This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Elites Have Lost The Right to Rule
From Michael Krieger of KAM LP
War is the growth hormone of the cancer that is big government.
- Alex Jones
A government always finds itself obliged to resort to inflationary measures when it cannot negotiate loans and dare not levy taxes, because it has reason to fear that it will forfeit approval of the policy it is following if it reveals too soon the financial and general economic consequences of that policy. Thus inflation becomes the most important psychological resource of any economic policy whose consequences have to be concealed; and so in this sense it can be called an instrument of unpopular, that is, of antidemocratic policy, since by misleading public opinion it makes possible the continued existence of a system of government that would have no hope of the consent of the people if the circumstances were clearly laid before them. That is the political function of inflation. When governments do not think it necessary to accommodate their expenditure and arrogate to themselves the right of making up the deficit by issuing notes, their ideology is merely a disguised absolutism.
- Ludwig von Mises
How Wall Street Died
Let me take you back to the fall of 1999. I was a senior in college without a clue what I wanted to do with my life. Wall Street was in a boom and seemed exciting. I had always loved the financial markets since I had first discovered them years earlier; however, I wasn’t convinced this was the profession I wanted. I had majored in Economics at school for practical purposes but I found almost all of the courses to be extraordinarily uninspiring with the exception of a few like Corporate Finance and the Economic History of China. It was the general micro and macro economics courses that I found the most painful to sit through. I wasn’t alone in this assessment. Many of my close friends were Economics majors as well and we all felt the same way (I later found out this was because we were being indoctrinated in voodoo Keynesian economics) . So even with the Economics degree I wasn’t sure that I wanted to pursue a career in finance given the fact that I found myself more interested in subjects such as English , History and Philosophy. Nevertheless, the firms were hiring, I had the degree and it would allow me to move back to New York City without living at home.
What I discovered as I interviewed for jobs disturbed me right away. Every single firm with the exception of one was completely obsessed with math. Entire interviews revolved around “how quantitative are you” and the like. Although I hadn’t had much experience with investing I had enough to know this line of thinking seemed preposterous. It seemed to me only basic math skills are necessary to be a successful equity investor. Besides that, it seemed that the key is understanding that the world is always changing rapidly under the surface and therefore what is a good business today might be bankrupt tomorrow and what is a start up today could be the next Microsoft. This seems obvious but the skill set to figuring all this out is more geared to an appreciation of human psychology, historical cycles and cultural shifts (both fads and structural changes) than math. What I realized later is the reason they were so focused on mathematicians and Phd’s is that Wall Street was moving away from what it was always meant to be - a conduit between the holders of capital and those that wish to deploy that capital in productive economic activity. Rather than trying to hire a well rounded workforce of intelligent college graduates the firms were hiring a cadre of quantitative robots that would play an instrumental roll in blowing up the world’s financial system.
When you get too many people of a particular mindset (in this case highly quantitative and academic) to aggregate in a field that is very much a people business and one where “street smart” common sense is of extreme importance you are asking for serious trouble. When you couple that with a Federal Reserve that keeps interest rates too low what you get is a bunch of quants inventing products that provide a yield sufficient for pensions and others struggling to earn a return. Products that are completely mispriced for the risk inherent in them. I am not placing all of the blame on the Wall Street firms (although they deserve a lot and the fact people haven’t been punished severely is a huge reason why there is no confidence on main street), rather I believe the Federal Reserve deserves 95% of it. If it wasn’t for them manipulating the price of money to absurdly low levels you wouldn’t have had the rush into toxic products in a search for yield. While the newly enthroned Wall Street quant army would surely have done their damage nonetheless it wouldn’t have resulted in the complete destruction of the financial and monetary system that we face today. In a nutshell, this is how I think Wall Street died and until it gets its act together will remain a corpse.
The Elites Have Lost Their Right to Rule
One of my favorite quotes is from Joseph Schumpeter who said “everyone has elites the important thing is to change them from time to time.” Of course, this is what happens in a well functioning democracy. The problem today and the reason why the United States is on the verge of some sort of revolution (I believe it will manifest as a revolution of ideas and not an armed one) is that the election of Obama has proven to everyone watching with an unbiased eye that no matter who the President is they continue to prop up an elite at the top that has been running things into the ground for years. The appointment of Larry Summers and Tiny Turbo-Tax Timmy Geithner provided the most obvious sign that something was seriously not kosher. Then there was the reappointment of Ben Bernanke. While the Republicans like to simplify him as merely a socialist he represents something far worse.
Of course it is not just Obama. He is at the end of a long line of Presidents that think they have some sort of divine right of kings to rule. Think about the Presidency of the United States since 1988. Bush, Clinton, Bush…If Obama had not won the Democratic primary we would have ended up with President Hilary Clinton. Catch my drift? Something is not right here. This is the United States not some sort of petty monarchy. There is no divine right of any family or group of families to rule. When this starts to happen you get the disaster we are now faced with. That said, the bigger point is this. What Obama has attempted to do is to wipe a complete economic collapse under the rug and maintain the status quo so that the current elite class in the United States remains in control. The “people” see this ploy and are furious. Those that screwed up the United States economy should never make another important decision about it yet they remain firmly in control of policy. The important thing in any functioning democracy is the turnover of the elite class every now and again. Yet, EVERY single government policy has been geared to keeping that class in power and to pass legislation that gives the Federal government more power to then buttresses this power structure down the road. This is why Obama is so unpopular. Everything else is just noise to keep people divided and distracted.
Getting Into the Mind of Ben Bernanke
I do not have a clear window into the highest levels of power in many areas such as the military or the intelligence community but I do have a very good understanding of it when it comes to the financial system and the economy. At the end of the day everyone knows that those who can create the money and credit have the ultimate power over any political system. Therefore, at the top of the economic power of the world is the Federal Reserve and at the top of that is Ben Bernanke. This is why I took a great deal of interest in reading the full text of his speech today. Much will be written about it but I want to tackle it from two points. First, who is Ben Bernanke?
You can really see into his head from reading this speech. He is an academic who thinks he is smarter than everyone else which is why he is in the position he is in. He thinks the key to monetary policy is to trick people into doing things that will hurt them in the end. He believes the mal-investments he intends to push people and institutions into equals economic growth. What surprises me so much about the investment community and the American public in general is that so many fail to understand that we live in a top down centralized economic system much more similar to China in more ways than people want to admit. We look at how the government steers the economy in China and sneer. How are we so different right now?
As far as the speech itself, it confirms something I mentioned several weeks ago. Banana Ben absolutely wants to do a massive QE2 program. The only thing holding him back is gold is near an all time high. What he wants is gold much lower and stocks much lower to give him cover. Gold has not cooperated so he is in a bind. He cannot print a massive amount of money with gold here and stocks at 1055 because what happens if gold soars and stocks sell-off in the days that follow such an announcement? What if the response in the treasury market is not as desired? He is scared to do it here and he is right to be scared because such a reaction would be the end of the Fed right then and there. The Fed will be gone anyway within a few years in my opinion but it’s going to fight hard to survive and if you want to make money in this market you need to understand that. The most powerful institution in the world is fighting for its survival. Never forget that.
So what is he going to do? I believe that the Fed and government are doing a lot more than people think to manipulate all markets behind the scenes. After all, they have publicly announced their manipulation in many other ways so does it make any sense whatsoever to assume they aren’t doing a plethora of other things behind the scenes? Of course not. I think that with the Fed in a bind they will accelerate and become ever more aggressive in behind the scenes games. This will make markets even more volatile and extraordinarily challenging. This is financial war make no mistake about it. The only way in my opinion to survive this is to buy all dips in precious metals, agriculture and oil. It is in these three areas that I expect to see the most price inflation as money eventually figures out the end game. The end game is more and more people will eventually wake up to the fact that the markets are a hologram put in front of you by the magicians at the Fed. That what constitutes real wealth in the years ahead will be owning food, energy and a means of exchange that will be accepted should a black market economy arise as it has in virtually all nations at one time or another throughout history.
In the end, the elites will be overthrown and a power vacuum will form. The transition period will be extremely difficult as the elites will fight their demise to the end. For you see, they care nothing for you they care about their power and control. Nevertheless, rulers have always only ruled by the will (or apathy) of the people and when the people become overly taxed and abused they always rebel. The main thing to think about is what kind of society do we want to rebuild from the ashes. I am of the view that it must be a return to the Constitution and an elimination of central banking power and secrecy. Let’s not fall for a demagogue or be pushed into a war when things are at their worst.
Have a great weekend,
Mike
»
- 58953 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
With Ron Paul at the head, I bet filling his cabinet would be like a wet dream of who's who among our favs. Man, we could actually have an intellectual think tank around him instead of the decaying matter staining the White House walls these days.
Peter Schiff ??? He and his Euro Pacific misleads his own clients.
John Bolton : A NeoCon who will start war even with canada.
Hugh Hendry/Edwards : don't know their back ground , who will they serve ? people or elites ?
hendry's a scotsman, doubtful he'd take the gig, for any "money" hehe.
he sure wouldn't want the paycut, and couldn't do the "gov't service, place all of my money in a 'trust' and launder through to avoid any taxes" gig.
- Ned
oatmeal savage.
Bill Black @ FDIC (if it survives)
Paul/Napolitano. LOVE IT.
But they must drop the republican party. Again, RP must leave the republican party.
They'd find it difficult if not impossible to get on the ballot in many states. Campaign funds would be eaten up in court battles.
I like it. Oh and 870-Tactical-12 more reliable....just an opinion
It was a no win situation..
Because I chose not to vote (given the wonderful choices that were provided) but instead continued taking care of my personal affairs in a responsible and mature manner, does that make me part of the problem or part of the solution?
Furthermore, does getting ready to launch a new (domestic) venture during the eye of the storm yield bonus points or demerits?
It's not a real democracy until we include "None of the above" on the ballot.-jpk
Yikes! Didn't you mean "republic" instead of "democracy"? Is it really better to have the many ruling the few where a majority always wins? I don't often agree with elites, but I equally disagree with the majority of people, too. So I'd prefer less power to everyone under a limited government that focuses on principles and not wishes.
Individualism was banished from the Earth never to return...didn't you get Rosie's memo?
"Individuality is fine as long as we all do it together." -- Frank Burns
Euphemistically speaking...
Sorry if I sound like I'm picking out some subtle nuanced difference, but I really do kind of think we should be aware of the differences between forms of government and use the correct term to describe our ideal and/or what form we see our governments as taking. That may sound harsh when put that way, but I'm not sure how else to put it.
On the plus side, at least we've only trashed the concept of democracy when "spreading democracy" around the world and spared the core of our constitution in case we ever return to being more of a republic. Helps the PR.
Country names can be hilariously funny.
The lesson for that came many centuries ago,
with the naming of "The Holy Roman Empire",
which was neither holy, nor roman, nor, by any stretch of the imagination, an empire.
Since then we've had,
"The German Democratic Republic",
"The Union of S.S. Republics",
"The Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea",
"The Democratic Republic of East Timor",
"The Provisional Peoples' Demopcratic Republic of Diega Garcia",
"The United States of Mexico"
"The Peoples' Democratic Republic of Algeria",
and we could go on and on all night, could we not?
Word. I'd settle for a little more live and let live, and a lot less trust me, I know what I'm doing (it's for your own good anyway).
Those be good words, too.
Obama is a complete fraud.
That said, he has, to date, kept us out of a third world war likely by putatively failing to support an Israeli attack on Iran.
McCain would have had us in a third world war by now. He is even more of a tool.
Obama has been extremely instructive. He has instructed the Democratic progressives on how absolutely impotent they are.
The Republicans (who have a brain) have already figured out Bush/Cheney and the historical criminality of that regime.
The high risk is that the Dems get thoroughly deservedly trounced in November only to be replaced by the Republican meatheads (think Peter King, McCain, etc.), who, along with the usual Neocon stooges (Bolton, Frank Gaffney, FoxNews etc.) will even more vociferously scream for war.
Obama showed us that the system is a complete fraud, as is he.
That's all you could hope for at this time of history.
I did not vote for Obama.
I do not vote.
I refuse to participate in Kabuki theatre.
I do not vote.
Then you have NO right to say shit.
I disagree. Abstaining is a vote in itself.
continuing to vote in the current system tells the elites that you believe the system is still legitimate and working (while it is neither)
as long as ANY of us show up at the polls they can claim to have a mandate to do whatever the F they want
don't vote - what if they held an election and nobody came?!!!
Then the dead people that voted would be electing the fools.
Not voting is what gives these leeches the audacity to bullshit the populace so brazenly. Thats why on good election year turnouts only 1/2 registered voters bothers to show up! Either vote 3rd party or vote in the primaries to take control of your favorite R/D party.
Not that I think it really matters since TPTB control the votes through propaganda. However, enough people need to CARE enough to realize they are getting tricked and that the system can't be fixed internally before real change will happen with lots of lead, fire and rope.
That is why Obama is a godsend. People like me needed a fake messiah to dissapoint the country to show the sheep that it really makes no difference working within the system. Nov. 2010 will see an incumbent backlash. Then things won't change as all those f*cksticks get bought off or because they were also planted by TPTB. Then folks will get more ticked off. Then, maybe, we can have a real change. Or .gov takes over the internet and we go back to printing up pamphlets in the basement like Franklin did.
I'd like to buy your theory that a little bit of the flu shocks your immune system into overdrive. But I think enough voters LIKE socialism to make this whole thing a big rock rolling downhill that won't stop until it reaches the bottom.
So that would be your basic domino theory?
Bah, there's only two key dominoes, and them bones are facing so opposite (in status only) they're touching rears. Snakeyes is the reptiles who steal the money while it is hot off the press, and boxcars is the herd that found out they can vote themselves money. Unfortunately for the rest of us, the game always builds off the double.
"Then things won't change as all those f*cksticks get bought off or because they were also planted by TPTB."
Funny how many "money-baggers" keep announcing their candidacies ....
voting should be mandatory and so should runoffs.
I don't think my voting for Ron Paul told the elites that I believe that the system is still legitimate and working.
they did a good enough job of marginalizing Ron that they didn't care whether you voted for him or not - his chance of winning the election was zero
what exactly did your vote accomplish? (other than sending the elites the message that you believe the current system is one in which your vote matters - ie, the system is working and you believe in it)
Everyone has a price. Maybe Ron's is higher than most but he still has one.
doofus.
Thank you for roundly refuting my claim. I stand corrected by the might of your supermassive intellect.
Dude, the only thing you proved is that you have a price. The rest of your statement is projection. It may be true, but it's an unprovable assertion.
Yup. Like all the folks who campaigned against the gay and then scrambled out of the closet, or ranted about family values while have a mistress or frequenting the titty bars and ho houses.
You can't extrapolate from yourself to everyone. Just because you lack qualities of character, does not mean everyone else is handicapped.
bingo.
I wasn't extrapolating from myself, I was extrapolating from every other member of the executive, legislative and judicial branches. I personally don't have a price because I have no faith in the monopoly money known as FRN's. But thanks for the insults nonetheless...
you said everybody has a price, now you're saying you don't?
For fuck's sake you tool, I disagree with you and you give me shit. I agree with you and you give me shit. This is why I have no hope for the future. Even those on the same side will nitpick each other to death. And while we're busy arguing semantics, the fascicsts are taking over. Thank you for adding soooooooooooo much to the discourse.
You started it by stating an absolute, from which it is impossible to back down from.
I thought you could null and void it by throwing the vodka back up.
So your contradictory statements make those who point them out fools? Please tell me just how that works; it's an interesting dynamic.
My reason for having no hope for the future is that tools like you are missing the obvious, even when your nose is being rubbed in it.
thesapein's statement has nothing to do with sentiment (agreeing or disagreeing), but rather consistency (which cannot exist when you say something only to contradict yourself with your very next statement).
And why do you care about agreeing or disagreeing in the first place? Seek to know and understand instead. Society burying its collective head in the sand is what placed us at the brink of economic ruin in the first place.
Not so fast nor true. My burn rate is dwarfed by the growth rate in my Intellectual Property. No price here. "How much for the women?"
Not voting is akin to saying "I don't want anyone in power", which is unrealistic. In this case, though, someone had to be elected, so your non-vote is reduced to your willingness to let others have a greater say on how the country is run. Abstaining has perhaps a more meaningful message on "YES/NO" referendum votes.
I didn't want to go vote, but I did in November 2008. I ended up choosing Alan Keyes for president, and thinking... "am I nuts?". Looking back, I didn't see that as a wasted vote. But I do admit to wasted votes for a few non-incumbent Democrats I helped elect to the House/Senate.
What WAS I thinking there????
Agree. Abstaining is a vote. Myself, I did vote the last time - I wrote in the names of cartoon characters.
My dream team:
Wiley Coyete: Minister of Tecnological Development
Wimpy: Chair of the Fed.
Yosemite Sam: Minister of Defense
Boris Badenov: Director of CIA
Dudley Doright: Head of FBI
Foghorn Leghorn: Press Secretary
Snidely Whiplash: Head of Freddie Mac
Duckman: President
Scrooge McDuck: Secretary of the Treasury
Joe Camel: Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare
Donald Duck: Anger Management Advisor
Have you been keeping up with current events?
Because what we got going in Washington, D.C. is pretty close to your dream team.
lol
I'm sorry, I've heard many good arguments for abstaining from voting, but the system is not set up to register "negative" votes. Unless you have taken quantifiable action of some sort against the system, (voting is only one available method) your apathy and acquiescence are automatically counted as approval of the status quo. Your non participation is directly aiding the corruption you complain about.
All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to......
a better voting system would allow a voter to cast his vote against a DEM/REthug candidate which would cancel out a positive vote for that candidate. and a candidate would have to receive 50% of votes to win.
this would help us cull the DEM/REthugs out of office for good.
They say make your vote count, this would do it
125MM voted in '08 (66.8MM for BHO, 58.3 for JMcC), or ~57% out of 223MM eligible. So, not voting ultimately leaves you governed by the actions of approximately 30% of the population. Somehow, Barry's 30% "mandate" not only doesn't give a rip about the other 26% that voted for McC, but even less about the other 43% that voted by not voting. Good plan. Think if only 10% voted, and split 51/49 that they'd care about why the turnout was so low? Must be the evil Joooooooos putting all these clowns up.....
DosZap
I don't vote. Two reasons. First of all it's meaningless; this country was bought and sold a long time ago. The shit they shovel around every 4 years *pfff* doesn't mean a fucking thing. Secondly, I believe if you vote, you have no right to complain. People like to twist that around – they say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain', but where's the logic in that? If you vote and you elect dishonest, incompetent people into office who screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You caused the problem; you voted them in; you have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote, who in fact did not even leave the house on election day, am in no way responsible for what these people have done and have every right to complain about the mess you created that I had nothing to do with.”
“The next time they give you all that civic bullshit about voting, keep in mind that Hitler was elected in a full, free democratic election”"Now, there's one thing you might have noticed I don't complain about: politicians. Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here... like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There's a nice campaign slogan for somebody: 'The Public Sucks. Fuck Hope.'"
"I have solved this political dilemma in a very direct way: I don't vote. On Election Day, I stay home. I firmly believe that if you vote, you have no right to complain. Now, some people like to twist that around. They say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain,' but where's the logic in that? If you vote, and you elect dishonest, incompetent politicians, and they get into office and screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You voted them in. You caused the problem. You have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote -- who did not even leave the house on Election Day -- am in no way responsible for that these politicians have done and have every right to complain about the mess that you created."
George Carlin
Nice.
.
Gully, agree completely. I used to buy into the civic duty thing, but then I moved to Maryland. The state is completely rigged in favor of all Democrats, and I sincerely doubt the so-called Tea Party bunch will have any effect here whatsoever, especially in Montgomery County. I switched party affiliation ages ago to Libertarian, and have been richly rewarded. I no longer get bombarded with idiotic mail, nor do I get incessant phone calls asking me to vote.
Regarding politicians--I once worked, briefly, for one of the people who is running locally. A thoroughly loathsome individual, and about as two-faced as they come--well-trained during an internship with a House Republican of many years' standing. The system itself is rotten to the core.
"...and I sincerely doubt..."
There's your weakness. You lose.
Our founding fathers had plenty of doubts, but they forged ahead anyway.
If you don't vote, you can still complain... making you a hypocritical chickenshit fake-anarchist-wannabe complainer.
Another comedian (can't remember who darn it), stated, "By voting I'm giving my consent to be governed by a bunch of pricks"... or something very similar. Your post reminded me of it, and we are seeing the truth in it- up close and personal.
sanity, bitchez
that sounds like vintage Lenny Bruce..ground up like hamburger in the 1950's along with Billie Holiday...WAY,WAY before their time.
also sounds of the Bill Hicks flavour. . .
Read more: http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=261909165&blogId=318036812#ixzz0xv8viP1ymmmmmmmmm Bill Hicks =)
So it's like participating in a market, sort of, no? By participating, you're helping the market. If you refuse and focus your time in other, more productive markets, then you basically just have more important things to tend to than going to these lame polls.
If you closed any accounts with banksters and traded into gold and silver, then you just did a hell of a lot more than a stupid vote.
Still, it would be epic if Ron Paul got the most votes next time around, wouldn't it? Or do you believe it wouldn't happen or wouldn't make a difference?
I voted, and I'll complain if I damn well want to. What, are you going to not listen to me or something? Wooo.
The thing that allows me to complain about Obama (and McCain, and all the other D's and R's) is that I did not vote for them. I did not vote them in. The convolutions expressed by Carlin are only applicable in a vote that has only two choices. We have several choices. Granted the D-R machine has stacked the deck against anyone 'outside'. But 'not voting' is not going to change that.
Vote or don't; I don't care. Your first point is valid. But I reserve the right to complain. You can't take that from me. I have not consented to be governed by any of these schmucks. I also reserve the right to participate in any extra-curricular regime-changing activities, when and if it gets to that point. I also reserve the right to be imperfect, yet still have (and express) principles and opinions.
Let's say everyone gets on board and refuses to vote...except for 3 people. 2 vote Democrat, 1 votes Republican. Nothing changes. Oh, but now everyone else 'gets' to complain. Yeah, that helps.
Voting for a REAL Patriot, and beleiver, arbiter of the Truth such as Ron Paul, IMHO is better than staying home.
It's a PROTEST vote, against the Globalist Pawns.
Even if YOU Know HE/SHE has no chance of winning...you fired back.
Who made you king and when did you decide you can suspend the first amendment? Or do you simply work for the EPA and decide to do everything by administrative ruling?
Republicans, as tone deaf as they are, generally don't suspend the first amendment, unless they first say some incredibly stupid crap about Muslim terrorists and how we have to fight them over there in order to avoid fighting them over here. Democrats, on the other hand, progressives that they are, just suspend the first amendment when they don't like what you say. Generally by executive fiat or by an unconstitutional administrative ruling.
I'll guess you're a Democrat progessive because of the imperious tone.
Sorry, but an absence of voting is a vote.
I vote not to participate. That is a vote.
It is a vote to not give consent.
If you vote in a fraudulent election, you are consenting to the fraud.
If noone voted they would have no consent, no self-imposed mandate.
The last time I voted in a Presidential election, I was faced with voting for Dole (who was an empty suit and ill suited) and Clinton, who, by that point, had been outed as completely corrupt.
I held my nose and voted for Dole because I wanted to participate and send a message.
It was a joke. After that, no more.
Just like a good Democrat progessive, maybe you could mandate the vote.
That way we would all be forced, just like all of the other mandated programs, to participate in imposed inanity.
No thanks.
I don't agree with a non-vote is a vote premise, but well said Trundle.
Problem with progressives is they know what's best, and are going to do it for you, whether you like or agree with it or not. A non-vote is a vote of aquiescence or apathy to them, and they actually believe that supports their agenda. Also, your non-vote cannot be differentiated from those that don't give a flyin' leap about anything. Maybe that's the key. Add an "Abstain" vote option, like w/ proxies...people probably wouldn't bother getting to the polling station for that though.
Sorry, but NOT Voting, took away your freedom of speech.........you chose not to exercise it..........which is your right.
NO Action, is the same as condoning the bullshit.
At least vote for a QUALIFIED candidate...and we had one..
Ron Paul.
We just have to agree to disagree............
sorry DosZap, I call bullshit.
ran up against that meme during the 'bama campaign, and as a non-participator in the "voting" charade, I now answer those who whine with "you voted for it, you have NO right to say shit".
conscious non-participation in false "voting" allows the mind the freedom from having to filter all the lies put forward by those who seek to be "elected" - it gives me more time to fully understand the global agenda by not being forced into the "nationstate" mindset. . . THEY don't think in the terms of national boundaries, of separate parties, or countries, or patriotism - none of that is in their reality.
if you play by the rules they teach you, then you are a pawn in THEIR game, nothing more. . . in order to work towards awareness, you need to allow your mind to think outside the parameters set by your training/trainers.
Cathartes,
See the answer to the post above, when I say VOTE, I mean not for the staus quo, the only excuse for not exercising that Freedom, is if there WAS/IS no qualified candidate.........
And, as explained WE had one.IMHO.
Agreed DosZap there has been one person at least trying to hold the country to what it once stood for and resembled.
Here is something interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiAL76OoXp0
Get savvy, ig.
http://www.bradblog.com/
Pac-Man Hacked Onto a Touch-Screen Voting Machine Without Breaking 'Tamper-Evident' Seals Same systems to be used by millions of voters this November...The BRAD BLOG Informs NBC's Chuck Todd That Ballots Are Not Actually Counted by Humans
While your handing out rights to the "deserving". I'll take a right to vote for someone who I have no control over. And a right to make rules that I don't have to follow myself because nobody is questioning my authority. And throw in a right to leave the earth for good. Even though that will cause massive changes in it if too many people exercise that right. You didn't really believe one dude made this place all on his own. did ya.
The locking out of other candidates/parties from the so-called Presidential "debates" would be a good start. (They are NOT debates.) But the drawback would be a totally mindless electorate (excuse the oxymoron). They would not know who was "right" if the debates became an all-skate.
Rocky,
Please notice the indents of the posts... as each post is replied to, the indent from the margin moves further right. I did not reply to you originally. Kind of hard to follow in such a long thread - I know.
There was a page change, my post was right at the top, and I swear the indents were aligned, let's say not in my favor.
Thanks for your kind reply.
What a dolt.
All rights are preserved so long as the criteria of citizenship are met.
Voting in national elections is a fools game designed by those who have selected the choices you will decide between. Nearly any choice you make has been approved in advance.
Am I the "dolt" or is there something missing from the thread?
My reply was to idiocy posted by DosZap... must have been junked away...
Perhaps this amazingly stupid post by DosZap is what I originally replied to:
by DosZap
on Fri, 08/27/2010 - 11:39
#548786
I do not vote.
Then you have NO right to say shit.
This sort of shallow rhetoric is ridiculous. One of the glorious things about our constitution is that A) You don't have to vote, and B) That you can say whatever you want.
You can agree or disagree with his choice, but your statement above is the sort of ignorant recited drivel that adds nothing and detracts from the real discussion.
.
So if you ask me who the Greatest Composer of All Time is, but my choices are:
(A) The Inbred Banjo Kid from "Deliverence"
(B) Wham
... and I refuse to answer your question, I obviously have no right to comment on music AT ALL. Got it!
Greatest Composer of All Time
Beethoven. And the Ninth Symphony is the greatest piece of music that will ever be written by man. That's one absolute statement I'm willing to make and stand behind.
The ethereal majesty of Bach beats the technical brilliance of Beethoven hands down.
Bach is pretty good. Mozart too. Wagner kicks ass. Richard Strauss blows my mind. I really dig Ravel. Some American composers rock, too; I like what I've heard from Copeland and Barber's Adagio for Strings really sings, gotta see what else he's done.
No! It's Deliverence Banjo Boy or Wham. There is no other alternative!
(I'm a Bach man myself, for the record, though it is a tight race...)
Doesn't Ronny Cox get any credit for that Deliverance gig?
He'll get a cabinet level position. Maybe Secretary of State.
all this beethoven 9th, just reminds me of Jack Heck. well, he was, how can i put it, quite influential in my life. wow, now that i think about it, the zerohedge of oakwood ave. quite mysterious and anonymous creature. but never did i ever go to nancy's house and this kind of music wasn't blaring from all levels of this man's castle. it was a very old castle home. thanks guyz, goddess of memory. the big B's r o c k.
R.I.P. Jack Heck. great art on this man's, old castle wall's.
Now here is a debate worth joining, even if it is a little off topic. Cannot disagree with your choice, but I am partial to Brahm's First. Passages of Swan Lake can bring tears to my eyes. Bach's 3rd Brandenburg likewise. And S. L. Weiss' Passacaglia from his Sonata 18. And many pieces from Franz Liszt. Toss in Miles Davis to lighten or darken the mood as needed. In my neck of the woods Mozart is always the favorite. I can see the brilliance, but his work always makes me feel mathematical. The three B's, on the other hand, make me forget theory and just feel.
Now for the greatest piece of artwork---to broaden what is no doubt already a dead discussion: The Pieta. I once had a chance to view it on a quiet day, and for several minutes I was the only human being with eyes on it. I am not a religious type, but the absolute passion evidenced in every curve and fold of that marble screams. It is everything humanity ever was or can ever hope to be. It will never be equaled, even if the human race survives another million years. Everyone else is merely playing for second place. I would have thought after completing it Michelangelo would have thrown away his tools, and like Daniel Plainview just said, "I'm finished".
I also rank old Claude D near the top of my personal heap. How odd; Bach and Debussy. But not really when you think about it. OK, back to the hateful socio-political crap.
Nice choices for music and art that move the emotions. Three dimensional sculptures are my favorite art form, with the Piata and David high on the list. There are many pieces to choose from in Paris, Florence, and Rome.
On your piece, I was struck by a few observations:
I have found many of those period statues of men to be anatomically correct and idealized in general while women seemed to be depicted by artists that either had less than ideal subjects, attempted at modesty although men were exempt, or perhaps they just had to guess at their shape without nude models, reminding me of the sandbag line from the 40 year old virgin.
You've forgotten one of the most important B's - Bartok. His work, love it or hate it, completed that which was begun by Bach in the technical realm of Western music. Having said that, I'd agree that if only one piece of Western music survives the fall of civilization, it should be Beethoven's 9th symphony. No other piece comes close to that melding of technical mastery with divine inspiration.
Lovely, lovely Ludwig Von.
Wow, that would be a pretty rough call to have to make. One peice of Western music... Yeah, I may go with the 9th. But I sure would miss the Mass in B Minor. And the Ciaccona from Partita #2 in D Minor. And... Good call on Bartok, by the way.
The third Brandenburg is the one with the trumpet, right? That's a favorite of mine as well. McCartney said it inspired the trumpet in Penny Lane.
How about the second movement of Beethoven's Pathetique sonata? I first became familiar with this from a scene in A Boy Named Charlie Brown. Schroder plays the piece while Snoopy performs an ice skating routine on a deserted rink at night. Beautiful.
Interesting that you mention that Snoopy scene. I'm probably not alone when I state that my earliest and most influential exposure to "classical" music came entirely from cartoons. I can still sing "The Bunny of Seville" AND "What's Opera, Doc" pretty much word for word.
"Oh, Bwoomhilda, you're so wuv-wee..."
Whether you vote or not does not limit your ability to say shit..in fact, it magnifies it.
Hello DosZap. Nice of you to believe, but It's rigged.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZws98jw67g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWDEZqqqBHE&p=511FC7E5C4C21718&playnext=1...
In this age of corruption, why would voting be different?
Didn't say it Wasn't rigged, but until there are NO real choices, I personally will vote.
Ron Paul was a REAL choice, I spoke w/ my vote.
Either way, again, everyone has an opinion, and we all know what their like.
DosZap - Do you see how you're getting junked? Think about that for a while.
Hey, they're all voting against him. I think that means they don't have the right to complain.
Zing!
Youse guys. Youse cracks me up.
No,
Doesn't matter to me..........Junk away.
As stated we all have opinions, and are to an extent,able to voice them.
The Logic of not voting for a VIABLE Non Corrupted candidate, makes no sense to me.
I plan to vote against all incumbents; that this happens to include that tool Michelle Bachman is just a happy perk. It might not change things but it might put the whole system in disarray.
Bachman voted against the banker bailouts.
Goyim, you must know that Bachman is a Zino-Servent. Like Scot Brown, and appearently Rand Paul too, only those who want this broke country to continue fighting needless, antagonizing wars, need apply.
http://bachmann.house.gov/Issues/Issue/?IssueID=2864http://bachmann.hous...
while I'm not familiar with Bachmann's "story," it only took a couple of clicks to find what I was looking for:
the evangelists have made their pact with their "devil" to bring on their "apocalypse" and "zion" is a big part of the storyboards - Palin is another of that breed, as are many other elected nutjobs. . . gotta love how venal all these tribes can be, using each other with violence in mind.
Right, everyone knows eugenics is the real pro-life movement.
All incumbents out - its the only way they will hear us.
If you don't kick 'em out now; they'll think you liked what they did to you.
comment retracted: I'm taking the stance that the political system isn't worth more of a comment than this.
Don't worry about not voting.
Someone gets to vote twice instead.
You're dead on. Kabuki theatre is what it is.
Diebold microcode. Produced by the finest enron accountants in the world. Easily flashed for special needs and occaisions.
"Diebold. Making counting turn out right so that the world won't be so wrong." Order yours today.
Not voting == voting the winner, as in not causing any change to the result.
You voted Obama.
And seems you're too stupid to even understand what you did.
I voted for him too, and am deeply disappointed. Smart, independent-minded people must admit when something hasn't worked out as hoped.
But I'm still not sure what I would do differently in retrospect. Remember McCain said something along the lines of "the economy hasn't been my thing." If he were President, his economic policy would be completely run by advisors plucked from the banking industry. His campaign advisor was Phil Gramm for chrissakes.
Homer: "Don't blame me! I voted for Kodos!"
So, you voted for Obama. You call yourself "Smart". You also say "I'm still not sure what I would do differently in retrospect"
Wow!
There were good reasons to vote for Obama. The complete failure of the entire Republican party over the previous 8 years being the greatest one.
The only thing I could have done differently is not vote, I guess. But I don't like to do that.
I have very little doubt that I am smarter than you.
You could have voted for someone else. You didn't have to choose McCain/Palin. Because people like you think your can't be on the "winning" team if you vote outside the Big Two party lines, you literally cause the Big Two to remain in control.
Third parties can't get off the ground if you are more concerned about being on the "winning" team than about core principles.
I'm not going to suggest which third party you should vote for but if you keep staying inside the lines defined by the D-R machine, then you deserve exactly what you get. If you want change, vote for it. Don't sit there and whimper that what you voted for was not what you expected. You can't be "reasonably smart" and be surprised by Obama given that his entire voting record is public and his entire political career was Chicago machine politics.
The nonsense about votes not counting if you vote third party is a myth. Your vote really doesn't count if you vote D or R. A D/R vote is a vote for the Matrix, a deliberate choice for evil, for control, for enslavement. Well, now you are seeing what you voted for. And you are not sure you'd do anything different? Wow, just freaking wow.
I'm not whimpering about anything. Go fuck yourself.
Well, you just proved your smarts here!
It takes balls to admit when you're wrong. When you're feeling let down the last thing you need is to have someone come and kick those balls... His initial post wasn't about bragging that he was smart - he was just saying the obvious that if you don't admit you're wrong, then you're not going to learn... which commits you to being stupid.
Sniff, sniff... I'm not whimpering about anything... sniff, sniff... go fuck yourself, you big stupid!
There were good reasons to vote for Obama.
May have seemed so at the time but now we know better.
gold,
Hindsight is always 20/20.
"I have very little doubt that I am smarter than you."
Not really consistent for someone that wasn't smart enough or did enough due diligence to realize Obama is a complete loser. If nothing else, McCain would have created a stalemate for the free spending Congress.
What exactly are you happy about with your Dear Leader's so-called accomplishments?
Here Cow, I'll walk you through how we smart people think:
The very first line of my first post was "I voted for him too, and am deeply disappointed."
Therefore, a discerning reader might conclude that I'm not happy with his accomplishments, and that he's not my Dear Leader.
I think your arguments are coming from partisanship. Partisanship just clouds the brain.
and of course, the only thing a "Smart" person like yourself could have done differently is not vote, as you said. Because having even a dufus, like McCain, in there to veto the massive spending of the current Congress would have not been "Smart", in your view.
McCain would have been worse. Has the GOP really demonstrated to you that they're anti-spending?
McCain would have responded to the financial crisis in the same way, by protecting the hell out of the banks, plus we'd likely be in one more war by now.
The only difference would have been no healthcare bill, which would be good, except our premiums would still be going up by 12% every year, so direct effect on me is a wash.
And putting someone like Sarah Palin in line to be President behind an aging man in poor health is unacceptable to me.
Great. So if you are so "smart", you can easily answer this multiple choice question: Which scenario leads to the LEAST government spending:
a) Republicans control both Congress and the Presidency
b) Dems control both the Congress and the Presidency
c) One party controls Congress, while the opposite party controls the Presidency
You didn't include the correct answer:
d) None of the above
Too right!
How is this direct effect on you a wash when under Obamacare your premiums will go up, you will have to claim the cost of your health insurance as earned income thus increasing your income tax liability, and after this the quality of health care you will receive under Obamacare will be infinitely worse than it was. On the other hand your premiums would have gone up but you still would have had the best healthcare in the world and would have had a lower tax liability! How is this a wash again?
This whole conversation is all just a bunch of political blather.
Here you go: "Obama is a muslim and McCain would have been a much better President."
Is that what you all want me to say? Do you guys feel better? Do you "win" now?
Obama may be a Muslim. I don't really care if he is. As for McCain, who knows. He did not win so that conjecture is utterly pointless.
I'm not critical about who you voted for because that's your business. I was only questioning your comment about what we will be facing under Obamacare being a wash with the state of health care before it's enactment when even a small amount of research points to the fact that we will be decidedly worse off under Obamacare.
Will you care about 'your healthcare program' when there's no money to run it?
I don't think you understand what's underway.
Curly is cool though.
Since I am self employed, I pay for my own health insurance and this ensures that money will not run out for it. I understand perfectly well what is underway for me and my employees.
I don't think you have a clue!
"McCain would have been worse. Has the GOP really demonstrated to you that they're anti-spending?
McCain would have responded to the financial crisis in the same way, by protecting the hell out of the banks, plus we'd likely be in one more war by now.
The only difference would have been no healthcare bill, which would be good, except our premiums would still be going up by 12% every year, so direct effect on me is a wash.
And putting someone like Sarah Palin in line to be President behind an aging man in poor health is unacceptable to me."
Agree 100% on every point.
McCain is a fuck-up.
Palin is an insult.
The GOP are warmongering sell-outs.
Voters that play the D vs. R game are sheep.
A couple of things: don't EVER put yourself in my class.
The other is that if you really were smart you'd have either seen through Obama's bullshit for what it was or else have had the good sense to listen to one of us smart people as far as what you should have done.
I was on many forums telling people not to fall for this logical fallacy of false dilemma between D and R, and calling Obama "Teddy Ruxpin." If you ever see that anywhere on the web, it came from me.
What I find most offensive is the conceit of the near-smart like you. You aren't half as intelligent as you think you are and people like you with bloated egos and mediocre IQs are a dime a dozen. Think you're brilliant, huh? Then explain how the fuck you fell for the Obamacon.
I promise to never put myself in your class.
Class of the Titans. LOL
Amen trav. It's always been that golden nose elitist bullshit "I'm smarter than you" attitudes which turns my stomach the most.
I just said that I'm pretty sure I'm smarter than Cow, after he insulted my intelligence. He hasn't added anything to change my mind.
Hey Chetster - you called yourself "Smart" before I entered the fray. Don't blame it on me dude.
How someone on the internet can call themselves smarter than someone else is beyone me. You ARE probably smarter than me, though. Smart is not all it's cracked up to be. Larry Summers is smarter than me also, btw. He's just stupid.
Fight! Fight! Fight! - Fight Club
McCain is a fuck-up. Instead of socialized healthcare, McCain would have bombed Iran already. Everything else would be exactly the same... because both the Rs and the Ds are taking orders from the same people. Wake up.
TARP, financial "reform", guantanamo torture center, ZIRP, "stimulus"... all of this shit would be exactly the same under McCain.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynoCrgl2gj0
and there you go.
- Ned
http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/05/11/the-dunning-kruger-effect/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect