Slashdot Mirror

When internet randoms have a better record of truth-telling than legitimate journalists, what are you going to do?

Here's something from an internet random that I bet you would never hear from the mainstream media: Your Complete Guide to the N.Y. Times' Support of U.S.-Backed Coups in Latin America

"What should be a conversation about American military and its covert apparatus unduly meddling in other countries quickly becomes a referendum on the moral properties of those countries. Theoretically a good conversation to have (and one certainly ongoing among people and institutions in these countries), but absent a discussion of the merits of the initial axiom-that U.S. talking heads and the Washington national security apparatus have a birthright to determine which regimes are good and bad-it serves little practical purpose stateside beyond posturing. And often, as a practical matter, it works to cement the broader narrative justifying the meddling itself. Do the U.S. and its allies have a moral or ethical right to determine the political future of Venezuela? This question is breezed past, and we move on to the question of how this self-evident authority is best exercised. This is the scope of debate in The New York Times-and among virtually all U.S. media outlets. To ante up in the poker game of Serious People Discussing Foreign Policy Seriously, one is obligated to register an Official Condemnation of the Official Bad Regime. This is so everyone knows you accept the core premises of U.S. regime change but oppose it on pragmatic or legalistic grounds. It's a tedious, extortive exercise designed to shift the conversation away from the United States' history of arbitrary and violent overthrows and into an exchange about how best to oppose the Official Bad Regime in question. U.S. liberals are to keep a real-time report card on these Official Bad Regimes, and if these regimes-due to an ill-defined rubric of un-democraticness and human rights-fall below a score of say, âoe60,â they become illegitimate and unworthy of defense as such.

For those earnestly concerned about Maduro's efforts to undermine the democratic institutions of Venezuela (he's been accused of jailing opponents, stacking the courts and holding Potemkin elections), it's worth pointing out that even when the liberal democratic properties of Venezuela were at their height in 2002 (they were internationally sanctioned and overseen by the Carter Center for years, and no serious observer considers Hugo Chavez's rule illegitimate), the CIA still greenlit a military coup against Chavez, and the New York Times still profusely praised the act. As it wrote at the time:

With yesterdays resignation of President Hugo Chavez, Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator. Mr. Chavez, a ruinous demagogue, stepped down after the military intervened and handed power to a respected business leader, Pedro Carmona.

They flat-out lied about Chavez stepping down. LIED.

The world is not evil. Turn off CNN, Fox, MSNBC, WaPo, NYT, the comedy news, just turn them all off. They are not news. They are propaganda.

Start looking for sites like Consortium News, Truthdig, WSWS, Counterpunch, etc.

That is not what it means.
It's true I shouldn't have used the word fascism. And then again I should. I read this recently and it looks appropriate: https://www.truthdig.com/artic...
Trump then is 'a close call' which to most came out of the blue but is a symptom , not an anomaly. Obviously those who believe 'it's the russians' won't look beyond that.

They've changed their algorithms a while ago and are going after a loot of people, like Wikileaks, Democracy now and WSWS, to pick and choose what goes to the top and what is basically censored.
In august 2017:

As stated above, since April, other left-wing publications that present themselves as progressive, socialist or anti-war also have suffered significant reductions in their Google search results:
* alternet.org fell by 63 percent
* globalresearch.ca fell by 62 percent
* consortiumnews.com fell by 47 percent
* mediamatters.org fell by 42 percent
* commondreams.org fell by 37 percent
* internationalviewpoint.org fell by 36 percent
* democracynow.org fell by 36 percent
* wikileaks.org fell by 30 percent
* truth-out.org fell by 25 percent
* counterpunch.org fell by 21 percent
* theintercept.com fell by 19 percent

In september 2017:

As a result of Google’s censorship, the WSWS’s global page rank has fallen from 31,000 to 41,000, according to Amazon’s Alexa traffic ranking software.
(...)Democracy Now, one of the top 5,000 sites in the US, had its search traffic fall 50 percent between April and September, up from 36 percent in the period through July.

So it was getting worst, and it does affect the websites views by the population.

Here is an article about the subject in another website that was affected, if you want to read more:
The Silencing of Dissent

Basically Trump is accusing Google of doing something similar against him. He's a POS, but don't make the mistake of defending their algorithms, they are not unbiased anymore and really work to reflect someone's interests.

Reading this one instead: https://www.truthdig.com/artic... .

There's no room for any other conclusion. Extraordinarily well documented. Organized by "The Syria Campaign", a group of UK origin intelligence professionals, based in New York.

https://dissidentvoice.org/201...

https://www.mintpressnews.com/...

https://www.truthdig.com/artic...

The oil and gas carrying kind... See https://www.truthdig.com/artic...

https://www.truthdig.com/artic...

The Russia hack story is the biggest fabrication in recent history. There is 0 evidence, and no reason to believe a word of it.

http://www.truthdig.com/report...

And in case you missed it:

http://www.truthdig.com/report...

Close. The actual plan is this:

Step 1: Target Asia by dumbing down complex dialog, plots, (hard to follow with a language barrier) and reducing the number of black people in your movies.

Step 2: Release

Step 3: Profit.

Bill Maher: "Part of it is--and this is the dirty little secret--is that most movies are made with an eye to the foreign market, and Asians [in Asian countries] really are racist. [...] They don't want to see black people generally in their movies."

Of course, I can't wait for plenty of people to refute this without any sources by just going "Nu-uh."

[Bill Maher] https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

http://www.hollywoodreporter.c...

http://www.truthdig.com/report...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

http://atlantablackstar.com/20...

The list of citations could go on for days if you're willing to put the time into finding and sorting them.

Why is a Clinton's Christmas list for nerds there?
Can I post that too?

***

Con vs. Con
http://www.truthdig.com/report...
Posted on Jun 19, 2016

By Chris Hedges

During the presidential election cycle, liberals display their gutlessness. Liberal organizations, such as MoveOn.org, become cloyingly subservient to the Democratic Party. Liberal media, epitomized by MSNBC, ruthlessly purge those who challenge the Democratic Party establishment. Liberal pundits, such as Paul Krugman, lambaste critics of the political theater, charging them with enabling the Republican nominee. Liberals chant, in a disregard for the facts, not to be like Ralph Nader, the “spoiler” who gave us George W. Bush.

The liberal class refuses to fight for the values it purports to care about. It is paralyzed and trapped by the induced panic manufactured by the systems of corporate propaganda. The only pressure within the political system comes from corporate power. With no counterweight, with no will on the part of the liberal class to defy the status quo, we slide deeper and deeper into corporate despotism. The repeated argument of the necessity of supporting the “least worse” makes things worse.

Change will not come quickly. It may take a decade or more. And it will never come by capitulating to the Democratic Party establishment. We will accept our place in the political wilderness and build alternative movements and parties to bring down corporate power or continue to watch our democracy atrophy into a police state and our ecosystem unravel.

The rise of a demagogue like Donald Trump is a direct result of the Democratic Party’s decision to embrace neoliberalism, become a handmaiden of American imperialism and sell us out for corporate money. There would be no Trump if Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party had not betrayed working men and women with the North American Free Trade Agreement, destroyed the welfare system, nearly doubled the prison population, slashed social service programs, turned the airwaves over to a handful of corporations by deregulating the Federal Communications Commission, ripped down the firewalls between commercial and investment banks that led to a global financial crash and prolonged recession, and begun a war on our civil liberties that has left us the most monitored, eavesdropped, photographed and profiled population in human history. There would be no Trump if the Clintons and the Democratic Party, including Barack Obama, had not decided to prostitute themselves for corporate pimps.

Con artists come in many varieties. On Wall Street, they can have Princeton University and Harvard Law School degrees, polished social skills and Italian designer suits that are priced in the tens of thousands of dollars. In Trump tower, they can have cheap comb-overs, fake tans, casinos and links with the Mafia. In the Clinton Foundation, they can wallow in hundreds of millions of dollars from corporate and foreign donors, including the most repressive governments in the world, exchanged for political favors. But they are all crooks.

The character traits of the Clintons are as despicable as those that define Trump. The Clintons have amply illustrated that they are as misogynistic and as financially corrupt as Trump. Trump is a less polished version of the Clintons. But Trump and the Clintons share the same bottomless guile, megalomania and pathological dishonesty. Racism is hardly limited to Trump. The Clintons rose to power in the Democratic Party by race-baiting, sending nonviolent drug offenders of color to prison for life, making war on “welfare queens” and being “law-and-order” Democrats. The Clintons do a better job of masking their snakelike venom, but they, like Trump, will sell anyone out.

The Clintons and the Democratic Party establishment are banking that the liberal class will surrender once again to corporate power and genuflect before n

Somehow the expose' doesn't mention anyone from some of the richest countries in the world, but Iceland, which jailed bankers, is front and center.

It was an admitted typo: the user meant every homeless man, woman, and child. How does this sub-2 percent vacancy rate compare to the homelessness rate?

Ahh more insults from you, this is becoming common.

Stop commonly saying things only worthy of an insulting reply.

Just because a bank is holding onto property does not mean its empty,

Red herring. In fact, these properties are empty, and the banks are holding on to them, not the other way around. This is well-known, and citations abound. If you were not being deliberately disingenuous I would suggest you learn to use google. Instead, I'll suggest you stop being disingenuous.

Plus I really dont think there are 640million empty properties right now in the US ("multiple empty houses for every man, woman and child" is what you said

Yes, that is wrong, because I misspoke. I apologize. The truth is that there are multiple empty houses for every homeless man, woman and child. The point of such a statement is to show that homelessness in America is a created problem.

Of that $618Billion, the Federal Reserve has seen $681Billion flow back, and thats with about $230Billion in loans yet to be repaid. Puts your "elaborate theft from the taxpayer" comment in a new light, now doesnt it...

No, no it does not. The theft was of property, and the means was writing mortgages illegally, and then being loaned money to cover the costs of the whole scam. They kept the property. They still own it. We still have a chronic homelessness problem in this country, which we could fix if we had the will. Instead, we had the will to give the money to the banks.

I think he may be referring to something Amnesty International put out several years ago. They state that at that time there were 3.5m homeless and 18.5m vacant houses.

The problem with that statistic is that the 18.5m vacant houses weren't necessarily bank-owned homes. That number includes seasonal vacancies, unrented rental properties, people looking to sell their property, homes awaiting move in, etc. You can see a current break down at Table 4 here.

The 3.5m homeless also depends on how you define homeless. In 2013, a Congress report by HUD but the number on any given night around 600,000. The 3.5m number is likely the number of individuals over the course of a year that experience homelessness of more than a night or two.

The numbers are significant either way, it just helps to state how the numbers came about. That's the great (or bad) thing about statistics, you can cut them up and make them say whatever you want.

So we are back here again, blame all Muslims and their belief system for the foolish actions of a minority. The fallacy of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Would it it be equally fair to say that atheism is the root cause of the nihilist actions of serial killers or those who go on a rampage, that their lack of a belief system facilitates horrific acts? Do we need to have a post on slashdot every time an atheist goes on a rampage? Handpick and skew their belief systems in such a way as to say, 'see, Atheism led to this!' Meanwhile, our foreign policy incinerates thousands of Muslims on a regular basis, whether they oppose the US policy or not. They are just statistics of course, not that these men, women and children's lives matter to any of us. We have very little posts about them in Slashdot (even though people like Snowden found these actions and appalling). Here is an interesting piece by a cartoonist who draws incendiary cartoons, but refuses to be part of the Hebdo orgy, http://www.truthdig.com/arts_c...

Chris Christy scares the bejesus out of me. His personality is scary. He is the kind of guy who in my opinion you don't want to give too much power. The way he shouts down people who are weaker than him particularly concerns me. This article is a good summary of him.

Yes, there is a Wikileaks investigation - one which has been declared all but impossible to charge Assange in. There are no charges. The GP is correct.

Even Mr. Conspiracy Theory, Assange himself, doesn't believe the "Stratfor endictment". Stratfor for the most part is just people BSing about what they read from things that are in the public record. The most hilarious example was when Wikileaks retweeted from one of their Stratfor docs, "New #Stratfor docs: US soldier stealing $22M from Iraq?" What was this amazing Stratfor doc? It was a Stratfor guy commenting on an email that he received:

Dear Friend,

My name is Sgt.Walter Evans, an American soldier; with Swiss Background, serving in the military of the 3rd Infantry Division in Iraq with a very desperate need for Assistance. I and my partners moved one of the boxes containing funds which we believe is belonging to Saddam Hussein in March 2003, the total fund in this box is (TWENTY-TWO MILLION UNITED STATE DOLLARS), this fund had been moved via a safe Diplomatic Courier Service to a secured security company...

Basically since we are working for the American government we cannot keep these funds, we are Three (3) persons in involved. This means that you will take 25% percent and 75% will be for me / my partners.

Yes, that's a typical Nigerian-style spam email. Which Wikileaks retweeted as being a Stratfor-sourced scandal.

“The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name.” --Confucius

FBI Director James Commie.

We are already living in an "inverted totalitarian state". I quote:

Inverted totalitarianism differs from classical forms of totalitarianism, which revolve around a demagogue or charismatic leader, and finds its expression in the anonymity of the corporate state. The corporate forces behind inverted totalitarianism do not, as classical totalitarian movements do, boast of replacing decaying structures with a new, revolutionary structure. They purport to honor electoral politics, freedom and the Constitution. But they so corrupt and manipulate the levers of power as to make democracy impossible.

There has been a slow motion coup d'etat over the past number of years. Private oligarchical corporations have won. They now openly bribe congressmen, write laws, and underwrite our new NSA surveillance state. You can vote for who you want. It may make some small difference. But you will not substantially influence the levers of power by simply voting.

This FBI leader is just a mouthpiece for the surveillance state. I don't trust anything he says.

"They are ultimately going to come after New Zealand because New Zealand doesn't conform to the rules they demand you live under."

This is exactly what america has been doing to the world, i.e. imposing bullshit intellectual proprety laws and monopoly law on the world or threatening them with sanctions. Please for the love of god, learn about how corrupt your own nation is.

http://www.truthdig.com/

If Israel just wants land, they have a funny way of showing it.

Like they're going to do it all at once. Then the veil would finally be lifted, and not even Daddy Amurika could keep covering for Israel's ass at the U.N. That of course hasn't stopped prominent Israelis from openly talking about wanting to engage in ethnic cleansing and murder to achieve a truly jewish Israel. And while you guys like to complain about the Hamas charter, the Likud charter lays claim to all of the West Bank.

How about places in the West Bank sacred to Jews - Hebron, Nablus, Jericho?

That's what the slow grind of Apartheid is for. The Jewish-only roads, the separation barriers, the abuse of water rights. Tearing down Palestinian villages that have existed for hundreds of years because of 'building code violations' or to make room for 'public parks'. And last but not least, Settlers Gone Wild, who shoot Palestinian farmers in the head or divert sewage from their illegal settlements into Palestinian farms. They do it slowly enough and the United States will still automatically protect their ass with it's Security Council veto pen.

They do it too much and and the POTUS makes a big show of giving Bibi a talking to, at which point Israel announces they'll stop building settlements - for a month or two - and could we please please get back to talking about those Qassam rockets.

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/gop_campaign_manager_resigns_after_fake_hurricane_sandy_tweets_20121031

Once again, The president doesn't block people.
The president isn't running the bureaus.
I've been reminding people of this for 30 years.

And yeah, this sure is a lot worse then letting the NSA collect data without FISA approval~

anyways:
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/on_civil_liberties_comparing_obama_with_bush_is_easy_--_and_mostly_wrong_20

Are you wondering why on Earth Obama would think it's a good idea to bomb Syria, when Libya was such a disaster? I'll give you a hint: both countries are non-members of the WTO, with state-owned banking systems. So is Iran.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/making_the_world_safe_for_banksters_syria_in_the_cross-hairs_20130905/

The people who financed Obama's elections -- and who are the only folks for whom he's been a good president -- are the ones who have the most to gain by regime change in Syria.

With that statement it is clear you don't know wtf you are talking about

That's exactly your problem, because I do know what I'm talking about. And of course smearing Muslims based on the Korean is a farce since Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the same God with the same Old Testament, only under different names. As if you'd go around calling Christians a bunch of rapists because the Bible commands them to marry their brother's widow in the event of his death because had yet to have offspring.

And since you skipped it the first time:

They're pissed because their land has been stolen, their people have been bombed, and they have been humiliated and starved.

As if your charter would be any different if it was your family and people ethnically cleansed from their ancestral homelands by a bunch of immigrants. And if that wasn't enough, then spend the next four and half decades living under an apartheid regime that kills who it wants, bomb who it wants, whenever it wants.

Another problem for the people running around bleating "The Hamas Charter!" "The Hamas Chaaaarter!" is....the Likud Charter. Which lays claim to all of the West Bank, which Israel has zero right to as they seized it in a war they started in 1967. And it doesn't stop there. Israeli officials have openly talked of starving the population of Gaza, I'm sorry, "putting them on a diet". And now "leveling" the Gaza strip and returning the area back to the "middle ages". Again. And that's not even touching the outright racist garbage thrown around by the likes of Avigdor Lieberman.

And unlike Hamas, Israel not only has the power to make good on their threats to bomb, level, and starve the population of Gaza - they're actively doing it right now.

Obama didn't just gorge on corporate cock, he also sold out the civil rights movement. Grover Norquist was correct years ago when he said that Obama couldn't govern as a Democrat, but no one expected it would be because of his indifference to his "old" base.

Even Black intellectuals like Cornel West get it. Obama sold out the civil rights movement thoroughly and well.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_obama_deception_why_cornel_west_went_ballistic_20110516/

just as government cannot produce

Of course a government can produce. Governments produce lots of things, and they so by charging taxes and printing money. Yes, governments are more forceful in taking your money than businesses, where you have more choice (although often not very much choice). But that doesn't mean that they don't produce goods and services.

so government cannot (in a meaningful way) save.

A fiat government can't save money, because it would be plain stupid to save a resources that you yourself have exclusive rights to create. And any excessive reduction off debt would create unemployment by reducing the ability for the private sector to save and pay for stuff.

But real prosperity doesn't come from money savings, but from productive investments. And the government can do that. Of course, it truly depends on how well your government uses unemployed labor.

I personally highly favor a decentralized approach to the government employing unemployed, like described in this article. Many anti-government people have the right idea in that having a huge centralized government is ineffective. And that is why you want to decentralize the decisions about project. The federal government should do what it fits best for, which is funding (being the fiat owner) and oversight. (ensuring that local corruption doesn't grow too large)

the government debt has exceeded the ability of the whole country to pay the interest on that debt,

A fiat government can always pay the interest as it has the money printing ability. In fact, it doesn't actually need to loan money either, and only does so to subsidize savings.

The real thing to worry about is the amount of production in a country. As how much is produced is what actually limits the government. That is why it is in the best interest of the government to make productive use of any unemployed. Inflation is just inflation, and doesn't matter to the government as long as enough things are produced. You simply can't get hyperinflation as long as production is going strong.

There is a common misunderstanding that governments tax the economy by demanding taxes. That is actually completely backwards. The government taxing occurs when it buys goods and services from the private sector. Meanwhile what is named as taxing is mainly inflation reduction by claiming its own money back, as well as a way to force the private sector to accept the currency in the first place.

Of course, all of this only applies to fiat economies, and not countries using some kind of currency standard like the euro countries.

Keep sticking your head in the sand.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/08/5793248-after-rep-giffords-shot-in-arizona-palins-take-back-the-20-goes-down

You have to look at the big picture and the political rhetoric being generated. I know you don't want to believe this can happen here. But we haven't seen the last of it by far. It's only warming up.

First, Rachel Maddow is NOT a reliable source. Would you believe a source from Rush Limbaugh?

Next, they took the site down because they were getting flack from liberal commentators like Rachel Maddow and idiots like you were buying into it. People were trying to blame Palin for this early on, just like the Austin TX IRS bomber, but when the facts came out, they found that both assailants were not "right-wingers". (Here is an article trying to link Joe Stack to the TEA Party. Again, Stack quoted the Communist Manifesto in his online post. Hardly the sign of a TEA Partier.)

I know you really, REALLY REALLY want this to be Sara Palin's or some other right winger's fault, but the fact is, it wasn't. The fact that you can make yourself believe it when it's been proven to you that it is not true just shows how delusional you, and people like you are. You want to believe something so bad, you actually reject truth and reason to support what you want to believe.

Here, don't take my word for it. Check the Wiki site for Jared Lee Loughner :

In the initial aftermath of the 2011 Tucson shooting, many speculated that Loughner's political views had been fueled by extremist rhetoric.[citation needed] Records show that Loughner was registered as an independent voter and voted in 2006 and 2008, but not in 2010.[21][22] A YouTube channel under an account called "Classitup10" was linked to Loughner.[23][24] Loughner had also posted a video on YouTube in which he described his school, Pima Community College, as "one of the biggest scams in America". This video led to Loughner being suspended from the school.[25] One classmate stated that Loughner had laughed at a young woman and likened her to a terrorist after she read a poem about getting an abortion.[26][27] [26][28] An old friend, Bryce Tierney, discussed several of Loughner's views. According to him, Loughner had exhibited a longstanding dislike for Gabrielle Giffords, a Blue Dog Democrat, and he repeatedly derided her as a "fake". This grudge intensified when he attended her August 25, 2007, event and she did not, in his view, sufficiently answer his question: "What is government if words have no meaning?"[20] Loughner kept Giffords' form letter, which thanked him for attending the 2007 event. An envelope in the same box as the letter was scrawled with phrases like "die bitch" and "assassination plans have been made."[29] Loughner was known to believe, and to say, that women should not hold positions of power.[30][31] Loughner's best friend, Zach Osler, disputed speculation by media commentators that Loughner's actions were fueled by partisan politics and rhetoric, insisting, "He did not watch TV, he disliked the news, he didn't listen to political radio, he didn't take sides, he wasn't on the Left, he wasn't on the Right," and instead conspiracy theories had a profound effect on him.[10] Another friend, Zane Gutierrez, later told the New York Times that Loughner's anger would also "well up at the sight of President George W. Bush or in discussing what he considered to be the nefarious designs of government."[31]

By the way, you satisfy the first [CITATION NEEDED].

I assume you actually meant Killing Social Security under the guise of a debt crisis.

Ugh, republican, yes? let me ask you something...why is your answer to EVERYTHING give the rich people more money? Town is burning, give rich people more money. No jobs? give the rich people more money. Sitting in the street with a broken leg and no money for a doctor? Give the rich people more money.

You aren't giving the rich people money, you are allowing them to keep more of what they have earned. Who is it that hires the most employees, rich people or poor people? Last time I checked, the homeless don't have a lot of people on their payroll. We obviously need more Government Economic recovery, where they saved/created jobs at the tiny cost of $238,000 per job. How could a normal business, like McDonalds, possibly save a single job at a lower cost?

Ya know what? We've TRIED THAT for going on 30 fricking years now? Forget trickle down, aka trickle upon? or how about how we gave FREE MONIES TO GE who said "thanks" and then sent their best paying jobs overseas which I'm sure will buy the CEO some more gold toilets and hookers, but help America? Naaah.

And who is it that set it up for GE to pay no taxes? Let's see, who's the current president?

If anything taxes on the top 5% should be HIGHER not lower! Money hoarded by the rich is "dead money" its not getting spent, its out of the economy, goodbye. When they will get the living shit taxed out of them if they keep it? Well then they invest it in their businesses so as to lower their tax debt, duh! Taxes have NEVER BEEN LOWER on the top 5%, not ever. Are we better off than those times of high taxes? Can you name ONE time your "give the rich more money" policy has EVER worked? Even one? We've had trickle down, voodoo economics, the "free trade" bullshit under Clinton, and of course Dubya cutting like there was no tomorrow. Are we better off? NO.

Sorry, but the taxes on the rich have been lower. They are higer now than they were during Regans presidency. And guess what, there were more jobs available then than there are now. Typical democrat, believes every lie that they are told by their preisthood.

That horseshit might actually sell to someone that doesn't know history, has never been here, and of course your constituency which is the rich and the poor suckers in red states that think they are gonna be rich someday, aka "lotto mentality" but everyone else has seen this shit time after time after time only now sadly the Ds are just as sold out as the Rs to the rich so it is SSDD.

You mean like how every time the tax rates were dropped, the government revenue increased? That history? Or the democrats history that claims that the richest 10% dont pay their fair share (>75% of total taxes), while the poor people have to carry the burdon (lower 50% pay no taxes).

  That is why I believe we will have our Arab spring, because the public no longer believes in your games. They don't vote NOT because they don't care, it is because they have lost hope that anyone will listen. And when the poor, which outnumber you by a good 10,000 to 1 and rising every day decide to fall behind our own version of Uncle Joe or the crazy Austrian? Well lets just say I hope you have your jet filled up because the fall of Saigon comes to mind.

Now we get to your main point. Islam rules! Al Queda will have its Arab spring, and driver the Israelites into the sea. Kill all the Jews! Kill all the Americans! Kill all non-Shiites!

Typical Democrat.

Ugh, republican, yes? let me ask you something...why is your answer to EVERYTHING give the rich people more money? Town is burning, give rich people more money. No jobs? give the rich people more money. Sitting in the street with a broken leg and no money for a doctor? Give the rich people more money.

Ya know what? We've TRIED THAT for going on 30 fricking years now? Forget trickle down, aka trickle upon? or how about how we gave FREE MONIES TO GE who said "thanks" and then sent their best paying jobs overseas which I'm sure will buy the CEO some more gold toilets and hookers, but help America? Naaah.

If anything taxes on the top 5% should be HIGHER not lower! Money hoarded by the rich is "dead money" its not getting spent, its out of the economy, goodbye. When they will get the living shit taxed out of them if they keep it? Well then they invest it in their businesses so as to lower their tax debt, duh! Taxes have NEVER BEEN LOWER on the top 5%, not ever. Are we better off than those times of high taxes? Can you name ONE time your "give the rich more money" policy has EVER worked? Even one? We've had trickle down, voodoo economics, the "free trade" bullshit under Clinton, and of course Dubya cutting like there was no tomorrow. Are we better off? NO.

That horseshit might actually sell to someone that doesn't know history, has never been here, and of course your constituency which is the rich and the poor suckers in red states that think they are gonna be rich someday, aka "lotto mentality" but everyone else has seen this shit time after time after time only now sadly the Ds are just as sold out as the Rs to the rich so it is SSDD.

That is why I believe we will have our Arab spring, because the public no longer believes in your games. They don't vote NOT because they don't care, it is because they have lost hope that anyone will listen. And when the poor, which outnumber you by a good 10,000 to 1 and rising every day decide to fall behind our own version of Uncle Joe or the crazy Austrian? Well lets just say I hope you have your jet filled up because the fall of Saigon comes to mind.

What's good for GE is good for India

FTFY

Tell that to the residents of Bhopal.

What's good for GE is good for India

FTFY

Uh huh...to quote Mel Brooks bullshit bullshit aaaaand bullshit. maybe you'd care to explain how a full 2/3rds of corps paid NO taxes this decade or how GE, who paid paid NO taxes in 2010 and in fact got a REBATE and is now using those funds to fire Americans and build overseas with the head of GE actually having the brass balls to say "We've globalized around markets, not cheap labor. The era of globalization around cheap labor is over. Today we go to China, we go to India, because that's where the customers are."

BULLSHIT and EVERY single time of growth in the history of this country TAXES AT THE TOP HAVE BEEN OVER 70% full stop. We have had unprecedented tax breaks for the top 1% for THIRTY YEARS and NOTHING has gotten better. NOTHING. So peddle the rep fantasy somewhere else, we ain't buying it no more. America WILL BE COME NATIONALIST the only question is how violent the change over will be. China is about to drop their US dollars so the game is over friend, time to pay the check.

Except there is a little problem...WE ARE BROKE...The taxes on the top 1% have never been lower in our nation's history and they will NOT be going up anytime soon, or IMHO ever, thanks to the legalized bribery SCOTUS gave us by equating money with speech and making corps people (they're just like you...only better).

Meanwhile the high tech jobs promised by our new tech economy are are finally here...they are all in India and the new tech corps like Google pay a pittance thanks to the double dutch and other loopholes, oh and in case you haven't heard China is getting ready to dump its dollars so you can ALL say hello to the great depression part II that many of us have been saying for years would come thanks to selling off of this country by offshoring, illegal immigration (currently 85% of illegals with anchor babies are on welfare) and H1-Bs making college pointless for many in the tech sector.

So you want to go back into space? the top tax rate MUST go back to 90% which despite all the rich hoarding and squawking NEVER in our history has more jobs been tied to lower taxes, in fact EVERY boom has had high taxes on the rich (because instead of hoarding they have incentive to invest) along with HIGH tariffs on those shipping our jobs to third world countries that allow pollution so thick you can detect it on the west coast AND a closing of ALL bases and walking away from the two pointless Jihad fests we have going on and instead using those troops to CLOSE THE LEAKING BORDER and repealing the law allowing anchor babies.

Instead what we are gonna have is a full on collapse, we will be NO different than the PIIGS in Europe, mark my words. After a few years in the collapse and Egyptian style riots we will have a new party rise, most likely militant nationalist, the only question now in my mind is whether we shall become xenophobic (preferred) or whether we will take Poland (aka South America) like the last heavily armed nationalist bunch. Shit is about to hit the fans folks, and these bozos are talking moon bases. No wonder our credit rating is becoming as bad as our citizens, which BTW student loan debt has surpassed CC debt and thanks to the rules against bankruptcy not clearing it student defaults have NEVER been higher. Kinda hard to pay for that degree for that job that got sent to Bangalore on a McJob you know?

Bingo! I bet if you figure up how much gas is wasted running back and forth compared to online shopping the amount of Co2 generated MORE than makes up for any 'dirty power" as they put it.

I know in my own case it was an almost daily running to town as well as at LEAST two trips to the state capital a week to keep the shop supplied (state capital is 120 miles round trip) so if we figure in 20 miles times say three if I was able to plan ahead along with 2 120 mile trips that is 300 miles a week in gas that isn't being blown anymore, and when my Ranger gets around 19 miles to the gallon that is a whole lot of gas!

But of course with our lovely politicians blowing cash like drunken sailors while giving free money and tax breaks to those who are sending jobs overseas (read what the head of GE says, he says "We are sending the high paying jobs to India because that's where the customers are now" really? Maybe if you wouldn't have sent all the jobs overseas Americans might have money to buy your stuff now. huh.) I wouldn't doubt if Internet sales end up taxed MORE than just going to Wally World, so we can flush any energy savings right down the toilet. Never seen a good idea a politician can't fuck up, doubt Internet commerce will be ANY different.

LTMGTFY. Here are the top five items for a google query "Bradley Manning Torture"
http://news.change.org/stories/un-investigating-bradley-manning-torture-claims
http://news.change.org/stories/the-obama-administration-is-torturing-bradley-manning
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/12/14/manning
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101215/09551812291/us-is-apparently-torturing-bradley-manning-despite-no-trial-no-conviction.shtml
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/accused_wikileaker_bradley_mannings_torture_by_isolation_20101215/

They have no case yet, they think, it needs to be bigger. So they torture Bradley. See http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/accused_wikileaker_bradley_mannings_torture_by_isolation_20101215/ or even http://www.google.nl/#hl=nl&source=hp&q=bradley+manning+torture

Have you actually researched the Health Care Bill to see what is in it, or do you just believe what the pundits tell you? The healthcare bill models its minimum plans on the High-Deductible Health Plans. They are, in my opinion (and I know since I do buy my healthcare on the open market so had to research these plans), the cheapest comprehensive health insurance plan. By that, I mean that it will not bankrupt you (plans that require you to co-pay 40% (or 20% or 10%) of the cost with no limit can still bankrupt you - 10% of a lot is still a lot). There are many plans out there that offer more perks than the HDHP and there is no reason that they cannot be sold in the future.

Also, rate hikes are subject to Federal overview but I did not see anywhere that said they were capped, and I do not recall seeing anything that limited their profits. Do you have a source you can cite? And how do you know all of the new customers they get will not be profitable. Sure, a lot of them are sick people that got screwed by the insurance company, but there are also a lot of people who aren't sick but cannot afford insurance or do not think it is worth it. One reason health insurance companies cited for rate hikes at the beginning of this year is that all the young, healthy people were dropping their coverage due to the recession, leaving all the sick people. Or, are they just lying again?

You gave me two choices for sustainable health care. Which one do YOU want? Letting people die on the side of the road or Government control? I have already advocated the public option. That is also what President Obama wanted. The only reason we are trying this crappy mix is because the Republicans would not allow that through. I do not believe that this bill is designed to destroy the insurance companies, but I am not positive it won't. But, there is only one way to find out. I do agree with you that we will probably eventually have to choose one way or the other, though. Hopefully, when people realize that this current bill is a less than optimal solution, the health insurance lobby will be weakened enough so that the American people can finally get the public option they wanted (70% at the beginning of the health care debate).

Indeed.

I save my anger for our bankrupt liberal intelligentsia of which, sadly, I guess I am a member. Liberals are the defeated, self-absorbed Mouse Man in Dostoevsky’s “Notes From Underground.” They embrace cynicism, a cloak for their cowardice and impotence. They, like Dostoevsky’s depraved character, have come to believe that the “conscious inertia” of the underground surpasses all other forms of existence. They too use inaction and empty moral posturing, not to affect change but to engage in an orgy of self-adulation and self-pity. They too refuse to act or engage with anyone not cowering in the underground.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/liberals_are_useless_20091206/

Umm, but they are. Don't we all know this already?

Brian Ross Report on Covert Operation to Destabilize Iran - Aired 5/24/07
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wg3r2YSM9g

Also, Iran was on it's way before some oil interests of the US and Britain got in the way.

Iran Had a Democracy Before We Took It Away
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090622_iran_had_a_democracy_before_we_took_it_away/

But Americans have an attention span of two weeks.

Pitiful.

Wow! Source? Haven't seen anything like that.

That's a bit like asking for a source that the sky is blue, because you've never noticed... Of course, you couldn't be bothered to do the simplest search for yourself.

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/08/30/bush-blames/
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/200601012_bush_blames_clinton_again/
http://www.davidcogswell.com/Political/BushBlamesClinton.html
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2008/07/28/bush-administration-blames-bill-clinton-for-deficit/
http://www.truthout.org/article/keith-olbermann-a-textbook-definition-cowardice
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0006/23/se.02.html
http://zzpat.tripod.com/cvb/impeach44.html#Bush_Blames_Clinton_For_N_Korea_Debacle
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-13-attacks-panel_x.htm

And, of course:
http://homepage.mac.com/garyligi/iblog/C1957607809/E20080429161904/index.html

1) Last I heard, one of them refused and didn't suffer for it.

Joe Nacchio would probably not agree with that statement.

No. he sure didn't, did he? Well.. the next time you don't go making Stalin comparisons until someone has killed a million of their own people at a minimum. I mean... there are standards here.

In fact, what actually happened was Karl Rove took a trip to the Crimea to meet with the Saakashvili, the President of Georgia, and then Georgia gets a wild hair up their ass right after Karl Rove left the Crimea and started bombing civilian targets within S. Ossetia without provocation.

"...Since Karl Rove skipped out on his subpoena to appear before the House Judiciary Committee last month, the whereabouts of Bushâ(TM)s longtime political strategist have emergedâ"Rove was in Crimea, Ukraine, for the fifth annual Yalta European Strategy summit. Also in attendance: former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili. Hereâ(TM)s an excerpt from his panel discussion about how U.S. policy toward Ukraine would change, if at all, after Novemberâ(TM)s American presidential elections...."

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20080815_karl_roves_ukranian_sojourn/

Putin actually reacted to stop Georgia from bombing civilian targets in S. Ossetia

Bush and Cheney told you they wanted another war before the election. They haven't been allowed to invade Iran like they wanted to, so they had to arrange a different war... between Georgia and Russia.

Thanks for a long and detailed explanation. Here is just one example http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080511_the_defining_moment_for_climate_change/ , which form of government do you think will be able to act quickly and forcefully to address an issue on things of such grand scale?

In 2006 with legal troubles and the Dems poised to get investigation powers Cheney's office hired a document shredding service:

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/200601030_shredding_truck_was_heading_to_cheneys/

They don't even try to hide it; I'm sure they have a play-dumb response to this one too. As long as they seem nice or have charisma it just doesn't matter how stupid or evil politicians are; substance doesn't matter anymore.

"I'm still laughing at how the Bush administration is out smarting the democrats in Congress at every turn."

Laugh while you can.

Your sorry assed demagogues have succeeded in squandering international goodwill towards the U.S., sold military technology to China in order to insure low prices at Wal-Mart and guaranteed that not only *you*, but your children (if you stop doing the hand dance long enough to have any), and their children's chidren will be paying the price for their stupidity.

The long and short of it laughing boy, is that *your* party attempted to impeach a sitting president over a stain on a blue dress and failed, but have sufficiently befuddled the nation with misdirection and divisiveness that we are failing to impeach a president and his cronies who have lied to us, lead us into a quagmire, are shredding the constitution at every turn, and who felt the need to put safeguards in place to prevent them from being charged as war criminals like his father was.

So, yeah, good ahead and laugh, I for one will shed a tear.

That's the real George Bush, in the same way as the real Chuck Norris is Carlos Norris, an actor.

The image is the warrior. The Texan. The man who landed a plane on an aircraft carrier with socks in his pants. "Bring it on". That's the image Dubya's imagemakers cultivate.

That's what the GP was talking about.

Bush didn't have such terrible difficulties with language when he was governor of Texas. His speaking skills have declined since then -- a pattern not indicative of dyslexia. It is speculated that it's pre-senile dementia.