This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
He's Back - Cliff Asness On The Republican (and Tea Party) Way Forward
- 8788 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
- advertisements -
The End Game Has Always Been Known.
1.) The financial system has a shelf-life of 60-80 years then it collapses due to math associated with using exponential growth model for your basis ie compounding interest.
2.) In the case of the Federal government take over to form one United State, instead of United StateS is now to force unfunded obligations down upon the States via State agreements.
3.) If States don't cancel the agreements, they simply will go bellyup and will have to be restructured by the Federal government.
The State can quit this crap any time they want to by repealing the State law that allows the Federal government to operate Federal programs under State Law. See your State Code for details.
Why are the State's complaining, they entered a pyramid scheme, all they simply have to do is cancel the agreements. If you think the Federal governments can sustain the pyramid schemes, good luck with all that...
Last State out is the biggest loser. Why are all these groups so focused on DC, their State capital is where they should be taking over. You do know the State has given the Federal government permission to operate in the State right? Nope, nobody cares about that, they think they are going to get someone in DC to listen, what for?
It's a win-win for everyone but the State citizens, wait till these State government's start collapsing like Greece due to unfunded mandates. Boy, you would think some stupid Tea Party members would go down to their State capital instead of march all the way to DC to get a door slammed in their face? You would think.
http://worlddarkestdays.blogspot.com/
Here you go you stupid TeaBaggers.
1.) Go to your State Capital with the rest of your teabagger group.
2.) Tell them to repeal all State laws that allows the Federal government to operate within the State or to operate Federal programs under State Law.
3.) If they don't listen, vote them out, get people in to repeal the Acts.
First State to repeal, is the biggest winner, last State out is the biggest Loser.
I can hear it now, "the Federal government this, the Federal government that", well dumb asses, you know your State can cancel those pyramid agreements, right? Oh no, it's better to get on a bus and go all the way to DC so Glenn Beckk can send his cameras out there while we protest.
I'm glad to see this talk about the states because I believe you are correct that to have any chance the states need to get out before they get blown out. The only problem is the whole War of Northern Aggression. First guy out the door is probably going to get bombed. I have to ask, what would have Lincoln done with nukes? It is the best chance we have, but I don't think they will let power slip easily. It does not sound like you are calling for succession, but even standing up to the Fed in the manner you suggest and the state will be painted in that light.
No reason to go through another Civil War, that is what the TeaBaggers are trying to do. No reason to leave the Union. The Federal government has been given permission by your State legislative branch to operate Federal programs under State law. There is no reason to go to war.
At the current pace, every State in the Union will be in receivership, restructuring will be done by the Federal government. The TeaBaggers have big hearts but absolutely no brains. The problem is in your State and every State.
I am in no way saying to cancel the agreement with the other States ie Articles of Conferation and the US Constitution.
The solution is to reverse the Acts instituted by your corrupt State legislative branch giving Federal government permission to reach into your State. It was greed that got the States to this position, most of it started during the last depression out of desperation.
http://worlddarkestdays.blogspot.com/
Oh, don't get me wrong I agree with you. Just kick the Feds out and nullify Federal law on the state level. Jefferson and Madison seemed to think this was ok, and who are we to argue? Now the problem is virtually everyone views the Fed as superior and the states as little more then puppets of the Fed. It would be pushed to violence because the Feds would push. If it went to court the court would side with the Fed, of this I am certain. So the first state to toss the Fed agents on their ass would draw the ire of the Fed. Now the Fed would have to respond swiftly and with force and the state would be labeled as traitors and the Feds wold come in with force. Even doing it peacefully will lead to violence, it's just a matter of who fires the first shot.
I agree with you except I think that no matter what it would lead to violence because of how the Fed would act and how they and their media would construe the situation.
You have clearly thought this out, what do you think the Fed would do to block this? I cannot believe they would stand idly by, they want to destroy what remains of state sovereignty.
"Now the problem is virtually everyone views the Fed as superior and the states as little more then puppets of the Fed."
Sure is superior when the State has given them permission. Go look at your State code, if you were right they wouldn't need the statutes.
The States gave the Feds permission, so the Feds are acting legally until the point the State removes their agreements.
Matter of fact, if the States remove their agreement, the Feds can't enter under Federal Law, that is why the State's Acts conform to the Federal program.... ie to receive entitlements or benefits... without permission the State will receive no entitle or benefit and the Federal program will have to leave the State under State and Federal law.
The State enacts Laws to give the Federal goverment permission under the State Plan to run a Federal program, without this agreement the Federal government has no authority to act in the State, and the State will crease to get the entitlements and benefits of the Federal program. Without State permission the Federal programs are not able to reach into the State nor are they able to dish out to the State... see your State code and the corresponding Federal enactments.
The courts would have nothing to do with it, the parties have no agreement, there would be no controversy.
http://www.reclaimmichigan.com/stateandfederalcontrol.html
Now if you were right, then you can tell me why when I lived in Louisiana the Federal government had to threaten to take away Highway funds from the State to get them to change legal drinking age to 21 from 18? If you were right and Federal law somehow magically has jurisdiction on all issues, why didn't they just make a Federal law to do it?
There is no reason to leave the Union.
There is no reason to go to DC with the Tea Party movement.
No reason to use violence.
No reason to go to war.
I assure you, the States repeal their Acts the Federal government will move out of the State. Why do you think the Federal government waited until such Acts were enacted to before moving in?
as shameful implies... a couple of times... what do you think the fed and its media machine is going to do? just sit there?
your advice sounds good on paper... so do both communist and capitalist theology. then of course, these silly humans get involved and ruin it all.
and don't get your panties in a bundle and call me a defeatist. i agree with your premise to disengage the machine, but i would certainly expect the machine to fight that effort. you ignore that detail at your peril.
Yep, the run up to 1861 had a running battle over tariff structure that was just killing the South (on purpose) as a main theme. SC was driven to secede over it and had full priveleges to do so under the agreements between States at that time. The gambit started the show war and the outcome (one of them anyway) was a loss of the Federalist Republic structure and the creation of the "Union" aka "SuperState" aka "Empire."
The validity of this "history", of course, is predicated on the premise that you think about the Constitution in the standard fashion, as an enabler of rights and freedoms. I would caution that there might be some vulnerability to taking such a simplistic position.
So it comes down to the statement, "I have the following rights!"
To which the natural rejoinder is, "You better prove to yourself that those rights you think you have are something solid and not just consensus illusion as what you are proposing to do (Secede) is going to bring &^%&% to you if you are incorrect."
So it comes down to the statement, "I have the following rights!"
Your Rights come from God not from some elected official. For this discussion, mostly irrelevant.
You have a choice.... yelling at DC is not going to work.
The Federal government is given permission, go look at your State code. The Federal government has no choice in the matter, they work on permission, that is why they didn't come in before the State enacted the Act to work under Federal programs.
The State's Attorney General know the score but they themselves will be losing power as well.
Great stuff, Mako. Healthy paradigm shift about where to demand change - thanks.
there is no reason to not be clever about this.. why be blunt? coordinate and get one of the more forgotten states to do it as more of a trivial motion.. pick one that doesn't really use much fed support or give much to the fed... i don't know, north dakota? oregon? arkansas??
this way they can be labeled as kooks but momentum can swing a few years later as 4 or 5 join suddenly... etc
Actually once you eliminate the agreement, most Federal taxes are no longer there. The States would easily be able to support themselves.
You answered the issue with your last observation on highway funds - states are addicted to DC $$$$.
DC funds such a large % of most state's budgets that it's like asking a heroin addict to quit cold turkey.
It can be done in theory but usually not possible in the real world.
the ironic part is that it is the addict who is picking the very heroin that he later begs for.
brilliant
The choice is yours. It is possible. The federal government works under State law that allows them to reach into the State, the State law and programs must conform to the requirement of the Federal program or actually they get kicked out.
See you think it is force, matter of fact if the States cancel the agreement, the Federal government will have no choice because money will flow out but not come in.
Your points are good. Excellent, even. But your referral to Tea Partiers as "TeaBaggers" is nothing if not puerile. Don't be so devisive. There's absolutely no merit in it, and it is dragging those of us who would normally be working together, backwards. The author did, I believe, an excellent job of disagreeing with some of the tennants of TeaPartiers without sounding like a petulant child.
Until they get their heads out of their bums, they are wasting their time. This is a wake up call, either get mad at the messenger or actually do something in your State capital.
If they focused in on their State, well the Federal government would be out of their lives right now, well at least back to the original intent of the Constitution.
A more pertinent question would be, what would Lincoln have done if the OTHER side had nukes?
The answer: not a damn thing. He would have treated the south with a lot more respect.
In order to have a (nearly) bloodless revolution, all a state needs to do is seize control of the nuclear armament within its borders.
Succession isn't a real option for the same reason that moving out of the house when your teenage kid starts bossing you around is not a real option.
The states must reassert their dominance over the pack. The federal government wants to be told where its boundaries are.
It wants structure.
It wants discipline.
Good ideas, but Feds and nbc,cbs,abc news etc. would villify any state that tried it. Then sheeple and elite outcry from the north would bring Executive order 13528 into play. I say "north" because it would probably be a southern state to try this first.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13528
i will take your advice. I was aiming for DC, but Salem Or is much closer.
Mako-
Good idea. Pick a red state and get rid of the Federal farm subsidies. Get rid of the Boeing and GE plants. The worthwhile residents would then evacuate with their jobs. You'd be left with a state populated with hillbillies. Maybe you could get the other states to send their hillbillies to that state. Problem solved.
I want to be a hillbilly in that case. Free the hillbillies!
I feel so sad about the health insurance industry.
It is going to be "destroyed" after all the decades of operating very profitably while enjoying an anti-trust exemption.
So sad.
All those generous profit margins were bound to attract a plague of tax dependent legislators.
Gee, some things are better bought collectively.
Fire departments, national defense, CDC, NIH.
And health care is an area of utter ignorance on the part of the consumer. So socialist systems cost 1/2 to 1/3 what our "internal referral," 28% to the billing system, too greedy to copy Mayo and VHA clinics -- the increasingly McCallenized mess.
So true believer capitalists want to argue that a market-less commodity is best served by the mess ??? Can't learn from experience ? Can't compare sensibly to Canada, France, England or Germany ? Pitiful..........
The man who holds the world record for longest period spent on a gurney is a man from England. 77.5 hours straight before they were able to find him a bed. Shortly after this he had to spend another 60 hours on one. Great Britain has a population of just over 60 million. Is that really the type of health care system you think would work for a nation of over 300 million?
The fact is this health care atrocity will fail because it fails to address any of the real problems, which are numerous and very costly, with the industry. Many of these problems were caused or exacerbated by the federal government. Every foray into health care the government has made has made things much worse (HMO act of 1973!). With the fed's track record, I do not have faith they can overcome this precedence.
All the countries you mention are a fraction of the population and nearly all in far smaller geographic areas, equivalent in some cases to one of our states.
No Bamster or Pelosi will convince me that the unUnited States can support 500,000,000 people on national health care without turning the country into hollowed out shell.
I just cant read right vs left crap anymore. The real fight is state vs people. Eveyrone that still argues left vs right is still part of the problem, no matter what side you claim. Stop watching TV.
Showing how wrong the other side's position is doesnt make yours the correct one.
Amen brother.
I instantly tune out anyone that starts spouting right vs left bullshit. As soon as I hear "we republicans" or "us democrats" etc etc my opinion of the speaker drops to near zero. People need to wake the F up and realize that the two are *not that different*. They're both sending us down the merry path towards shitsville.
"We believe in small government and freedom" - actions speak louder than words asshole.
Gotta second the "amen" on this clown's partisan nonsense. Don't tell me how well Republicans would have handled this. Bunch of phuckups as bad as any democrat. Repub suckups loved Paulson's ass, and Dick "Deficits Don't Matter" Cheney. They had their day in the sun, and blew it. As bad as any other scoundrel in Washington.
Some folks cannot be help to give the old close and play one more try with the same old tired tunes. Just more examples of wasting quality O2.
Another funny thing about "left" vs "right" provocateurism, I almost never - and I mean never - run into it OUTSIDE the public fora of TV/radio/blogs. 99%+ of the folks I chat with in any natural environment have a far deeper capacity for nuanced thought than the media polarizers would have you believe.
tide or cheer both owned by P & G, what's the fuckin difference.
NOTHIN
2 party systems just don't work. but what does?
A simple philosophy to ponder: government, by definition, is corrupt. It possesses a legal monopoly on the use of force. Rent-seekers will co-opt it. It must, by its very definition, be corrupt. But some kind of government is necessary. So, above all else, in order to minimize the influence and impact of corruption on my life, I want to keep government as small as possible.
Government is not, as some people like to say, a necessary evil; it is not an evil, but a means, the only means available to make peaceful human coexistence possible. But it is the opposite of liberty. It is beating, imprisoning, hanging. Whatever a government does it is ultimately supported by the actions of armed constables. -Ludwig von Mises
agreed. i think if you can see through it you got the best of both worlds. i know you submit insight to seeking alpha. your recommendation to buy pm's. coins or bars?
Minted coins are probably harder to fake or slug than larger bars. Buy from a well-known source.
Republicans & Democrats -- opposite sides of the same bad coin.
What we need is a new party that will:
--be composed of non-professional citizen-politicians with common sense, morals, ethics dedicated to cleaning up the Washington cesspool
--pass campaign finance reform & shut down K Street lobbyists & end the corrupt practice of buying politicians with campaign contributions and other favors
--pass congressional term limits
--pass a Line Item Veto which will force the president to be the Gatekeeper of Pork thus be accountable and responsible for any wasteful legislation passed into law.
--reinstate sound money (gold standard) and shut down the corrupt banker's cartel, the Federal Reserve, and bust up the TBTF Banks
--reduce the size of government, to include the military and entitlement programs
great comments Pegasus, I didn't see them until I had hit enter on mine.
What will more parties accomplish? We will just have more extreme candidates sweep into power more frequently when the middle of the road parties ensnare each other's voters.
I like the party platform you propose, but a new party is not the answer. I'd rather people get more involved in primaries, and speaking of which, we need primary reform for the presidential process. Do we really need NH and Iowa choosing first every 4 years?
What are you talking about? NH and Iowa is the best part of the election cycle. At least in these two states the political process is determined by more than just the barrage of endless commercials. The politicians actually have to answer a question or two!
As for some of the hatred of the Tea-Party people...I don't understand it. At least these people are trying to overturn the status quo by going outside the mindlessness of the two-party system. Yes, their rhetoric might be a little simplistic and the debate isn't as "erudite" as some on ZH would like, but give these people a little credit!
How are they "going outside the mindlessness of the two party system" if they have a bigger hard on for sarah palin than I do? No easy feat. Tea party members cant swing a dead cat without hitting that cunt. SHE WAS THEIR KEYNOTE SPEAKER DUDE and today they had her in dirty harrys hometown in the desert running her dicksucker. The tea party barbqued and tailgated while Jorge Arbusto spent 5 million a minute Killing haplass ass saddam hussien but noooo, put a nigger in the WHITE house and all of a sudden the debt is a problem?
sometimes pretty talk just doesn't cut it.
Paraphrasing Votewithabullet because he's gonna get junked:
The Tea Party needs to dis-invite Sarah Palin because she really represents the republican party (trojan horse?), and further Sarah's image is so tarnished it does damage to the Tea Party's image.
The Tea Party has a PR problem because they didn't seem to mind a government who wasted money getting our military bogged down in two pointless wars, but they do have a problem when a (just as socialist) president offers the same amount (or less) of spending on health care (officially).
He concludes with the fact that debt was no problem to Tea Party members when it was perceived that the government was run by a conservative, but it is a problem now that the government is perceived to be run by a liberal.
I'll reply to your post rather than "votewithabullet" because s/he is beyond the pale of ignorance and vile hatred.
The Tea Party started after TARP, the bank bailouts, which was when Bush was in office. It instensfied with the stimulus bill under Obama, then came health care. Most people in the Tea Party aren't anti-military like most here are and most would agree that the Iraq war was run poorly as is the Afganistan war. Most would agree that these "wars" should have been WON years ago and done with and our boys back home by now.
I agree with anyone who says the Tea Party people need to distance themselves from Sarah Palin. She is a retard.
and a culture of respect for honesty
--Alter the constitution to provide incentive for multiple parties and make them form coalitions for rule. Perhaps have a prime minister who has the power of executive rather than an elected president.
Mako's state approach is interesting, but it still does not shrink the rapacious federal beast. A lot of hard work and effort will be needed to educate voters (and potential voters) that we need a federal government that does a lot less with a lot less. There will be even more hard work to get like-minded folks elected. There are so many entrenched interests around just about every piece of pork program at the federal level, with folks who can trot out a little kid and family with a sob story at a moment's notice. There are to many voters who are happy to take a slice of other people's hard work and think that it is a god-given right.
A few, very simplistic thoughts to help force very painful, but necessary decision-making:
- freeze federal spending at current nominal levels until deficits eliminated
- take a snapshot of the entire federal deficit - including off-balance sheet obligations such as GSE backstops (in past years, the social security fund "surplus" was used to mask the true extent of the federal deficit - this likely won't be the case moving forward)
- each year moving forward, the level of deficit at the time of the snapshot must be reduced 10% - getting to a zero deficit (perhaps a 15 yr time frame, but each year would need to see 6.7% progress - no "backloading")
- in the 11th year, reduce budget by 5% below revenues
- from that point on, limit federal spending to increases based only on growth in population and inflation
- 5% of federal budget would be used for debt paydown
- where revenues exceed budget, set aside for a war, real natural disaster, or severe economic downturn
- No funding for undeclared wars
A lot of agencies and programs would go into the dustbin. Entitlements would have to be rethought. People who paid in get back what they paid in, maybe with interest, maybe not. People getting benefits for which they did not pay in are treated essentially as unsecured creditors. Congress and the electorates can debate and decide if they want taxes to go up, or what they want to scrap, if anything, to provide funding for transfer payments. A lot of red tape, and associated reporting and operating costs, would need to go away. Nice to haves go away. Go to flat tax so that everyone who works has skin in the tax game. Able-bodied people would be expected to work in some capacity in order to receive benefits. Realistic economic and revenue forecasting encouraged. Heads of CBO and OMB and senior staff (if these entities still exist in their current capacity) are fired it their projections of revenue are short by more than 2%. The next year's budget has to suck up any shortfalls from the prior year budget. Congress is subject to ALL laws that it passes - no exemptions. There are no government defined-benefit retirement plans.
What we NEED is to do away with the lobbyists. Both houses of Congress, and every damn congressperson is bought and paid for a dozen times over by 20,000 corporate lobbyists from K St.
Corporations, including and most especially big banks, health insurers, defense and oil companies, outright OWN Congress lock stock and barrel. We the sheeple are just freaking serfs with no say in government.
It doesn't matter who wins the election. Before their ass has warmed that big leather chair in their congressional office they're entertaining some corporate cretin and getting their palm greased.
you are right. the supreme court explicitly (and the executive and legislative branches more subtly) oppose you. that's the rub.
this would be so much easier if you'd have more than 2 major parties..
or just one party!
that's the ticket!
btw, i've reported you to the PLA fembot batallion for liquidation
republican's are against the health-care for wrong reason.
State citizens are being raped and have been raped by both parties for 100 years.
The current problems can be solved at your State capital. Teabaggers in DC is about as futile as you will ever get.
The State citizens are being raped by Reps and Dems at the local, state and federal level.
American politics comes down to one simple question. Would you rather get shit on by an elephant or a donkey?
I THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT WHO COULD YELL LOUDEST???
OH YEAH? YOU WANNA FIGHT ABOUT IT???
exactly. and while they break beer bottles and go to it the rulers smirk and continue stealing.
Dear Mr. Clifford S. Assmunch,
I can see the difference between Mark Levin and Keith Oberfuk
but Boehner and Pelosi or Reid and McConnell are indistinguishable.
Yes, six of those and a 1/2 doz. of those please.
This shit REALLY doesn't belong here.
I agree.
I agree in spades. I also agree that focusing on political partisanism is idiocy. We are being cleaned-out by oligarchs of both parties. Why the heck would I care which brand of cigarettes my tormentor smokes, when he's sticking the lit end in my eye?
I also agree and was surprised to see such nonsense make it to ZH
maybe it's just for the novelty?
sort of like keeping a weird rock you found on a beach somewhere..
perhaps it was meant ironically. the divorce from reality stands out more here than on some sites.
Obama may be a socialist but not appreciably more so than GWB. Where was the anti-socialist outrage when Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress passed the Medicare expansion in 2003? Most if not all of the Congressional Republicans railing against Obamacare voted in favor of it. If Cliff actually believes that Republicans are the party of small gov't, he's deluded. They believe in small gov't only when they're out of power. Once they get control of the gov't purse strings, they're no different than Democrats. They demonstrated during the Bush years that they don't have the cojones to cut spending. They're too afraid of losing votes.
That's because they're all the same. Make some promises, get elected, then bust your nut to maintain the status quo. In this case the status quo is a political system dominated by two parties, both of which are bought and paid for (by the same people).
I'll tell you what will happen if the Republicans get a whole shitton of seats in the November elections - NOTHING. Exactly the same as what will happen if the democrats hold a ton of seats. NOTHING. Well, nothing for the 'good' anyway.
Most of it is just absolutely laughable. Watch when something like 'gay marriage' comes up as an issue in the elections. Sure some people feel pretty strongly about it either way, but in the grand scheme of things WHO GIVES A FLYING RATS ASS. I wonder if people will still decide who to vote for based on such bullshit when the country is in (the rest of the way into) the toilet.
No shit. They ban gay marriage every two to four years, pretty much every time that there is a major election coming up.
Once they stop bashing the gays, it'll just be another minority.
I think that they should let the gays marry just so I never have to hear about it again.
I don't think that the Democrats are better, but fuck the Republicans that say "Once we take over in November, we're going to fix all this."
Ummm... you guys BROKE everything, remember? Now we can fix what you broke by putting the people who broke it in charge? Hahaha... no.
we wouldn't want those gays to settle down and be miserable
you don't want to normalize people like that..
we need to keep them around as good potential scapegoats and pariahs when ze big crunch comes
y'know, that ol' Liberals-corrupted-the-moral-fabric-of-mom, god and apple pie canard that gets tossed around..
Bingo.
MB i know you live in denver, so we are close in, could have a physical shoot out if wanted†
love is love.
love has nothing to do with marriage.
marriage is a institution.
i say if anybody wants to be married, be my guest.
You're missing the point. Everyone has an opinion on the subject. But in the grand scheme of things, who fucking cares? Really?
Let's fix the real problems first, then when we're living in a near perfect utopia we can worry about the minor stuff. Until then let people do whatever the F makes them happy.
gay marriage is old news.. the battle ground went to gays at the prom - people were tuning out the gay marriage noise finally.. but shutting down the prom to keep a couple muff divers out is the new news
The problem is that there is no free market with the health care system. If it were truly free, then his argument makes sense. The problem is that we are all held at the behest of these fuckers, raising their rates every year. This is not free.
I usually enjoy Cliff Assness's writing, but fuck you on this one. Republicans are just as corrupt as Democrats. They haven't represented true conservative views in decades. George W Bush spent more than any fucking "left-wing" Democrat.
Ron Paul and others like him are our only hope.
ron paul's views, in the main (and especially in the areas most controlled by presidents) seem exceptionally attractive. that he is older and has elaborated them longer also gives one hope(y changey). but could he turn out like obamaboutface (assuming paul's seemingly improbable election)? al gore, out of office, seemed to contrast sharply with george bush in office and give the lie to ralph nader's (and zh's political) motto: the democrats and republicans are substantially the same. then hopey changey got in and proved it.
What is essential is not to place one's hopes in any personality but in ideas. You can support an individual who espouses those ideas just as long as he/she espouses them. You can watch them closely and hold their feet to the fire to make sure they stay the course. What we cannot do, and have tried to do, is make politics someone else's problem. It is OUR problem.
I have become active in the Tea Party movement because it is the only movement that actually has a chance to roll back government. Philosophically I am libertarian / anarcho-capitalist. My local group leans repub but as long as the leadership stays on point (small gov, reduce spending, respect for the Constitution, old-fashioned federalism) I will continue to support them. I tell them I am there to remind them of Barry Goldwater.
One of the other principal reasons I am there is to form associations with people who know how to do government. I am absolutely certain that we are in for a forced radical change in the way government is done. The radical change will be forced by fiscal realities. I believe it is essential to have a core group of people who recognize this and are preparing for it at the state level. My current mission with them in this regard is educational. The leadership is politically quite astute but not nearly as closely attuned to economic realities as I am. Above, in Mako's first comment to this article, he alludes to this.
First State to repeal, is the biggest winner, last State out is the biggest Loser.
I'd modify this (he won't like it) and say this: "First state to recognize fiscal realities, radically slash their budget, and maybe even institute sound money, is the biggest winner."
+1
Oh, oh, and reject all Fed "Faustian bargain" infusions of cash.
So close, but no cigar for Idaho residents paying taxes in silver:
http://www.examiner.com/x-16226-Boise-Economic-Policy-Examiner~y2010m3d2...
So let me get this straight. You think universal health care is a bad idea.
Let the lottery of birth, circumstance and yes pure luck determine wether you have decent health care or not.
That's what you think is a good idea?
Just askin'.
it depends entirely on how you propose to pay for the alternatives.
nobody owes me shit, nor do i owe *anyone* anything i haven't personally promised. not even my parents.
there are a lot of chinese without healthcare... go ahead, send them a check if you like. i have no such plans or obligation to compensate them for their birth, circumstance, or luck. same for the lazy-ass phuckups down the street.
why is this so hard for idealists to understand?
It's not.
But then you have to realize how far along we go.
That is, why pay for others to have healthcare leads to
Why pay to defend other nations/peoples with our military leads to
Why pay for others' kids to get public education leads to
Why pay for others SS benefits leads to
Why pay to warehouse criminals leads to
Why pay to pave the streets I don't use leads to
Why pay to .......
It is easier to not question but not helpful.
i don't mind everyone getting health care... but where is the competition to drive down costs?? we will let all other american industry globalize to dust but the FDA preventing drug imports is the biggest crock of shit thuggery there is
that republicans (or whoever) can hold their faces straight when they call this travesty socialized medicine is itself a spit-taker. if it were it would have a public option which would include v.a. (at least) style mass purchase bargaining over medical costs including drugs and the removal of anti-trust provisions for health insurance, including competition across all state lines. and, were i king, a price break for birth control, do not resuscitate orders and organ donation.
If I remember correctly, Asness is the douche who suggested that rising medical costs aren't the problem... it's just that everyone wants "21st-century medicine". As long as the middle class is satisfied with 1950's-quality medicine, there will be plenty of the good high-tech modern stuff for the wealthy Wall Street bankers.
i guess i'm a douche too. it's not that they simply want that 'good' medicine (i do too!), it's that they don't want to pay the market price for a routine MRI scan every time they feel queasy or depressed. somehow they're entitled to it...
the middle class don't all drive lexus or shop at whole-foods... following the essence of your comment, why then, is *this* situation so acceptable, when it's not OK that good, but less-than-bleeding-edge, affordable middle-class health-care is affordable and available, but the high-end stuff isn't being given away?
just askin'
an mri for queasiness or depression is not really the problem. it is end of life extreme care pretty much driven by the medical establishment combined with very poor information about health and its care available to consumers; monopoly pricing, patient skimming and benefit refusal by health insurers; the tying of health insurance to a particular job; marketing of drugs to doctors and patients based on non-medical incentives; and our friend from the financial markets regulatory capture.
Republicans acting with decorum and honesty during the healthcare debate?
Tea Parties inspiring the country?
Serious, I'd love to know what dimension this guy lives in.
Regardless of what you think of the policy/implications of health care reform, their behavior was completely disgraceful unless frothing mouth spite is what passes for admirable behaviour in American political discourse these days. Never before have I seen so many old white men in suits act like such a bunch of bratty spoiled children. Again, disgraceful.
see mscreant below. it seems to depend upon who you listen to, what your view of the movement is. don't surrender your own thoughts! anyone in the media has an agenda. know it, filter it, then decide for yourself. most people think they do this. most people are wrong, and the existence of the media machine is proof.
i've attended multiple tea-parties in the past and have found them to be amazingly civil, and consistently focused on the issues.
my personal grumble is the hard-core religious folks with whom i'm being "bundled". my placard/signs protest over-spending (not taxing!) and as an agnostic, it can be a little bit unsettling seeing more quotes from the bible than from jefferson. it's still worth it. so far.
unless you are just trolling here, consider going to witness a real tea-party protest and gauging for yourself what the bulk of these folks are all about. i would guess that you'll be surprised (and maybe impressed) that more of the folks are like you than are not. you don't have to take a sign, or chat. just observe.
to be sure, a tea-party in texas will probably have a different vibe/tone than one in vermont, so caveat emptor. but be wary your favorite media. i listen to both limbaugh and schulze. both smart, both entertaining, both mostly extreme. it works for them, but i don't think its working for the US, other than clarifying the outer edges of the arguments, which *is* valuable.
all i know is this government, seemingly owned by the banks, feels like it's getting way out of control, and it is very unsettling. lobbyists, earmarks, etc. are the real enemies to all of us. one issue, one vote. make it clear. make it impossible to hide the vote.
dump the parties, and always "watch the other hand".
Can we make "Audit the FED" a prequisite for being elected?
Tea Party stuff and the health care bill.
I am asking everyone to tune in to their radios, I have. They keep playing threat messages that congressmen and women have received for their votes supporting the healthcare bill.
Different Radio stations are playing it different ways. Coast to coast radio (conservative) is just kinda playing a few messages as part of the news, with little commentary. An African/American station I was listening to scared the shit out of me though. They are playing these messages and commenting about how crazy these folks are (some of them are senseless over the top, rabid), how messed up they are. I don't have lots of quotes memorized but here is what I felt-- brace yourself-- this is being spun as a black/white issue, and the whites are nuts. They started talking about how many guns had been sold since Obama came into office. The talked about how Obama was wonderful for not taking the bait and just going on about his business. Now this one I think I have verbatim, ready?
"Some of these people are just itchin for a revolution, ain't they? They just can't stand that Obama is president."
"Yup."
That is when they started talking about gun and ammo sales.
Just reporting the spin in my neck of the woods. I live in a major urban area. I don't want a race war, but that is how some folks are starting to spin this. The bitch of it is, to explain to folks what is really going on takes time, patience, and a degree of education. Many on both sides of the racial divide do not have education.
I wish they wouldn't do this, but folks, if they keep this up, here it comes.
Tea party = stupid hillbillies.
My parents are tea partiers. You should hear them and their friends talking. You'd think that they're Southerners in 1857 or something.
Gun sales went up because people lie and say that the "Democrats will take your guns away." It happens every time there's a Democrat ready to be elected, just like gay marriage gets banned every time there's a Republican coming up.
"assault weapon ban" mean anything to you?
A black friend of mine has told me essentially the same thing. A race war is building.WHites are getting blamed for the current pain, and I can't really argue against that, being that the majority of
banksters , wall streeters and politicians are white.Thats why I think declaring martial law in this country will be a disaster.Once ML is declared, the anarchists will come out of the woodwork
and ignite a firestorm which will be the trigger of the racewars.Not nearly enough police and troops to cover this problem, it will be every man for himself....essentially Rodney King riots multiplied by a million....
HAve a nice day!
I cannot find the quote, but wasn't there a gem from Bush 41 about 20 years ago that went something along the lines of "If you want to see a civil war in this country, elect a black man to the white house?"
again, I can't find it - but maybe some dangerous fella with a sharp memory knows the exact wording? or if such a thing was ever uttered?
big ed muskie does ibogaine?
It is deep in the county school system MsCreant. The basis is that both sides are attempting to splinter society and turn the parts upon themselves. The classic purity of position thesis. A tried and true method that has led us to this place. Easy to rend, difficult to mend.
don't forget the efficiency of the "thought terminating cliche"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_terminating_cliche
things like "liberal," "terrorist sympathizer," "hate our freedom," etc. etc.
Miles, I really am worried. I usually poo poo this sort of rehetoric. I guess I got shaken out of some of my stereotypes today.These radio guys should be smarter than this, but anger trumps all I guess. Be careful what you ask for.
I have neighbors who don't want it but are very matter of fact about it. They think they will be attacked by African Americans when things fall apart. They are getting ready. They don't hate them, I do not believe (I could be wrong on this count, they may say other things behind closed doors). They think they are just being pragmatic, "That is what the black people will do." Hearing that on the radio was the first clue I have had that blacks might see things boiling down to a race war too.
So pointless. The real war is with the elite. Age, race, religion, dem/rep, sex and sexual orientation, all distractions that are local for us to focus on, versus the real culprits who are not accessible to most of us. There is a way of looking at it that we need to nail the culprits so that we can avert the possibility of us turning on each other over these fake divisions.
Its called "divide and conquer" MSCreant
And we fell for it....
Close Hulk. It's divide and subjugate....
+100
with fear as the wedge. pick a scary monster...
Agreed.
just keep saying CLASS WAR over their drone.. it resonates
I have seen it go down before. A terrible and tragic waste. The kicker is that "pragmatic" side and that is what is being worked and banked on. After all, there has been a tremendous investment to bring the fracturing of society to this advanced stage and it would be foolhardy to think for a moment that account won't be tapped. PSYOP 101, know it for what it is at various stages of the cycle.
i think it is definitively regional in the u s of a.
really, i live in the ultra white ass communities and this is the last thing on anyones mind.
well i take that back, nothing really is on any of these white folks minds.
Just setting the stage for gun control legislation
Yep, for "terrorists" HR2159
this is why the have nots will always suck... we are left with too many jackasses.. how the fuck are you going to control guns in a country literally shitting them out everywhere???
The Tea Party protests so far have been peaceful, it's more than likely what happened in DC and around the country was due to radical left infiltrators. Textbook Alinsky tactics. The only violence at the town hall meetings was due to Obama's union thug buddies from the SEIU. The only purported video on the alleged incidences of racial/homo hatred was on Huufpo and that video blanked out the word could've easily been calling him a maggot. Jimmy Kimmel runs a similar bit called " Unneccessary Censorship" for the same effect.
Gun and ammo sales were thru the roof before Obama even got into office.
Overall appears to be staged acts to stimulate demand for outlawing dissent.
Stupid racist teabaggers! Fuck the teabaggers. Those people are idiots on another level.
LOL. And one thing in the article is certain, the Republicans sure did screw up while in power.
They had the perfect trifecta of expanding government, starting wars that don't matter, and screwing the economy all in six short years!
If the Republicans truly want power they can:
Fix the economy that they ruined
Stop caring what people do in their homes and bedrooms
Stop starting stupid wars
Stop with the Orwellian government programs to spy on American citizens
Legalize the diggity dank.
If they did those things, I'd support them.
Instead, they'll just make up some shit on Faux News, pretending to be fair and balanced...
Yeah the republicans are evil. Where is the news? So are the democrats. They screamed about those things and we see everything they are going to stop it. The hand off from Bush to Obama was perfect. Might as well be Bush's 3rd term, interesting that Barry effectively ran against Bush. Now I'm not saying McCain was a good call, that guy is a crook and should be behind bars. The real trick is they are just changing the face of the man who is screwing us. We think things will change because it's a new face, but we still get screwed. As long as we keep up the partisan bickering they will continue to screw us with impunity.
WARNING
WARNING
attention pothead, you have been assigned to gate #451 of the rehabilitation center, boats leaving for the boulder splitting facility in Guangzhou will be leaving at dawn - report immediately for vacation or the Fembots and hounds will be released.
MB, i wanted to flag your post as junk, because of the first sentence... but the rest of it actually makes my point.
i am simply a concerned citizen who is very wary of my current (last 10 years?) government's actions on multiple fronts, including virtually everything you cite!
am i a tea-bagger? i don't know, but i certainly don't like much of what they are doing, and worse where they are and havebeen going for a last few administrations. tea-parties are a sloppy way for us to gather and figure out what's bothering us, i suppose.
unless you are trolling, stop it with the party names, and pursue the issues you cite. i think you'll find that your discussions last longer.
tea bagger, not tea bagger. Who cares. So long as they're sick and damn tired of the status quo I don't care what they want to call themselves.
Why do we need names for people that are sick and tired of the political bullshit in this country. People just want to bundle them all up and give them a name so that they can try to take ownership of the group. This clown assness for example - obviously he figures it suits his agenda if all the tea baggers are part of his movement, whatever that may be.
Maybe I'll start a group called the "We think Government is completely fubar, but don't necessarily agree on much of anything else and aren't affiliated with any major party" group. At least then these status quo asshats can't try to rally the group the their cause, the media wont speculate as to what exactly wer'e in favor of and people can feel free to join if they agree with the one and only principle (that government is completely fubar).
that sounds sloppy too, but count me in.
does your group name make a good acronym?
Politics and markets are inextricably entwined. If we believe in free markets, we must be political. That's not to say we must don an "R" or "D" label. Conservatism, which is laissez-faire liberalism outside of the U.S., is a natural position for most contributors to this site. If you visit the major conservative boards, you will find them to be conservative, not Republican. 95% would vote Republican, unless disillusioned, but they oppose much of what the Republican party supports.
So I find the above article trite and superficial. It offers no specific criticisms of the"Bill", unlike other sites have done over the past two days, and yet speaks from a "we Republican" viewpoint.
There is no Republican party. It's a myth like al Qaeda. All of the smart (or at least sane) people were embarrassed into quitting the GOP long ago; it's now just a code name for the least intelligent, least creative and most corrupt bunch of political gangsters in the world. Obama would have been a key figure in the GOP of the past; he's a Rockefeller Republican if there ever was one. But since there is no Republican party, he had to go somewhere else.
That guy is an assness for sure.
After reading "The Quants" I realise "The Truth" will set us free.
Republicans had a chance and the blew it. Why would anyone think they stand for smaller government? There are 2 big lies, one told by the Republicans is 'vote for us, we stand for smaller government', the other is told by the Democrats, 'don't vote for Republicans, they stand for small government'.
Event horizon has been breached long ago. It ends ugly.
The older you are , the luckier you are.
Those under 40 have my commiserations.
The funny thing about the event horizon on a singularity is that the people on the front end can't see it coming and the the people on the back end can't tell how they got there.
+100
nicely put. tragic.
Those under 40 are very fortunate.
They have not been living a lie their entire lives.
my parents are in their 70s and certain subjects must not be discussed
this is the effect of a life lived under inverted totalitarianism aka corporate democracy
Assness is a pollyanna.
The republicans he alluded to, who blew 12 years of opportunity to truly turn this country around, had that one chance to do it. But, no, they thoroughly fucked every one of their constituents that didn't have a company that made money from their budget busting earmarks, appropriations, and transfer of wealth from their middle class voters to their favored few.
I was one of them. 1994 was a watershed year. For once I began to believe that there were still men and women of honor who understood that we could not continue on with the descent to a static European welfare state, a France or Italy or Spain, where the children have to live at home into their 30s and 40s, with no motivation of devising a way of paying for a home of their own because they didn't have to, three generations of children whose entrepeneurial spirits withered away under a socialist system.
When Welfare to work passed I thought that the way forward had now been set.
Then year after pitiful year I watched as the republicans turned even more left than the democrats had ever tried to do. Created more sexual scandals after what they did to Clinton. After 4 years I stood aside and didn't vote again for another republican. I never will again. I am not going to buy Assness's perennial republican bon mot that while some Rs betrayed us, the democrats will do more damage than Rs ever did or could. That pig don't fly.
So do your best Cliff, but I predict that you will never see power again that you had in 1994 after wandering 40 years in the desert.
This time you will circle the earth like hamster on a wheel, going nowhere for as long as there live people like me who have seen and sadly abetted your crimes.
The republican party deserves no less--- for the repeated, endless, despicable betrayal of their base--- than the ninth ring of Dante's Hell, for 10 years of thumbing their noses at those who put them in power, culminating in the nomination of a wooden, inarticulate, puppet of a man, the worst in my lifetime ever to be nominated, George Bush.
A pox on your party.
Palin 2012!
you betcha!
Stop whining like girls blaming "socialism" for the current global economic collapse. This scapegoat of "socialism" is getting ridiculous. Socialism has ceased to exist in 1989, more than 20 years ago.
The U.S. is capitalist, Europe is capitalist, Japan is capitalist, China is capitalist (now more than ever) and there is no such thing as "socialism" to blame. France's Nicolas Sarkozy is not socialist, as well as Italy's Silvio Berlusconi is not. Both Sarkozy and Berlusconi are two conservatives whose voters are not very different from any mad Republican with a rifle in the mountains.
Seek the true roots of the collapse where it really is: in corporate greed, financial deregulation and oil prices. Stop with this ridiculous scapegoat of "socialism".
a repost, you really are pathetic, and the same content.
dude, get another gig, or are you pushing your oil prices agenda.
He had to know us girls would come after him with that "girl" shit. Men insult each other by calling each other women. That implies a whole lot. Too bad.
No pussy for them velobabe. Then we'll see how they whine. Some of them won't care, for sure, but those are not usually the ones thinking it is an insult to be compared to a girl.
Back to the regular ranting and programing.
nice to see you back in action again MC, not all is lost.
Too bad most males never really discover what being a man is all about, for them and those that choose to associate with them on more than a passing basis. Most especially for those of us that have to wade through the mountains of crap that lifestyle leaves behind.
Eta rapaz! E bem importante que saiba da historia do socialismo antes de dizer que nao existe aqui nos Estados Unidos. Os Russos ja sabem que o corrupcao sempre segue as promessas de igualdade. Investigue o Alexander Solzhenitsyn e os seus pensamentos:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8032986005286260681#
you are a curious one¡
Repeal of the 17th amendment to the Constitution would give states some voice in Washington. This would also tend to put some distance between corporate lobbyist and Senators.
Tyler Tyler Tyler... Are you going to stick with your comment, or are you actually referring to socialized health insurance, and not socialized medicine? Americans are absolutely in love with their socialized health insurance program for seniors. And before you start citing the Canadian system and the U.K. and Europe as examples of failed socialized medicine, all of those nations or regions spend much less than the U.S. does and the citizenry are overwhelmingly satisfied with their healthcare system. If you stick with your comments, well, I think you are fucking stupid... there's no other expression that captures my feelings as precisely.
I live in Canada
now that I have your attention
in the past 24 years, my mother has suffered:
colon cancer
a broken ankle
a broken hip
breast cancer
pneumonia
chronic thryoid problems
besides the years of pain,
all she ever paid for was basic premiums and parking
and is still eager to work, contribute to society and enjoy her existence and the love of her children
social health care is a blessing for my family, and she had nothing but praise for her doctors and nurses and the quality of care
you're all full of shit ;) the real disgrace to the Canadian public is that corporate tax is at it's lowest level as a percentage of Gov. revenue (16%) while personal income tax as a percentage of Gov. revenue is at 83% - the ratio has been getting more heavily skewed with each passing year. seems it's better to be a corporation than a citizen.
I'm an Aussie and can say the same for the Australian system (at least as it was 5+ years ago). Given the choice between the USA'ian system and the Aussie I'd take the Australian one in a HEARTBEAT. Oh, it costs shitloads less too.
Australia has 20 million people and Canada has 30 million people. These systems could not scale up to a population of 330 million people as many of the costs involved are not linear. Every nation that people cite as perfect examples of socialized medicine have populations which are 20% or less of US. Just saying "why don't we use this guy's system?" is not a solution to our problems.
How about Japan, is that big enough? It has about half of our population. Maybe Germany, running at about 1/3rd? I am curious why you believe that population size matters at all in this, do you have any statistics of any variety that shows government healthcare is more expensive than private when the size of the country's population increases? Somehow I think you are talking out of your ass instead. Note that all of these countries have very different socialized healthcare, yet all are doing it for large populations, much cheaper and with arguably better overall health than in the US. Our larger scale should DECREASE costs, not increase them per capita.
Japan has one of the oldest populations in the world and an almost negative birthrate. How long do you think cheap healthcare is possible? The uber nationalistic population has allowed incredible price controls which could never be enforced in America. Japan's health care faces many problems in the near future. The german system is pretty similar to what we have now in America, with the exception of a public insurance for people below a specified income threshold, except they have 3 times the capacity and almost twice as many doctors per capita. All these nations have issues with their own healthcare systems. What makes you think adopting them would suddenly solve our problems?
"The costs involved aren't linear" got some figures or stats to back that up? Healthcare provision itself IS linear, unless you've got a sicker in general population. On the other had the administrative cost side of things has economies of scale working in its favor.
We're talking about systems that *work*, you're countering with an empty argument with no justification.
The US currently spends almost double the next highest spender in the world in terms of health spending per capita. You could increase the amount spent per capita in Canada by 50% and still save mind boggingly large sums of money in the US.
Really? What a load of crap. Only the US is so screwed up that it can't do a decent single payer universal health care system. Any capitalist (except insurnace company execs) would know that a single payer system is more efficient (doctors don't have to spend 30% of their time arguing with insurnace companies), it makes the work force more flexible (people can change jobs), it makes companies competetive on a level playing field, it makes it easier for entrepreneurs ... and on and on. Only a tea party nut job would miss the clear logic of universal health care.
Exactly, well said!
Have yet to meet or hear of a doctor who spends 30% of his/her time arguing with insurance companies. Such an individual would soon be unable to afford to practice. As a matter of fact, government insurance has a higher claims rejection rate than private plans. Straw man arguments weaken the legitimacy for a single payer system.
As a 100% disabled veteran I would agree to disagree with you. Try using the VA for everything when you suffer from one or more chronic medical conditions then come on back and we'll have ourselves a little chat. Perhaps what you're saying is that a true single payer system would treat patients differently because it would be a system designed for everyone and not just for the veterans?
Tea Party Stupidity by Klepht
Do these people realize what they are doing? I don't think so. They went from being cable TV watching sheeple to sheeple holding signs outdoors.
First and foremost, most of these "tea parties" are protests about how the government is spending/wasting the money rather than a protest about the government taking it from them in the first place. They aren't calling for a repeal of the income tax (while also not advocating a replacement), nor are they calling for the end of the FED. Fools.
Aside from the fact that they are ideologically self-fucked, their methods and tactics are seriously flawed. Not just flawed, but completely, totally and utterly ineffective and so much so, that the only positive that can come from their efforts is perhaps getting a sun tan.
Protesting for one's rights or money is better viewed as BEGGING FOR RIGHTS/MONEY. That's correct. When you hit the streets with a sign, you are begging a entity (government) to give back to you what they've taken without your consent and most often by force. You are a beggar. You are not challenger of any kind. You hold a lower status.
Can anyone here educate me at all with a single instance in the history of Mankind where begging for rights actually succeeded? Where the ruling entity genuinely submitted to the people's demands for no other reason but the demands themselves? You know, none of this Gandhi crap where Britain was effectively collapsing and on the way out anyway. Or the MLK civil rights nonsense where no rights were ever liberated and where the government had an agenda for acting the way it did. I mean genuine the-people-ask, the-government-complies. I don't think anyone here can. But many of you guys are very smart, so I'm hopeful I can be proved wrong and I can learn something.
It's true what they say, those with the guns, make the rules. Reminds me of one of best movie scenes of all time from The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend...
...those with loaded guns, and those who dig.
You dig. "
I enjoy studying economics, history, the sciences. I realize there are certain truths to this world and there are certain things that are laws of nature and almost laws of human behavior/interaction. I wonder, what do these sign-waving people have in terms of negotiation power? Where is their leverage? Do they have anything at all? What do they bring to the table? What can they say or do that can demand at least a response from those they petition?
They don't have shit! Nothing. And like nothing, they will get nothing.
It's sad in a way. They have energy. They even have the quality of actually getting up off the couch and doing something. Unfortunately, they have no direction and are involved in a futile practice.
The great irony here is the very name of these events. "Tea Parties" ...HAHA! Do they realize that the Boston Tea Party was not a bunch of idiots begging and crying to their government masters? But that was a group of patriots who took actual physical action against the interests of those who oppressed them?
It makes me sick to my stomach to hear time and time again most people emphatically and dogmatically state that the only path, the only way, the right way, the best way, the moral way etc etc TO change things is through peaceful protest or peaceful-non-compliance.
What a load of shit.
Again, can anyone here cite a single instance where peaceful protest succeeded at achieving genuine change (for the real best interests of the people)? I don't think it has ever happened.
Is this public school and media indoctrination? Or are they just cowards and cannot call for what really needs to be done because it will be sedition or terrorism?
Reminds me of that saying that goes around here, "If voting actually worked, it would have been outlawed" ..there's much truth to that. You see, the moment you do something truly effective - they will murder you or imprison you. Or at least try to. If you protest out in the streets, if you run a website, if you get out the vote, if you preach and preach and you're A. Alive B. Not in prison, then you can rest assured that your methods are completely, totally and utterly ineffective at changing anything. You're safe because those in power are not threatened by you. It's that simple.
It's unbelievable how people cannot think straight. Before I begin on the next part, I will say this plainly. I believe, with complete certainty, that the foundation of America was a good thing and based on good principles. And that all the MEANS by which it was founded were right and just and still are to this day.
The founders of this nation did not start the revolution and move toward independence. They materialized it. It is something that grew for decades. During those many years, the founders and their predecessors tried every single means toward reform. They petitioned, they begged. They did not one day just up and decide to start shooting Redcoats. They tried it all. And it ALL FAILED. It failed like it always fails.
It always fails because the master or ruling entity has no reason whatsoever to negotiate or accommodate the weak. There's no incentive either. Today, the IRS has no incentive at all for working with the people on paying taxes. They don't need to think in those terms. They get the money regardless and by force. Likewise, socialism promotes sloth and rot because there's no incentive to excel. The money is coming regardless.
Take a good look at what the Federal government did to the peaceful Bonus Army! These people were not violent. These people had serious and just claims. They weren't even asking for their rights or to challenge the authority of the government! And take a good look at how the government dealt with that.
American history is full of these instances. But there are also instances of genuine reform and change. The Battle of Athens, Tennessee is a perfect example. A story the Federal government doesn't want you to know about. Might give you ideas!
How about the Chinese at Tienanmen Square? Most people have no clue about the extent of what happened there. The massive slaughter. That was the greatest display and the ultimate final defeat of peaceful protest. The Chinese are brave people. Even after a full day of being shot and bayoneted. Large numbers of Chinese would interlock arms and form a line to block the progress of the PLA, and the would still get shot to pieces. People who watched their fellow citizens die all day long continued in this path because they believed their cause was worth it. They believed that their own countrymen, the soldiers of the PLA, would eventually crack and breakdown at the sight of this relentless, completely passive peaceful resistance. You'd think that if you held your ground, and worked it to its logical conclusion, that the tyrants would be defeated since they are powerless without their people. If they kill everyone, they will have no one to rule. That if you accept the slaughter, if you take the slaps to the face and the beatings and continue, that the tyrant will be forced to realize that it doesn't work.
This is flawed for a number of reasons. The main reason is that it is based on an assumption that government primarily used fear as weapon. This method of accepting abuse in a show of defiance as a means to eliminate the fear-mechanism of government simply doesn't work because the government uses fear when they can, but when that fails they murder and they murder as many as they can until they succeed. Also, the notion that full unity can be achieved is MYTHICAL. In every revolutionary movement in history, including America's, the patriots were a minority and "life goes on" regardless. There's no such thing as an end to humanity or society, and therefore, there is no such thing as a threat to "stop it all" in a unified idealistic mass non-compliance movement. Also, the brutality of even your own countrymen is always underestimated. This is nothing new. Absolutely horrific acts were committed during the American Revolution by the British and by the Patriots. Neighbors killed neighbors. There were also mass killings. People who were ethnically, culturally identical. Who are the same people, the same countrymen essentially slaughtered one another and the government never shows any restraint at all. There's no limit to what they will do.
In the end, the Chinese were slaughtered. Over and over and over. To prevent further unrest, the government pacified the people with false reforms and they fell for it. The U.S. government did the same thing many times in the 20th century. The civil rights legislation being one of them. If they refused to accept the BS reforms, and continued, the PLA would kill more until they break. And as I said before, the patriot/revolutionary is a minority figure. Always is. A guerrilla fighter never goes head to head. They've got numbers, you don't. Your ranks are precious. You do not have an endless stream of conscripts and cannon fodder.
It all comes down to this. For the average person, the only, and I mean, the ONLY effective method that exists is actual armed rebellion. Period. Nothing else works. If you are interested in changing things or fighting for liberty and freedom, there are two paths you can take. The first path is the revolutionary. In this path, you're literally shooting and killing taxmen, politicians, judges, government people, corporate leaders, bombing things, sabotage, attacking supporters of tyranny so forth and so on. Obviously, this is an extremely high risk path to take. You are literally putting you ass on the line. Give me liberty or give me death - except for real, not just a cool slogan.
The other path is non-active resistance. Doing everything in your power to evade taxes, to evade supporting the government, to undermine them as much as possible, to promote your ideas and lifestyle in contradiction to the will of the government.
That's all there is to it. There's nothing else. Other than submitting and being a SLAVE. Of the two options that have any chance of success, one is active, the other is not.
As I said above, I firmly believe everything the founders did was completely just. They did it for their liberty, and it founded the greatest nation of all time. Even in this tyranny, we all still benefit from their sacrifice. It's sad that people consider the last resort and final effective means for enacting change as barbarism or murder or unacceptable.
What the farmers did on April 19th, 1775 is celebrated. It's celebrated because their side ultimately won. But for their time, what they did was considered high treason. It's no different than a group of citizens today grabbing their assault rifles and ambushing or attacking a U.S. military or Police convoy en route to completing some type of liberty-stripping mission such as a firearm confiscation. No different at all. The punishment for such acts is death. It was the same back then.
That is the ultimate hypocrisy and irony. That the very thing that created this nation is condemned as wrong, as unjust, as murderous. Yet, the government on a daily basis proves that it is willing to murder its citizens in order to impose its will on them. They are taking it to the extreme EVERY DAY. They are going all the way, all the time. But for us little slaves to even suggest such a thing, that is very naughty!
My suggestion for these "tea party" clowns is to put down the signs, go back home and to get a fucking clue. Their time is better spent adjusting their lifestyle to minimize their slave output to the government. Live a life that pays the least amount of tax possible, that avoids ever paying money to credit card companies. Better spent training with firearms. Better spent reading books, getting educated and educating young children with the truth. Exposing them to a classical education. Shielding them from being taken away from their parents (mentally) by this public education system that puts people into a matrix-like bubble.
If dropping the hammer on some scumbag Federal agent is not for you, and it's not for most people, there are other ways to resist. But ultimately, resistance is resistance - it isn't proactive change. It won't get it done. But holding off is certainly better than submitting, and is the best thing to do until an opening presents itself for genuine change.
http://www.phpbbplanet.com/damessageboard/viewtopic.php?t=2910&highlight...
don't hold back, now...
what do you really think? :^)
(some good stuff in there. my only gripe is the broad stroke that you use to paint the tea-party folks. pretty diverse crowd from what i've seen...)
i just love that we have to get a permit to protest these days... that kind of covers it for me. permission to do a naughty. wow.
"Where is their leverage?"
That's why I see the majority of this tea party as irrelevant. At the end of the day, most of them will vote how they've always voted (democrat/repub). A few people might swing either way.
But when they walk out of the election booths having voted for their democrat/republican of choice, what the F will they have changed?
+100
It all comes down to this. For the average person, the only, and I mean, the ONLY effective method that exists is actual armed rebellion. Period. Nothing else works. If you are interested in changing things or fighting for liberty and freedom, there are two paths you can take. The first path is the revolutionary. In this path, you're literally shooting and killing taxmen, politicians, judges, government people, corporate leaders, bombing things, sabotage, attacking supporters of tyranny so forth and so on. Obviously, this is an extremely high risk path to take. You are literally putting you ass on the line. Give me liberty or give me death - except for real, not just a cool slogan.
your heavy.
but right. especially
but really it is all in your mind†
I like my solution better. But few have the guts to do it....
A Stand – Stop the Pity Party Garbage and Focus!
To kill a vampire, you must cut off its supply to the blood. It is that $imple.