into much more understandable terms if we only talk about the next 12 months at a time. The argument can be made that ‘we need time and money to plan the future’. I don’t recall Obama planning before his first election to spend billions on green energy. The plan came into being after he took office ..meaning that the money majically appeared simply because he wanted to spend it. And then we realized within a 4 year frame that the money was ill spent. Still..we’re only talking about 4 years total. Why then are we talking about new taxes and ‘cuts’ over ten and more years. Our problems are here and now. The lefties here talk about angry white men..it’s time for some angrier women to take control of the money. You men have done enough damage. Honestly..put me in charge of that money and I’ll be damned if your’re getting 10 cents without a detailed explanation of why you need it..then if I happen to allow it, you’re only getting half what you think you need. Then you better report back with receipts and it better all add up. I don’t see what is so difficult.

  98. Charlie….I have been reading all this stuff about slavery so I decided to do a little research into this to see if it was “rich white men” that started slavery because I feel that this statement is condescending and racists in its entirety…..but here is what I found. I am open to other links and articles.
    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_did_slavery_start ( Bear in mind that I find Wiki an unreliable source but that seems to be factual for you ).

    “the Europeans had slaves going in the times of the Romans and the Greeks but until perhaps 100AD it was predominately all European slaves. It wasn’t really until Rome started opening up the Eastern trade routes hardcore that African and Middle Eastern slaves were available in Europe in excess. The Middle Easterners and Africans however had a long standing tradition of foreign slave labour as early as 1000 BC.” “A fact that is omitted here is that Europeans came to the slave trade very late in the day. For centuries before that, Arabs and Jews had been involved in a massive African AND European slave trade. People from as far away as England and Ireland were captured by Arab slavers and sold as sex slaves or slave labour. It really is about time that the so called African Americans were told the truth about the slave traders and who they were. Whitey came very late to the party.”

    I found this also….” Qur’an 23:1-6—The believers must (eventually) win through—those who humble themselves in their prayers; who avoid vain talk; who are active in deeds of charity; who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess—for (in their case) they are free from blame. ”

    I found this….” The colonists traded rum and mollasses with africa in exchange for slaves it was called the triangle trade.August of 1619 when a ship carrying slaves from Africa docked in Jamestown, Virginia. Prior to that date there were no slaves held by Europeans in what is now the USA, although many Indian tribes enslaved captives from rival tribes. Economic conditions in the southern colonies encouraged the use of slaves. The practice spread to the north, particularly New York and Connecticut. It was less in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts, two colonies established for religious reasons, and which for just such reasons opposed slavery. New York abolished slavery in 1827. ”

    And this…. ” Before 1400: Slavery had existed in Europe from Classical times and did not disappear with the collapse of the Roman Empire. Slaves remained common in Europe throughout the early medieval period. However, slavery of the Classical type became increasingly uncommon in Northern Europe and, by the 11th and 12th centuries, had been effectively abolished in the North. Nevertheless, forms of unfree labour, such as villeinage and serfdom, persisted in the north well into the early modern period. In Southern and Eastern Europe, Classical-style slavery remained a normal part of the society and economy and trade across the Mediterranean and the Atlantic seaboard meant that African slaves began to appear in Italy, Spain, Southern France, and Portugal well before the discovery of the New World in 1492. From about the 8th century onwards, an Arab-run slave trade also flourished, with much of this activity taking place in East Africa, Arabia, and the Indian Ocean. In addition, many African societies themselves had forms of slavery, although these differed considerably, both from each other and from the European and Arabic forms. Although various forms of unfree labour were prevalent in Europe throughout its history, historians refer to ‘Chattel Slavery’, in which slaves are commodities to be bought and sold, rather than domestic servants or agricultural workers. Chattel Slavery is the characteristic form of slavery in the modern world, and this chronology is concerned primarily with this form. ”

    Ok….now, from what I have seen you postings, is the issue of slavery takes on many forms……indentured servants, slave to wages…etc. Cool, I can accept your definition of these….I may disagree but I can accept it…..but I have to take exception to the IMPLICATION as I understand you that slavery is an invention of rich white men……actually, the first slave traders were blacks kidnapping their own and selling them into the trade for profit. It became a huge business and involved blacks and whites and Asians almost on an equal level. More Asians were sold into slavery than blacks. It became a business of old…..AND new as it exists as profitable today as it did 200 years or 2000 years ago except the majority of those sold into slavery today are…..Caucasian and Hispanic in origin.

    It was a sad day when the issue of slavery was imported as the Europeans came into the Americas……it was not an invention of plantation owners of the South….the North was just as bad or worse….and this is something that Lincoln overlooked. (For example, the creation of black army units run by whites and paid lower than whites to fight the South..if this is not a drastic form of slavery, explain why it is not). Why is slavery considered the reason the Civil War began….it was not…..it was an issue of State’s rights and tariffs……not slavery. Slavery was a side issue until the war began badly for the North…..THEN the rally cry was an Emancipation issue…years after the war started…to raise Armies.

    D13’s perspective: Slavery in any form is an abomination. I, personally, feel that any form of one human owning another in physical possession is wrong and should be eradicated. That is my black and white viewpoint. BUT….it was NOT an evil white man’s empire where this started…..so you are confusing me with your insinuation that it was primarily a United States issue…….am I wrong in my assumption?

    (See? No name calling…..) However, you are a Plutonian dust sucking mite of dubious character….but what the hell..I am Texan !!! :smile:

    • Colonel,
      It doesn’t matter who started it. Slavery was used to build a lot of wealth and status in the south. Wealth and status that continues to this day.

      There’s plenty of thief and murder in the world – does that make it ok for me to steal your stuff and murder you?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Todd

        What wealth in the South of today was created or the product of slavery?

        Did you forget reconstruction, carpet baggers, etc and the poverty that existed in the South for many decades following the war?

  99. Now, to Todd and Charlie and Buck and Mathius……question.

    What does it matter where revenue comes from, whether a raise in tax rates or elimination of tax breaks? Does it make any difference to any of you as long as you get your revenue?

  100. What I think, BF, is that YOU are an asshole. And you prove it with your sarcasm a little more each time you post. They feared Lincoln, the south did, because “he hated blacks” …

    What a fucking moron. Seriously, dude, you’re an asshole.

    Have a nice day … spend it here posting away.

    Putz

    • So much for civil… geez, you are the most irrational, inconsistent, guy here.

      The feared Lincoln .. why? His beard scared them?

      What did they fear about Lincoln? And obviously it wasn’t his position on slavery.

      On August 21, 1958, before a crowd of 10,000 at Ottawa, during the Presidential debates, Lincoln declared:

      ” I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”

      So, pray tell why the South feared him on such a position, Charlie?

      Black and white, his own words.

  101. @ USW/SUFA in general PAY FUCKING ATTENTION, PLEASE, especially to the bolded section … where a dum-dum like me proves what a false argument BF makes over and over (as do many of you here). See how black/white as BF argues it over and over, gets turned on its head.

    This will be my last attempt at civility with the guy who ALWAYS STARTS IT (pay attention, for once, USW). There are ALWAYS mitigating circumstances behind all action, BF. We disagree vehemently. Try, for once, to understand that not everyone holds your opinion; that not everyone believes what you claim to be fact as fact; that there are more than enough counter-arguments to any single position (even yours). The actions taken on Fort Sumter, for instance … an act of aggression and violence. Suddenly you see a mitigating circumstance in that (the occupation of a territory). Now, are you being duplicitous in your black and white argument or what? There are ALWAYS mitigating circumstances, whether we approve, agree or disagree. It’s as simple as that … and quite frankly, for someone with your intelligence to deny it, reduces YOUR credibillity (pay attention again, USW) no end.

    Now, this is posted at 10:33 … I’ll be civil if you’re civil. If you can’t control yourself, so be it.

    • Charlie, you are giving New York a bad name. This is not the Sopranos nor Boardwalk Empire. I can hold my own when it comes to spewing as I have demonstrated time and time again. My boys say I raise cursing to an art form. But, enough is enough.

      Th Civil War will not be solved by you or by me or by USW, Bama Dad, or that Copperhead Black Flag. It has already gone on for 150 years and when our great, great great grandchildren are our age it will still be going on. So, accept that the name will be different above and below the Mason-Dixon, the War of Secession for some, The War of Rebellion, The war of Abolition, the War of Northern Aggression for others.

      That is one of the great lost joys of being drafted, the opportunity to interface, up close and personal with those Southern Boys. Gives you a whole new view of things Y’all hear?

  102. escaping into another

    Honestly, you’re an idiot.

    • Honestly, you are ridiculous.

      So, to you, a criminal escaping into another state means he is a slave?

      No, that point you finger, Charlie is to provide for the condition that a legal transfer of such persons between States does not create a condition that the transfer is illegal. Only a man who has escaped custody becomes a fugitive, not one who is legally moved.

      I do understand that such nuance is very hard for you to understand, given simple words often daze you.

      And further, you are wrong there is nothing in the Constitution about slavery – the word is not used even once in the entire document

      • The engagement is over, asshole.

        You know EXACTLY what I’m referring to and I’m not about to fight this brickheaded argument.

        But tell me, moron, have you figured out yet how you used a gray argument in the fort sumter issue? Were you not using mitigating circumstances when you claim the union occupied SC territory, or are you suggesting that firing on the fort was not an act of war?

        Simple words, moron … try and figure them out.

        • Yep, run away. Blown out of the water – again – you fall back to your default of slander.

          I referred EXACTLY to your point – but you lack the necessary comprehension required. You cannot explain it, and even with noted history and legal professors explain it, you continue to pound your head against a rock.

          There is no “grey” argument for Ft. Sumter – you didn’t explain China/Hawaii to me, from your principle – which appeared to be rooted on that it was an island. If you can clear up your argument a bit, because here are the point I see you made:

          -US federal government occupied territory of a State without the permission of the State; an act that is illegal
          -Negotiations provided no outcome
          -The State enforced itself to correct the situation and bring it back to law.

          This is a grey area for you because:
          -Ft. Sumter was an island.

          I was using mitigating circumstances to explain SC reaction – I explained to you that above the differences between initiation and mitigation – but, it probably was too complex for you to grasp, too.

          Too bad, you appear at times intelligent, but there must have been some mental trauma that has damaged you that reason and simple comprehension is so difficult for you.

          Is that why you resort to and champion violence and slander so easily because physical force -being the most simplistic action- is all you can comprehend?

  103. For the record, because you explained nothing, moron. You blew yourself out of the water.

    I choose not to play this asinine game with you today, BF. Too busy … actually communicating with real people (try it some time).

    “You know what I mean” … returned to owners (asshole, how can someone own another person unless they are a slave?). Assume it is an implied written into the document, moron. Since you can assume so much else, assume the obvious (or why was there a civil war again?) Or do you deny there was slavery in the U.S.

    Seriously, don’t answer. I’m done for today. You remain the biggest asshole I’ve ever encountered.

    My typical New York behavior demands I repeat that. The biggest asshole I’ve EVER encountered.

    Have a nice day :)

    • Seriously, implied written into the document – … where the word is never used…..based on a separation of State and Federal law, so that if there is not a law against, you pretend there is a law for it…..

      Whew! Such jurisprudential logic, I wonder why you didn’t go to law school and end up on the Supreme Court!

      The Civil War was the Union preventing the secession of the South, you forgot that?
      There was slavery in the US, in the Union and in the Confederate States.

      Do you not think it strange that – if you are right – the war was over slavery when…slavery was still in place and legal in the North?

      Do you think they would have ended it there first, if was such an issue to go to war over it?

      Whoops, sorry, I asked you to think…I should not ask what you cannot do.

    • Our Charlie reminds me of the character “Charlie” in “Flowers For Algernon”

      On your point that Lincoln used his political skills in pushing the 13th Amend.:”

      “…The foremost authority on Lincoln among mainstream Lincoln scholars, Harvard University Professor David H. Donald, the recipient of several Pulitzer prizes for his historical writings, including a biography of Lincoln. David Donald is the preeminent Lincoln scholar of our time who began writing award-winning books on the subject in the early 1960s. On page 545 of his magnus opus, Lincoln, Donald notes that Lincoln did discuss the Thirteenth Amendment with two members of Congress – James M. Ashley of Ohio and James S. Rollins of Missouri. But if he used “means of persuading congressmen to vote for the Thirteenth Amendment,” the theme of the Spielberg movie, “his actions are not recorded. Conclusions about the President’s role rested on gossip . . .”

      Moreover, there is not a shred of evidence that even one Democratic member of Congress changed his vote on the Thirteenth Amendment (which had previously been defeated) because of Lincoln’s actions. Donald documents that Lincoln was told that some New Jersey Democrats could possibly be persuaded to vote for the amendment “if he could persuade [Senator] Charles Sumner to drop a bill to regulate the Camden & Amboy [New Jersey] Railroad, but he declined to intervene” (emphasis added).

      “One New Jersey Democrat,” writes David Donald, “well known as a lobbyist for the Camden & Amboy, who had voted against the amendment in July, did abstain in the final vote, but it cannot be proved that Lincoln influenced his change” (emphasis added).

      Thus, according to the foremost authority on Lincoln, there is no evidence at all that Lincoln influenced even a single vote in the U.S. House of Representatives, in complete contradiction of the writings of the confessed plagiarist Doris Kearns-Goodwin and Steven Spielberg

      There is no evidence that Lincoln provided any significant assistance in the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment in the House of Representatives in 1865, but there is evidence of his effectiveness in getting an earlier Thirteenth Amendment through the House and the Senate in 1861.

      This proposed amendment was known as the “Corwin Amendment,” named after Ohio Republican Congressman Thomas Corwin. It had passed both the Republican-controlled House and the Republican-dominated U.S. Senate on March 2, 1861, two days before Lincoln’s inauguration, and was sent to the states for ratification by Lincoln himself.

      The Corwin Amendment would have prohibited the federal government from ever interfering with Southern slavery. It read as follows:

      “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State,, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.”

      “Person held to service” is how the Constitutional Convention referred to slaves, and “domestic institutions” referred to slavery. Lincoln announced to the world that he endorsed the Corwin Amendment in his first inaugural address:

      “I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution – which amendment, however, I have not seen – has passed Congress to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service . . . . [H]olding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable” (emphasis added).

      Believing that slavery was already constitutional, Lincoln had “no objection” to enshrining it explicitly in the text of the U.S. Constitution on the day that he took office. He then sent a letter to the governor of each state transmitting the approved amendment for what he hoped would be ratification and noting that his predecessor, President James Buchanan, had also endorsed it.

      Lincoln played a much larger role in getting this first Thirteenth Amendment through Congress than merely endorsing it in his first inaugural address and in his letter to the governors.

      Even Doris Kearns-Goodwin knows this! On page 296 of Team of Rivals she explained how it was Lincoln who, after being elected but before the inauguration, instructed New York Senator William Seward, who would become his secretary of state, to get the amendment through the U.S. Senate. He also instructed Seward to get a federal law passed that would repeal the personal liberty laws in some of the Northern states that were used by those states to nullify the federal Fugitive Slave Act, which Lincoln strongly supported.

      As Goodwin writes: “He [Lincoln] instructed Seward to introduce these proposals in the Senate Committee of Thirteen without indicating they issued from Springfield [Illinois]. The first resolved that ‘the Constitution should never be altered so as to authorize Congress to abolish or interfere with slavery in the states.’” The second proposal was that “All state personal liberty laws in opposition to the Fugitive Slave Law be repealed.”

      That is your Lincoln, Charlie, not the myth you cling to….

  104. Keep it up, Charlie.
    Show us the extent of your intellect.

  105. You always make claims that you never do.

    You claim that the sources can be counter posed, but you never do, never show it, and the blame time

    Yet you have time for nonsense.

    Keep it up,Charlie – show us the man you are.

    • Hey, this took me all of two seconds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQvbji4u9aM

      Alternative reasons for the civil war (to justify slavery–what the genuine cause of the war was ALL ABOUT) … and I’m sure you know that, but you can’t help yourself … why?

      I can’t tell you how hard I’m laughing over here.

      • You didn’t answer this question, Charlie.

        Do you think they would have ended it first in the North, if was such an issue to go to war over it?

        • I didn’t see the question, BF. What are you asking? I may be a little in responding. I’m off to my car for lunch where I do some reading/writing, so I’ll see what your question is when I return. Be specific, okay?

          • Given:
            There was slavery in the US, in the Union and in the Confederate States.

            BF Proposition:
            The Civil War was the Union preventing the secession of the South.
            Lincoln: “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union.”

            Charlie Proposition:
            “..to justify slavery–what the genuine cause of the war was ALL ABOUT..”

            Arguments:
            Do you not think it strange that – if your Proposition is correct – the war was over slavery when…slavery was still in place and legal in the North?

            Question to Charlie
            Do you think the Union would have ended it with them first, if it was such a serious issue to go to war over it with another State/

            It is not conceivable for Lincoln to go to war over slavery in the South, when he had all the power to end it in the North … and he did not.

            Further, Lincoln confirmed slavery in situ, if it meant the South would not cede

            Conclusion:
            The War between the States was not about slavery.

            It was about secession.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Let me add, and the consequence that secession might of had on the NORTH and the planned “westward” expansion.

              Let me add this as well. Slavery was used then as “Rich” is used now to divide and cloud the debate among many. The issue of New States seems to be a primary target of this effort. Which side to choose? Who is going to go with the “SLAVERS”?

              Lets also not ignore that it was the more hard core “slavers” and “abolitionists” who worked to undo the compromises made by earlier generations that would have allowed slavery to die a natural and “less violent” death.

            • So you asked and answered your question to me?

              Well, then there’s nothing to add, is there?

              this is what I mean, BF. There’s no making a point with you. Not because you’re right, but because you’re never wrong (you can’t admit it). You can’t even admit the possibility of you’re being wrong. Again, if you bothered to look at the quote I took from the Goodwin book, there’s a ton of documentation to argue against both our positions, but it wouldn’t make a difference to you. Why? It tink you know the answer (not because you’re an asshole, but because you can’t admit being wrong or even remotely wrong). That is YOUR flaw, BF. It’s a shame, because you obviously have a very sharp mind. But amongst your ilk here, you can have the victory. The less arrogant crowd will simply smile, occasionally fire off a retort, but always know we’re closer to being right for the mere fact we don’t assume we are.

              And my God bless …

              • It is a question, I get to answer too! Anyone can….

                I also give you all the info, the reasoning, etc. – in hopes it makes you cautious in answering and avoid the dumber answers.

                I do not care about your documentation – the question requires none of it. Interestingly, your expert cannot answer it either – the question was posted to him and he ignored it too. Strange, but even professionals skid sideways on things they cannot answer.

                You posited the North attacked the south over slavery – and yet! they had slaves.

                To make war on a State complaining about them whilst you…are the same… makes no sense.

                So, I ask the question, in case, if (incredibly) I am wrong about my analysis.

                I do know I am not wrong.

                So your posit cannot be right.

                So why do you still maintain it, if it is wrong?
                That I do not get.
                It’s like you married it. “For better or worse, right or wrong, this is my belief!”

              • I also give you all the info, the reasoning, etc. – in hopes it makes you cautious in answering and avoid the dumber answers.

                Very cordial, aren’t you?

                I do not care about your documentation

                Yes, I’ve noticed. You don’t care for anyone but your own sources. Interesting.

                Interestingly, your expert cannot answer it either – the question was posted to him and he ignored it too. Strange, but even professionals skid sideways on things they cannot answer.

                Now you’re going to determine what my source was speaking to? Do you realize how insane that reads?

                You posited the North attacked the south over slavery – and yet! they had slaves.

                Yes, except the south attacked the north. Little slip up there in your FACTS, but why let that stop you now? It never has in the past.

                Hey, USW, does that qualify as VERY WRONG?

                To make war on a State complaining about them whilst you…are the same… makes no sense.

                Like that hasn’t happened before? Just about EVERY American adventure into war has some form of hypocrisy, no?

                So, I ask the question, in case, if (incredibly) I am wrong about my analysis.

                I do know I am not wrong.

                So your posit cannot be right.

                So why do you still maintain it, if it is wrong?
                That I do not get.
                It’s like you married it. “For better or worse, right or wrong, this is my belief!”

                At this point, my man (assuming you are a man), I really do think you’re insane. Seriously off the fucking wall already.

              • Very cordial, aren’t you?

                Blunt and honest about my intentions.

                I do not expect you or anyone else to be floundering about unnecessarily, with me like a tiger in the weeds waiting for you to screw up for me to pounce.

                I want an honest attempt – “so here is the stuff I know, my position and how I got it”

                I do not care about your documentation

                Yes, I’ve noticed. You don’t care for anyone but your own sources. Interesting.

                No, because it has nothing to do with the documentation. It has to do with fact.

                It is a fact the North had slaves.
                Yet, you claim they were so against slaves they went to war to stop it.
                Yet, they did not stop in their own nation.

                How can one argue “I am going to stop you from slaving because it is wrong, but we will keep ours ….”

                What “documentation” are you going to show me?
                That the North did not have slaves?
                ….

                That is why it is documentation ‘care-less’ – it simply doesn’t exist.

                Yes, except the south attacked the north. Little slip up there in your FACTS, but why let that stop you now? It never has in the past.

                So is that your new position, the North and South war wasn’t over slavery? But over Ft. Sumter?

                Pick an argument and hold to it, Charlie …

                Just about EVERY American adventure into war has some form of hypocrisy, no?

                True, but the level of hypocrisy in other wars are not overt and obvious – need an example?

              • Please, just go away. You’re continuing an argument you lost a long time ago and I have no interest in fighting it further. Can you not take a hint? Did I deny the north had slaves? Where did I deny that? Do you see how you’re assuming again? That word was ASSUMING … … which is usually the basis of all your arguments; that the other side can’t be right because you assume so.

                I’m asking nicely … just go away … okay?

              • What assuming?
                I posted my entire position – what part do you believe I assumed? Slaves in the North? Lincoln’s words? What?

                You didn’t deny slaves in the North, that is why it is under the heading “Given”

                But you do claim the war was about slavery, which is why that is under “Charlie Proposition”
                ….and I used your exact words, so to be sure I was not misquoting you.

                The question then was how can such a conclusion be reconciled given the North had slavery?

                How do you believe you “won” when you haven’t untangled a root contradiction?

              • Thank God it’s time to go home …

              • Drive safe
                Remember Green is “go” and Red is ‘stop’, not the other way around .. ;)

              • Grazie (for the drive safe). And I’ll promise to go and Green and stop on red if you promise to remember the south attacked the north at Fort Sumter and not the other way around.
                :)

              • The South attack Ft. Sumter, which was in the “South”, while it was occupied by the North.

                Hope whatever football team you cheer for scores a homerun!

              • OH, and PS:
                Charlie, I ALWAYS look up yours and everyone’s references.

                I need to see where -often- you “guys” get your errant info or (and more then one occasion) I learn something new too.

                For example, you point to Goodwin – but you missed that I present her terrible, plagiarized and historically err’d account in a post up earlier – which you probably did not read.

                Here it is again:
                Even Doris Kearns-Goodwin knows this! On page 296 of Team of Rivals she explained how it was Lincoln who, after being elected but before the inauguration, instructed New York Senator William Seward, who would become his secretary of state, to get the amendment through the U.S. Senate. He also instructed Seward to get a federal law passed that would repeal the personal liberty laws in some of the Northern states that were used by those states to nullify the federal Fugitive Slave Act, which Lincoln strongly supported.

                As Goodwin writes: “He [Lincoln] instructed Seward to introduce these proposals in the Senate Committee of Thirteen without indicating they issued from Springfield [Illinois]. The first resolved that ‘the Constitution should never be altered so as to authorize Congress to abolish or interfere with slavery in the states.’” The second proposal was that “All state personal liberty laws in opposition to the Fugitive Slave Law be repealed.”

  106. @ SUFA:

    The slavery issue had been a source of division between North and South from the beginning of the nation. That difference was embodied in the Constitution itself, which provided that a slave would be counted as three fifths of a person for purposes of congressional representation and which imposed an obligation to surrender fugitive slaves to their lawful masters. Although slavery was not named in the Constitution, it was, as antislavery Congressman John Quincy Adams said, “written in the bond”, which meant that he, like everyone else, must “faithfully perform its obligations.”

    p. 141 The latest Kearns Goodwin book, Team of Rivals.

    On the very next page, one of several instances of the hateful Fugitive Slave Law is mentioned.

    Now, I just happened to come across the above while at lunch/reading in my car. I won’t do this again, document as if YOU deserve such documentation when it is an obvious argument made by historians and scholars alike (whether it’s slavery that was the principal cause of the civil war or whether my underwear have skid marks or not). The point being, as it has always been, you (BF) do not have ALL THE ANSWERS. Nor is your life on this site and constant posting and insulting others in any way, shape or form, some kind of validation. Your arguments are every bit as flimsy as everyone else’s … you have the time and obviously the need to remind us all how you know and we don’t.

    Guess what? This was a minimal effort I undertook (actually just part of what I’m reading at the time). If it’s that easy to trip you up, imagine having the time (or desire) to further rip you to pieces?

    Not to worry. Not interested. I already know when I’m closer to right than you are. :)

    Now I’ll answer your question (if you asked one).

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 138 other followers

%d bloggers like this: