Let's take a look at what you originally wrote, and see how it fits into the real world: You wrote: Ever consider that Google is a business and has the right to choose what they want to include themselves?
To analogize: two people, Customers A and B, walk into a KFC fried chicken joint to eat some chicken. Customer A thinks the chicken is bad and goes outside hollering "This is bad chicken; don't it eat it". Customer B walks up to him and says, "Ever consider that KFC is a business and has the right to choose what products they want to include themselves?"
Your problem is that you have been brainwashed by years pro-hierarchy, pro-business propaganda. You have been trained to react the way you just did. I know! I was once there myself. I have reacted just as you have, on many occasions.
Try thinking for yourself. Try reading some leftist material. Really read it. THink about it. Take your time.....
Why are there so many apologists for those at the top of the hierarchy? That is what I want to know. Are you masochists? Authority lovers? Idolizers of success?
One way to fight the movie industry is to use freeway blogging. The movie industry is different from the music industry. A lot of their revenue comes from concentrated sources--namely these huge cineplexes that are frequently located near high traffic areas such as freeways. You could hurt them and cost them some money by placing signs on these high traffic roads near the cineplexes. The signs would tell people about the lawsuits.
YOu will NEVER convince me that working hard and striving gives a high quality of life. THat is SO insane! Lots of vacation time is high quality. A short work week is high quality. Medical care from the state paid for by taxes is high quality.
Having lots of time off to do as you please is high quality.
Commuting an hour a day, working your ass off, afraid you are going to be fired and lose your health insurance is NOT high quality.
WORKING HARD year in and year out in NOT high quality.
Yet 10 years ago, I said the same things as you. It is amazing how malleable young people are....
I wrote: Look at countries like Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, France, etc. Do you see a lot of citizens coming over here from there to live permanently?
you wrote:
Setting propaganda aside for a moment, do you have any idea how much of people's income is take by the governments in these countries? If you don't please investigate.
Gasp! You mean, the taxes are higher there than they are here!? I had no IDEA!/sarcasm Umm. Yeah, I know full well the that taxes are higher there. THat is one reason why the quality of life for the average person is higher there. Although I never would have believed it 5 years ago, it is now apparent to me that high taxation is good, as long as it is not spent on military too much. Investigate it yourself. I already have. In fact, if you read my sig, you can find links to pages that discuss that very topic!
You wrote:
I would like better health care as well, but what goes on in the majority of these countries is nothing more than a large redistribution of wealth.
"Nothing more than a large redistribution of wealth"? How about "nothing LESS than a large redistrobution of wealth"? I got news for you: redistribution of wealth is a GOOD THING. Go where the redistribution of wealth is high, and there is where you will find the highest quality of living. Swden, Norway, Denamrk, France, etc. Now, that redistribution is almost certainly not the only cause of the high standards of living. It may well be that the people are smarter or more educated, thus they know that redistribution of wealth makes for a better life for all.
Or perhaps they are just less easily fooled by their politicians than some other countries? ((COUGH)))AMERICA(((COUGH)))
Now, you will no doubt cite the Soviet Union or Cuba or N Korea as counter examples. Nope Saw-ree! They did/do not redistribute much wealth, as they do not have good gernerators of wealth. In order to redistribute wealth, you have to generate it first!
It's easy to have rose colored glasses, but be realistic. Not everyone is willing to give half their paycheck to pay for everyone's problems.
Man, talk about circular logic! Let me just point out to you what you just said: "Not everyone is willing to give half their paycheck to pay for everyone's problems."
Oh, man! Looking into your mind is like looking into one of those carnival House of Mirrors!
Let me just say this: when we take care of the weakest of us, we take care of ourselves. Do not let the greedheads suck you into their rigged game. The house always wins, and they own the House. Play the odds.
The media is socially liberal. yes, they promote racial diversity, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, ABORTION AND GAY RIGHTS AND OTHER LIBERAL SOCIAL ISSUES. And like you, when I was a faithful conservative years ago, whenever I saw some gratuitous example of the media's obvious social-liberal bias, I would say "damn liberal media" to myself.
But you can see for yourself that the media is NOT economically liberal. Here is how you can do: in the next year to two, the rightwing machine is going to be trying to rape the Social Security system. Well, they have been trying for years, but they are going to step up their efforts. So watch for what kind of possible solutions are presented to the phony SS crisis. What how often they mention the solution of decreasing benefits. What how often they mention raising the retirement age. Those two solutions are the favord Rigtwing solutions.
The leftwing favors different solutions. THe leftwing wants to raise the payroll tax cap from its present $87K to unlimited. Also the left favors raising the top tax rate paid by millionaires and use that revenue to pay the SS benefits.
You watch PBS CNN CBS NBC ABC MSNBC FOX et al, and you tell which solutions get mentioned again and again and again. I can already tell you which solutions. In fact, some of you have already noticed it too. And then tell me how often the leftwing solutions get mentioned. Please tell me if you hear the, because ever since I became convinced that the Left is right, I have been watching. And I NEVER see leftwing solutions mentioned on major tv networks.
THAT IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW YOU CAN PROVE THAT THE MEDIA IS NOT ECONOMICALLY LIBERAL. THE MAIN ECONOMIC LIBERAL ISSUES ARE TAXES (PROGRESSIVE TAXATION, WHERE THE TAX RATES RISE AS INOCOME RISES, AND TAXATION ON CAPITAL GAINS).
The media is socially liberal. yes, they promote racial diversity. And like you, when I was a faithful conservative years ago, whenever I saw some gratuitous example of the media's obvious social-liberal bias, I would say "damn liberal media" to myself.
But you can see for yourself that the media is economically liberal. Here is how you can do: in the next year to two, the rightwing machine is going to be trying to rape the Social Security system. Well, they have been trying for years, but they are going to step up their efforts. So watch for what kind of possible solutions are presented to the phony SS crisis. What how often they mention the solution of decreasing benefits. What how often they mention raising the retirement age. Those two solutions are the favord Rigtwing solutions.
The leftwing favors different solutions. THe leftwing wants to raise the payroll tax cap from its present $87K to unlimited. Also the left favors raising the top tax rate paid by millionaires and use that revenue to pay the SS benefits.
You watch PBS CNN CBS NBC ABC MSNBC FOX et al, and you tell which solutions get mentioned again and again and again. I can already tell you which solutions. In fact, some of you have already noticed it too. And then tell me how often the leftwing solutions get mentioned. Please tell me if you hear the, because ever since I became convinced that the Left is right, I have been watching. And I NEVER see leftwing solutions mentioned on major tv networks.
The reason we lost is because we have not justified and defined a real leftist agenda. The Rightwing, on the other hand, has spent 30 years or more defining and justifying the RIghtwing agenda. We all "know" that low taxes are good for "The Economy" and we all "know" that productivity should be ever high and we all "know" that low labor costs are good and we all "know" that welfare states are bad and we all "know" that government managed healthcare is a disaster, etc etc etc. And why do we "know" all these things? Because the rightwing propaganda machine has been pushing them down our throats via the teevee, radio and newspapers for the last 30 years.
THe rightwing propaganda machine starts with nonprofit foundations and think tanks that pay for studies and write articles based on those studies. Of course, because there is no criminal penalty for cooked, bogus studies, and no money to check these studies and news articles that are based on these studies, the rightwing propaganda machine is able to dominate the media agenda. THey have the money. THey are funded into the billions by billionaires and global corporations.
THe news articles based on these studies are propagated to media outlets (tv radio papers) where they reach the public.
The rightwing propaganda machine also does many other things, such as fund up and coming rightwing media talent, e.g., giving grants to promising rightwing radio talk show hosts, authors and reporters, consultants etc.
Also, because the rightwing propaganda machine has so much money to give, most high profile media figures, reporters, etc, know that after they quit working at their current job with the networks, newspaper, etc, if they are ideologically "suitable, they can get lots of fat consultancy gigs with the rightwing propaganda machine, as long as they do not piss them off.
So the rightwing propaganda machine is like a huge planet in a solar system, or maybe even like the sun itself.
If liberals want to change America, they need to fund a LEFTwing propaganda machine. It costs money. Unfortunately, the entities with the money want to keep their money. So they are not about to fund a LEFTwing propaganda machine. So it is up to us.
Once we do get a a LEFTwing propaganda machine, we need to make sure it pushes OUR agenda, and it needs to get down to the nitty gritty of the issues. We need to make the case to the American people that high taxation is where it is at. And it really is. All we have to do is show people that high tax welfare states are a great place to live. Look at countries like Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, France, etc. Do you see a lot of citizens coming over here from there to live permanently? No! Yes, some of them (the cream of the crop) came over here doing the IT boom to make more money, but they know they have a good deal there.
We need to make the case that America is a partnership and we are getting ripped off by the richest Americans.
Crank up a LEFTwing propaganda machine. Start generating facts and figures. Start with healthcare. Show Americans exactly what is going on with nationalized universal healthcare in places like Canada, Sweden, Denmark, France etc.
Show how West Europe and their unions and restricted trade benefits the people. Hell, in Sweden it is quite difficult to expand a business. But there are reasons for that. Show Ameiricans that having corporations get their fingers into every pie disempowers the average person.
Teach America the game theory of politics.
To change America, we need to define our issues and an agenda. The problem is that we have simply moved along to the right with the GOP, keeping ever so slightly to the left of the GOP. No wonder white suburban and rural middle class Americans do not trust the Democrats. They seem to simply see the Left as a tool of the minorities for ripping them off for the welfare checks of the urban minorities.
But to do all this we need a LEFTwing propaganda machine. But we have to pay for it.
That is the real reason why the futures markets are heading Kerry's way BIG, and why all the cable tv news talking heads look like they are at a funeral: the turnout at certain, key Democratic precincts is HUGE, and significantly higher than corresponding GOP precincts.
KERRY WINS!!
But still, if you are a liberal/Democrat--go VOTE.
However, you may want to vote strategically: if you are a liberal in a solid red state, vote rightwing 3rd party--build up the Constitution Party (or if the Constitution party candidate Peroutka is not on the ballot in your state, vote for the Libertarian candidate, Badnarik). THat way, your vote strengthens the future competition for conservative votes. That is the only way the Leftwing party, the Green Party, can grow--by growing the Rightwing parties using liberal votes in red states.
This country desperately needs some creative destruction applied to our govt and our electoral system. But the only way to get that is through 3rd parties. So, go build up the 3rd parties.
The Iraq war really confirmed that for me. That set of events caused me do research on the politics of the Right versus the Left. Because of my research, I will never cast another vote for a Republican again, and I will in the future take every opportunity to vote 3rd party.
Well, at this point the Right is really so much in control of the government and have the media so cowed (CBS, NBC, et al) or have the media on his side (Fox, CNN, MSNBC), that the only possible comeuppance for Bush et al., at this time is via the voting booth.
If you want some good info on how biased the media is, try reading the forums at www.deomcraticunderground.com
Those guys are on top of every instance of bias that the media perpetrates. Right now, the only news organization that has shown any inclination to fight Bush is CBS. I am not referring specfically to the Rathergate memos, but to the everyday presentation of campaign news.
All the rest of the media is either slightly biased for Bush (NBC, ABC) or solidly biased for Bush (Fox, CNN, MSNBC), with some exceptions on MSNBC and CNN.
You need to remember that almost all of these talking heads and reporters are making $100K, 200K, $500K, $1M, or even several million dollars a year. Yes! News anchor make MILLIONS! Even in large metro network affliate TV stations, the talking head salaries run over $1M or much more.
So Bush's tax cuts for the rich may be saving these tv news people over $100K per year or even more. So, who do you think they favor?
A stagnant economy stops a good welfare state because the welfare aspect has to leech off of somebody's wealth.
Are you familiar with this part of the Constitution: "...Promote The General Welfare"? We are not "leeching off of somebody else's wealth." America is a partnership (as implied in the general welfare clause) and like any partnership, there is a common pot.
Otherwise you would have a purely socialist state
THat would nice. Hard to get, but nice! Better though, to just keep our capitalist system and increase taxes. Too many brainwashed bots running around not able to think rationally enough, and to go to socialism and make it work, you need a populace well educated and really more rational than we have anywhere on earth, really, at the time.
because the government would have to take over the means of production due to the gov't's inability to take in as much revenue in the form of taxation to pay the private businesses currently in charge of production. Of course, a socialist state might be what you have in mind when you say a "good welfare state.
Now I cannot recall having read so much gibberish in paragraph in quite a while....Well, anyway, I was not talking about socialism/govt ownership of production. Here is a big hint for you: when someone mentions "increasing taxation on the rich", that means CAPITALISM, not socialism. THat taxation thing is kinda, ummm. inherently capitalist. You might wanna brush up on the basic definitions.
USA unemployment rate is also about 10%, but we hide our real unemployment rate. The 6% we see in the media is just those registered for unemployment benefits. When you count people who drop off the list, you get almost 10%.
Now, let's talk about the difference between an unemployed American and an unemployed West European: they get Longterm unemployment benefits, often for years. Maybe even for life! And of course in most W Euro countries, healthcare is paid for by taxes, so if you have no money, or very little, you still get healthcare, just like everyone else.
So, which is better for the citizen, to live in a country where you know that you are going to be taken care of even if you can never find a job, or be in America, where you know that not having a job could mean death?
you wrote: What's fascinating is the sheer control of the media by people who lean to the left, or even further to the left. The biggest spreaders of FUD are you ABC's, CBS's, NBC's, and CNN's. All of them are liberal outlets. The closest one to the right is Fox News, which is still a liberal station.
NONE of those media giants are liberal. And unlike you, I will present actual reasoning, evidence etc to backup my claim. Here goes:
Big Media is liberal on minor, token issues: affirmative action, abortion, gay rights. These are the offically approved liberal issues. But when it comes to the really important issues, the economic issues, Big Media is solidly conservative. For example, recently, we have had a lot of discussion on network and cable tv political news shows about the "Problem with Social Security." And there has been some discussion of "solutions" to this problem. Of all the many times possible solutions have been mentioned on tv news shows, there are only two possible solutions ever listed: raise the age of retirement, and reduce benefits. Gee, what about all the other possible solutions? What about raising the ceiling on the payroll tax? Currently, the payroll tax stops at about $87K, and income above that is not taxed at all for SS purposes. ALso, why not just create a special tax on high incomes and use that to fund SS? For example add a 1% tax on all earned and unearned income above $250K. That would take care of all SS problems, just like that!
But you never hear anything about that on tv because that is a LEFTist solution, and leftists are hardly ever seen on tv. All centrists and rightwingers. Go look at all the broadcast networks and look at each political news show. List all the neutral regular guests and all the rightwing and leftwing regular guests and hosts. Can't think of many leftists, can you? Well, maybe you never paid much attention to that kind of stuff? Maybe you just repeat what you hear on Rush Limbaugh, or what you read in the wall st journal?
Well, there is really only ONE true leftist regularly given a voice on broadcast TV: Bill Moyers, and he is being driven out this year. You might make a case for Eleanor Clift and Lawrence O'Donell on McLaughlin and and Juan Williams on Fox News Sunday, althoug they are really more classic democrats, which is not the same as true liberal/progressive leftist. Also, that lady who is on the PBS show run by the Wall St Journal editorial board.
Now, do you want to run down all the rightwingers on broadcast tv? And then we can get started on cable tv. And that is far worse.
You see, you really don't know much about the situation at all, do you? You just repeat talking points drilled into you by talk radio, WSJ, and other mainstream media outlets.
Anyone think of any other lefists regularly on broadcast TV?
Liberals who live in red states that are not in contention should vote for the rightwing 3rd party candidate, i.e., either for Badnarik of Libertarian party, or for Peroutka of the Constitution party. This is the only way we can grow a progressive, leftwing 3rd party such as the Green Party--by strengthening the Rightwing 3rd parties. When the Constitution Party (or the Libertarian party) gets strong enough to take some serious votes away from the GOP, only then the Green Party can grow appreciably. In order to get a better electoral system (e.g., proportional representation) we need some 3rd party legislators. And then once we have some 3rd party legislators, we can make some changes that will allow real 3rd party. But getting real changes all starts with growing rightwing parties.
The Constitution party is the one that can really cut into the GOP electorate. So, if you are a liberal in a solid red state, and Peroutka is on the ballot, vote for him, for the future. You can think tactically!
what would stop you? What makes you think a "stagnant" economy would stop a good welfare state? What, Rush didn't go into any more depth on that? He just keep repeating a few key phrases? Huh, go figger.....
Actually, there is plenty of wealth to go around in any industrialized country, as long as you have a progressive taxation system, little corruption, a relatively transparent government and some creative destruction applied periodically to the government itself.
And as for the birth rate declining, just take more money from those who earn more, and depend less on sheer numbers of earners. Create new taxes on the wealthy. They have most of the wealth in any industrialized capitalistic country.
Also use economies of scale and increasing efficiency. Large governmentally administered social welfare programs are run quite efficiently. For example, the Social Security Administration is run FAR MORE efficiently than any private healthcare company. One percent of costs are administrative in SSA. HMOs require about 15% admin costs. Gee, I wonder if it has anything to do with executive bonuses and perks? What, Rush did not mention that aspect of it on his radio show?
The reason many Americans would react that way (vote Bush when they hear Europeans vote Kerry) is that the Rightwing propaganda machine has been brainwashing them by demonizing Europe. This propaganda offensive seemed to begin not too long after the news of the strong European social safety net began to leak out of Europe and into the conciousness of many Americans. The old "threat of a good example" strategy of the American propaganda machine. I guess the logic is that if Americans see that Leftist Europe can make the welfare state work, that eventually Americans will get the idea that they can make it work for themselves, too. And that would be bad for corporate/business profits. Same principle more or less applied to every American invasion of or manipulation of all those leftist Asian or Latin American countries. Oh, Guatemala/vietnam/Chile/cuba is going leftist? Well, we will just invade them/back a coup/embargo them.... A threat of a good example might give similar ideas to other countries...So they demonize/propagandize Americans via the mass media, the better to manufacture consent for invasion or a coup.
So the lesson for Europe is, I suppose, you best watch you asses, the Rich people in America and the multinationals don't like your opulent welfare states that keep the citizens from being at the mercy of the upper class/the corporations. So watch out for an invasion/a coup/a trade embargo in a few years, once Rush Limbaugh/The NY Times et al have worked Americans into a hate frenzy at the very mention of the word "Europe".
And to think I used to be much like you. Manipulated by those in high places, by the corporations, by the war machine, by those who exploit the religious nuts, by a those driven to achieve and to create a lasting legacy. Whipped up into a righteous fury, ready to go out and die for nothing but a fatter wallet for some CEO, for some investor.
And how sad that humans should do this, when our time alive is so short. That we should allow ourselves to be manipulated like this. And not only do we allow ourselves to abdicate our powers of logic and take such rash actions, but we also forego a chance at a more logical and rational alternative world, a world where we all do not have to strive so hard, where we would not have to stress ourselves so much just to survive, a world where we devote all that wasted energy and wealth to more worthwhile pursuits, such as medical research to lenghten our own lives. Such a tragedy....
over 100K people die every day in this world, and 5K of them are Americans. A lot of them are dying from cancer. Why don't we wage war on cancer instead?
Just read what the man said. He makes sense. I trust him more than Bush or Kerry. You may say that he murdered 3000 at WTC, but it strikes me that he was at war. Was his war more bogus than our own in Iraq. We have killed 15 THOUSAND innocent civilians in Iraq. Seems like we are the murderous sociopaths, not OBL.
Here is a good transscipt of the tape: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story &u=/ap/ 20041029/ap_on_re_mi_ea/bin_laden_tape_16
Any good background check will turn up that file that the FBI now has on her. So which candidate gets the job, the one without the FBI file, or the one with the FBI file?
Uh, yeah, al qaeda attacked us because they hate us for our freedom....my ass!
Everytime we use real life events to point out that the greatness of America (at for the average person) is actually a fantasy, you rightwing bots counter with some example from a fascist country or from a 3rd world country. Why not instead compare America to Western Europe?
I live in Texas, where the GOP dominates. So instead of voting for Kerry (or the Green Party, my real favorite) I just voted in early voting for Badnarik, even though I am no longer a Libertarian. But since the Libertarian platform is essentially a rightwing platform (essentially advocating zero taxation), if the Libertarian party gets more popular and gets more ballot access, their candidates will take away votes from the GOP candidates....
Everytime we use real life events to point out that the greatness of America (at for the average person) is actually a fantasy, you rightwing bots counter with some example from a fascist country or from a 3rd world country. Why not instead compare America to Western Europe?
This sort of incident is best understood when you look at America's history. The apple don't fall too far from the tree. America was born on the backs of slaves and indentured servants.
Historically, the power of the state has almost ALWAYS been aligned with the top of the hierarchy. Back in the slave days, the government mainly worked for Master, or "Massa," the slaveowner, the rich plantation owner, or the merchant, or the rich farmer. The government was designed mainly to take care of Massa's property.
These days the corporation is our "Massa." And it don't really matter whether Massa is right or not. You best obey the Massa, or you get a taste of the whip.
And if you can afford to take Massa into court, then YOU must be Massa.
Always, always act first to protect Massa's property, whether it be a runaway slave, an indentured servant on the run, or one who has been stealing food, or a thief in the cornfield, or a shoplifter, or an IP infringer, then, and only then, ask questions, or deal with it in the courts.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's take a look at what you originally wrote, and see how it fits into the real world:
You wrote:
Ever consider that Google is a business and has the right to choose what they want to include themselves?
To analogize: two people, Customers A and B, walk into a KFC fried chicken joint to eat some chicken. Customer A thinks the chicken is bad and goes outside hollering "This is bad chicken; don't it eat it". Customer B walks up to him and says, "Ever consider that KFC is a business and has the right to choose what products they want to include themselves?"
Your problem is that you have been brainwashed by years pro-hierarchy, pro-business propaganda. You have been trained to react the way you just did. I know! I was once there myself. I have reacted just as you have, on many occasions.
Try thinking for yourself. Try reading some leftist material. Really read it. THink about it. Take your time.....
And that we have a right to boycott Google?
Why are there so many apologists for those at the top of the hierarchy? That is what I want to know. Are you masochists? Authority lovers? Idolizers of success?
One way to fight the movie industry is to use freeway blogging. The movie industry is different from the music industry. A lot of their revenue comes from concentrated sources--namely these huge cineplexes that are frequently located near high traffic areas such as freeways. You could hurt them and cost them some money by placing signs on these high traffic roads near the cineplexes. The signs would tell people about the lawsuits.
More on Freeway Blogging.
YOu will NEVER convince me that working hard and striving gives a high quality of life. THat is SO insane! Lots of vacation time is high quality. A short work week is high quality. Medical care from the state paid for by taxes is high quality.
Having lots of time off to do as you please is high quality.
Commuting an hour a day, working your ass off, afraid you are going to be fired and lose your health insurance is NOT high quality.
WORKING HARD year in and year out in NOT high quality.
Yet 10 years ago, I said the same things as you. It is amazing how malleable young people are....
I wrote:
/sarcasm
Look at countries like Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, France, etc. Do you see a lot of citizens coming over here from there to live permanently?
you wrote:
Setting propaganda aside for a moment, do you have any idea how much of people's income is take by the governments in these countries? If you don't please investigate.
Gasp! You mean, the taxes are higher there than they are here!? I had no IDEA!
Umm. Yeah, I know full well the that taxes are higher there. THat is one reason why the quality of life for the average person is higher there. Although I never would have believed it 5 years ago, it is now apparent to me that high taxation is good, as long as it is not spent on military too much. Investigate it yourself. I already have. In fact, if you read my sig, you can find links to pages that discuss that very topic!
You wrote:
I would like better health care as well, but what goes on in the majority of these countries is nothing more than a large redistribution of wealth.
"Nothing more than a large redistribution of wealth"? How about "nothing LESS than a large redistrobution of wealth"? I got news for you: redistribution of wealth is a GOOD THING. Go where the redistribution of wealth is high, and there is where you will find the highest quality of living. Swden, Norway, Denamrk, France, etc.
Now, that redistribution is almost certainly not the only cause of the high standards of living. It may well be that the people are smarter or more educated, thus they know that redistribution of wealth makes for a better life for all.
Or perhaps they are just less easily fooled by their politicians than some other countries?
((COUGH)))AMERICA(((COUGH)))
Now, you will no doubt cite the Soviet Union or Cuba or N Korea as counter examples. Nope Saw-ree! They did/do not redistribute much wealth, as they do not have good gernerators of wealth. In order to redistribute wealth, you have to generate it first!
It's easy to have rose colored glasses, but be realistic. Not everyone is willing to give half their paycheck to pay for everyone's problems.
Man, talk about circular logic! Let me just point out to you what you just said: "Not everyone is willing to give half their paycheck to pay for everyone's problems."
Oh, man! Looking into your mind is like looking into one of those carnival House of Mirrors!
Let me just say this: when we take care of the weakest of us, we take care of ourselves. Do not let the greedheads suck you into their rigged game. The house always wins, and they own the House. Play the odds.
Corrections In CAPS:
The media is socially liberal. yes, they promote racial diversity, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, ABORTION AND GAY RIGHTS AND OTHER LIBERAL SOCIAL ISSUES. And like you, when I was a faithful conservative years ago, whenever I saw some gratuitous example of the media's obvious social-liberal bias, I would say "damn liberal media" to myself.
But you can see for yourself that the media is NOT economically liberal. Here is how you can do: in the next year to two, the rightwing machine is going to be trying to rape the Social Security system. Well, they have been trying for years, but they are going to step up their efforts. So watch for what kind of possible solutions are presented to the phony SS crisis. What how often they mention the solution of decreasing benefits. What how often they mention raising the retirement age. Those two solutions are the favord Rigtwing solutions.
The leftwing favors different solutions. THe leftwing wants to raise the payroll tax cap from its present $87K to unlimited. Also the left favors raising the top tax rate paid by millionaires and use that revenue to pay the SS benefits.
You watch PBS CNN CBS NBC ABC MSNBC FOX et al, and you tell which solutions get mentioned again and again and again. I can already tell you which solutions. In fact, some of you have already noticed it too. And then tell me how often the leftwing solutions get mentioned. Please tell me if you hear the, because ever since I became convinced that the Left is right, I have been watching. And I NEVER see leftwing solutions mentioned on major tv networks.
THAT IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW YOU CAN PROVE THAT THE MEDIA IS NOT ECONOMICALLY LIBERAL. THE MAIN ECONOMIC LIBERAL ISSUES ARE TAXES (PROGRESSIVE TAXATION, WHERE THE TAX RATES RISE AS INOCOME RISES, AND TAXATION ON CAPITAL GAINS).
The media is socially liberal. yes, they promote racial diversity. And like you, when I was a faithful conservative years ago, whenever I saw some gratuitous example of the media's obvious social-liberal bias, I would say "damn liberal media" to myself.
But you can see for yourself that the media is economically liberal. Here is how you can do: in the next year to two, the rightwing machine is going to be trying to rape the Social Security system. Well, they have been trying for years, but they are going to step up their efforts. So watch for what kind of possible solutions are presented to the phony SS crisis. What how often they mention the solution of decreasing benefits. What how often they mention raising the retirement age. Those two solutions are the favord Rigtwing solutions.
The leftwing favors different solutions. THe leftwing wants to raise the payroll tax cap from its present $87K to unlimited. Also the left favors raising the top tax rate paid by millionaires and use that revenue to pay the SS benefits.
You watch PBS CNN CBS NBC ABC MSNBC FOX et al, and you tell which solutions get mentioned again and again and again. I can already tell you which solutions. In fact, some of you have already noticed it too. And then tell me how often the leftwing solutions get mentioned. Please tell me if you hear the, because ever since I became convinced that the Left is right, I have been watching. And I NEVER see leftwing solutions mentioned on major tv networks.
The reason we lost is because we have not justified and defined a real leftist agenda. The Rightwing, on the other hand, has spent 30 years or more defining and justifying the RIghtwing agenda. We all "know" that low taxes are good for "The Economy" and we all "know" that productivity should be ever high and we all "know" that low labor costs are good and we all "know" that welfare states are bad and we all "know" that government managed healthcare is a disaster, etc etc etc. And why do we "know" all these things? Because the rightwing propaganda machine has been pushing them down our throats via the teevee, radio and newspapers for the last 30 years.
THe rightwing propaganda machine starts with nonprofit foundations and think tanks that pay for studies and write articles based on those studies. Of course, because there is no criminal penalty for cooked, bogus studies, and no money to check these studies and news articles that are based on these studies, the rightwing propaganda machine is able to dominate the media agenda. THey have the money. THey are funded into the billions by billionaires and global corporations.
THe news articles based on these studies are propagated to media outlets (tv radio papers) where they reach the public.
The rightwing propaganda machine also does many other things, such as fund up and coming rightwing media talent, e.g., giving grants to promising rightwing radio talk show hosts, authors and reporters, consultants etc.
Also, because the rightwing propaganda machine has so much money to give, most high profile media figures, reporters, etc, know that after they quit working at their current job with the networks, newspaper, etc, if they are ideologically "suitable, they can get lots of fat consultancy gigs with the rightwing propaganda machine, as long as they do not piss them off.
So the rightwing propaganda machine is like a huge planet in a solar system, or maybe even like the sun itself.
If liberals want to change America, they need to fund a LEFTwing propaganda machine. It costs money. Unfortunately, the entities with the money want to keep their money. So they are not about to fund a LEFTwing propaganda machine. So it is up to us.
Once we do get a a LEFTwing propaganda machine, we need to make sure it pushes OUR agenda, and it needs to get down to the nitty gritty of the issues. We need to make the case to the American people that high taxation is where it is at. And it really is. All we have to do is show people that high tax welfare states are a great place to live. Look at countries like Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, France, etc. Do you see a lot of citizens coming over here from there to live permanently? No! Yes, some of them (the cream of the crop) came over here doing the IT boom to make more money, but they know they have a good deal there.
We need to make the case that America is a partnership and we are getting ripped off by the richest Americans.
Crank up a LEFTwing propaganda machine. Start generating facts and figures. Start with healthcare. Show Americans exactly what is going on with nationalized universal healthcare in places like Canada, Sweden, Denmark, France etc.
Show how West Europe and their unions and restricted trade benefits the people. Hell, in Sweden it is quite difficult to expand a business. But there are reasons for that. Show Ameiricans that having corporations get their fingers into every pie disempowers the average person.
Teach America the game theory of politics.
To change America, we need to define our issues and an agenda. The problem is that we have simply moved along to the right with the GOP, keeping ever so slightly to the left of the GOP. No wonder white suburban and rural middle class Americans do not trust the Democrats. They seem to simply see the Left as a tool of the minorities for ripping them off for the welfare checks of the urban minorities.
But to do all this we need a LEFTwing propaganda machine. But we have to pay for it.
----All about Leftism
That is the real reason why the futures markets are heading Kerry's way BIG, and why all the cable tv news talking heads look like they are at a funeral: the turnout at certain, key Democratic precincts is HUGE, and significantly higher than corresponding GOP precincts.
KERRY WINS!!
But still, if you are a liberal/Democrat--go VOTE.
However, you may want to vote strategically: if you are a liberal in a solid red state, vote rightwing 3rd party--build up the Constitution Party (or if the Constitution party candidate Peroutka is not on the ballot in your state, vote for the Libertarian candidate, Badnarik). THat way, your vote strengthens the future competition for conservative votes. That is the only way the Leftwing party, the Green Party, can grow--by growing the Rightwing parties using liberal votes in red states.
This country desperately needs some creative destruction applied to our govt and our electoral system. But the only way to get that is through 3rd parties. So, go build up the 3rd parties.
The Iraq war really confirmed that for me. That set of events caused me do research on the politics of the Right versus the Left. Because of my research, I will never cast another vote for a Republican again, and I will in the future take every opportunity to vote 3rd party.
Thanks for posting this.
Well, at this point the Right is really so much in control of the government and have the media so cowed (CBS, NBC, et al) or have the media on his side (Fox, CNN, MSNBC), that the only possible comeuppance for Bush et al., at this time is via the voting booth.
If you want some good info on how biased the media is, try reading the forums at www.deomcraticunderground.com
Those guys are on top of every instance of bias that the media perpetrates. Right now, the only news organization that has shown any inclination to fight Bush is CBS. I am not referring specfically to the Rathergate memos, but to the everyday presentation of campaign news.
All the rest of the media is either slightly biased for Bush (NBC, ABC) or solidly biased for Bush (Fox, CNN, MSNBC), with some exceptions on MSNBC and CNN.
You need to remember that almost all of these talking heads and reporters are making $100K, 200K, $500K, $1M, or even several million dollars a year. Yes! News anchor make MILLIONS! Even in large metro network affliate TV stations, the talking head salaries run over $1M or much more.
So Bush's tax cuts for the rich may be saving these tv news people over $100K per year or even more. So, who do you think they favor?
You wrote:
.
A stagnant economy stops a good welfare state because the welfare aspect has to leech off of somebody's wealth.
Are you familiar with this part of the Constitution: "...Promote The General Welfare"? We are not "leeching off of somebody else's wealth." America is a partnership (as implied in the general welfare clause) and like any partnership, there is a common pot.
Otherwise you would have a purely socialist state
THat would nice. Hard to get, but nice! Better though, to just keep our capitalist system and increase taxes. Too many brainwashed bots running around not able to think rationally enough, and to go to socialism and make it work, you need a populace well educated and really more rational than we have anywhere on earth, really, at the time
because the government would have to take over the means of production due to the gov't's inability to take in as much revenue in the form of taxation to pay the private businesses currently in charge of production. Of course, a socialist state might be what you have in mind when you say a "good welfare state.
Now I cannot recall having read so much gibberish in paragraph in quite a while....Well, anyway, I was not talking about socialism/govt ownership of production. Here is a big hint for you: when someone mentions "increasing taxation on the rich", that means CAPITALISM, not socialism. THat taxation thing is kinda, ummm. inherently capitalist. You might wanna brush up on the basic definitions.
USA unemployment rate is also about 10%, but we hide our real unemployment rate. The 6% we see in the media is just those registered for unemployment benefits. When you count people who drop off the list, you get almost 10%.
Now, let's talk about the difference between an unemployed American and an unemployed West European: they get Longterm unemployment benefits, often for years. Maybe even for life! And of course in most W Euro countries, healthcare is paid for by taxes, so if you have no money, or very little, you still get healthcare, just like everyone else.
So, which is better for the citizen, to live in a country where you know that you are going to be taken care of even if you can never find a job, or be in America, where you know that not having a job could mean death?
you wrote:
What's fascinating is the sheer control of the media by people who lean to the left, or even further to the left. The biggest spreaders of FUD are you ABC's, CBS's, NBC's, and CNN's. All of them are liberal outlets. The closest one to the right is Fox News, which is still a liberal station.
NONE of those media giants are liberal. And unlike you, I will present actual reasoning, evidence etc to backup my claim. Here goes:
Big Media is liberal on minor, token issues: affirmative action, abortion, gay rights. These are the offically approved liberal issues. But when it comes to the really important issues, the economic issues, Big Media is solidly conservative. For example, recently, we have had a lot of discussion on network and cable tv political news shows about the "Problem with Social Security." And there has been some discussion of "solutions" to this problem. Of all the many times possible solutions have been mentioned on tv news shows, there are only two possible solutions ever listed: raise the age of retirement, and reduce benefits. Gee, what about all the other possible solutions? What about raising the ceiling on the payroll tax? Currently, the payroll tax stops at about $87K, and income above that is not taxed at all for SS purposes. ALso, why not just create a special tax on high incomes and use that to fund SS? For example add a 1% tax on all earned and unearned income above $250K. That would take care of all SS problems, just like that!
But you never hear anything about that on tv because that is a LEFTist solution, and leftists are hardly ever seen on tv. All centrists and rightwingers. Go look at all the broadcast networks and look at each political news show. List all the neutral regular guests and all the rightwing and leftwing regular guests and hosts. Can't think of many leftists, can you? Well, maybe you never paid much attention to that kind of stuff? Maybe you just repeat what you hear on Rush Limbaugh, or what you read in the wall st journal?
Well, there is really only ONE true leftist regularly given a voice on broadcast TV: Bill Moyers, and he is being driven out this year. You might make a case for Eleanor Clift and Lawrence O'Donell on McLaughlin and and Juan Williams on Fox News Sunday, althoug they are really more classic democrats, which is not the same as true liberal/progressive leftist. Also, that lady who is on the PBS show run by the Wall St Journal editorial board.
Now, do you want to run down all the rightwingers on broadcast tv? And then we can get started on cable tv. And that is far worse.
You see, you really don't know much about the situation at all, do you? You just repeat talking points drilled into you by talk radio, WSJ, and other mainstream media outlets.
Anyone think of any other lefists regularly on broadcast TV?
Liberals who live in red states that are not in contention should vote for the rightwing 3rd party candidate, i.e., either for Badnarik of Libertarian party, or for Peroutka of the Constitution party. This is the only way we can grow a progressive, leftwing 3rd party such as the Green Party--by strengthening the Rightwing 3rd parties. When the Constitution Party (or the Libertarian party) gets strong enough to take some serious votes away from the GOP, only then the Green Party can grow appreciably.
In order to get a better electoral system (e.g., proportional representation) we need some 3rd party legislators. And then once we have some 3rd party legislators, we can make some changes that will allow real 3rd party. But getting real changes all starts with growing rightwing parties.
The Constitution party is the one that can really cut into the GOP electorate. So, if you are a liberal in a solid red state, and Peroutka is on the ballot, vote for him, for the future. You can think tactically!
what would stop you? What makes you think a "stagnant" economy would stop a good welfare state? What, Rush didn't go into any more depth on that? He just keep repeating a few key phrases? Huh, go figger.....
Actually, there is plenty of wealth to go around in any industrialized country, as long as you have a progressive taxation system, little corruption, a relatively transparent government and some creative destruction applied periodically to the government itself.
And as for the birth rate declining, just take more money from those who earn more, and depend less on sheer numbers of earners. Create new taxes on the wealthy. They have most of the wealth in any industrialized capitalistic country.
Also use economies of scale and increasing efficiency. Large governmentally administered social welfare programs are run quite efficiently. For example, the Social Security Administration is run FAR MORE efficiently than any private healthcare company. One percent of costs are administrative in SSA. HMOs require about 15% admin costs. Gee, I wonder if it has anything to do with executive bonuses and perks? What, Rush did not mention that aspect of it on his radio show?
The reason many Americans would react that way (vote Bush when they hear Europeans vote Kerry) is that the Rightwing propaganda machine has been brainwashing them by demonizing Europe. This propaganda offensive seemed to begin not too long after the news of the strong European social safety net began to leak out of Europe and into the conciousness of many Americans. The old "threat of a good example" strategy of the American propaganda machine. I guess the logic is that if Americans see that Leftist Europe can make the welfare state work, that eventually Americans will get the idea that they can make it work for themselves, too. And that would be bad for corporate/business profits. Same principle more or less applied to every American invasion of or manipulation of all those leftist Asian or Latin American countries. Oh, Guatemala/vietnam/Chile/cuba is going leftist? Well, we will just invade them/back a coup/embargo them....
A threat of a good example might give similar ideas to other countries...So they demonize/propagandize Americans via the mass media, the better to manufacture consent for invasion or a coup.
So the lesson for Europe is, I suppose, you best watch you asses, the Rich people in America and the multinationals don't like your opulent welfare states that keep the citizens from being at the mercy of the upper class/the corporations. So watch out for an invasion/a coup/a trade embargo in a few years, once Rush Limbaugh/The NY Times et al have worked Americans into a hate frenzy at the very mention of the word "Europe".
And to think I used to be much like you. Manipulated by those in high places, by the corporations, by the war machine, by those who exploit the religious nuts, by a those driven to achieve and to create a lasting legacy. Whipped up into a righteous fury, ready to go out and die for nothing but a fatter wallet for some CEO, for some investor.
And how sad that humans should do this, when our time alive is so short. That we should allow ourselves to be manipulated like this. And not only do we allow ourselves to abdicate our powers of logic and take such rash actions, but we also forego a chance at a more logical and rational alternative world, a world where we all do not have to strive so hard, where we would not have to stress ourselves so much just to survive, a world where we devote all that wasted energy and wealth to more worthwhile pursuits, such as medical research to lenghten our own lives. Such a tragedy....
over 100K people die every day in this world, and 5K of them are Americans. A lot of them are dying from cancer. Why don't we wage war on cancer instead?
Just read what the man said. He makes sense. I trust him more than Bush or Kerry. You may say that he murdered 3000 at WTC, but it strikes me that he was at war. Was his war more bogus than our own in Iraq. We have killed 15 THOUSAND innocent civilians in Iraq. Seems like we are the murderous sociopaths, not OBL.
y &u=/ap/ 20041029/ap_on_re_mi_ea/bin_laden_tape_16
Here is a good transscipt of the tape:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor
Any good background check will turn up that file that the FBI now has on her. So which candidate gets the job, the one without the FBI file, or the one with the FBI file?
Uh, yeah, al qaeda attacked us because they hate us for our freedom....my ass!
Everytime we use real life events to point out that the greatness of America (at for the average person) is actually a fantasy, you rightwing bots counter with some example from a fascist country or from a 3rd world country. Why not instead compare America to Western Europe?
I live in Texas, where the GOP dominates. So instead of voting for Kerry (or the Green Party, my real favorite) I just voted in early voting for Badnarik, even though I am no longer a Libertarian. But since the Libertarian platform is essentially a rightwing platform (essentially advocating zero taxation), if the Libertarian party gets more popular and gets more ballot access, their candidates will take away votes from the GOP candidates....
Vote strategically, my fellow liberals!
Everytime we use real life events to point out that the greatness of America (at for the average person) is actually a fantasy, you rightwing bots counter with some example from a fascist country or from a 3rd world country. Why not instead compare America to Western Europe?
This sort of incident is best understood when you look at America's history. The apple don't fall too far from the tree. America was born on the backs of slaves and indentured servants.
Historically, the power of the state has almost ALWAYS been aligned with the top of the hierarchy. Back in the slave days, the government mainly worked for Master, or "Massa," the slaveowner, the rich plantation owner, or the merchant, or the rich farmer. The government was designed mainly to take care of Massa's property.
These days the corporation is our "Massa." And it don't really matter whether Massa is right or not. You best obey the Massa, or you get a taste of the whip.
And if you can afford to take Massa into court, then YOU must be Massa.
Always, always act first to protect Massa's property, whether it be a runaway slave, an indentured servant on the run, or one who has been stealing food, or a thief in the cornfield, or a shoplifter, or an IP infringer, then, and only then, ask questions, or deal with it in the courts.