This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

American Liberalism: The Infantile Disorder

rcwhalen's picture




 

 

“The approach of a great storm was sensed everywhere. All classes were in a state of ferment and preparation. Abroad, the press of the political exiles discussed the theoretical aspects of all the fundamental problems of the revolution. Representatives of the three main classes, of the three principal political trends -- the liberal-bourgeois, the petty-bourgeois-democratic (concealed behind "social-democratic" and "social-revolutionary" labels), and the proletarian-revolutionary -- anticipated and prepared the impending open class struggle by waging a most bitter struggle on issues of programme and tactics. All the issues on which the masses waged an armed struggle in 1905-07 and 1917-20 can (and should) be studied, in their embryonic form, in the press of the period. Among these three main trends there were, of course, a host of intermediate, transitional or half-hearted forms. It would be more correct to say that those political and ideological trends which were genuinely of a class nature crystallised in the struggle of press organs, parties, factions and groups; the classes were forging the requisite political and ideological weapons for the impending battles.”

 

The years of preparation for revolution (1903-05) 

Left-Wing Communism: an Infantile

Disorder

V.I. Lenin

April-May, 1920

 

Grand Lake Stream, ME:  Had good fishing yesterday even as temperatures rose steadily as the group converged on Leens Lodge for evening activities.  Dinner last night featured a brief presentation by ME Governor Paul LePage and also a discussion of Weimar Germany by Madeline Schnapp of Trim Tabs.  The two discussions were good complements for the larger evening discussion.  But sad to say for Persian Economists, there were no Power Point presentations.

 

Governor LePage started his discussion with a very frank appraisal of the state’s fiscal situation, namely that the Democrats spent and stole the state broke.  Voters in ME recently gave control over the governor’s office and both houses of the state legislature to the Republican Party.   Suffice to say that the main theme of Governor LePage’s comments to the audience at Leens Lodge, which included a number of advisers who own the state’s debt, is that the State of Maine is going to pay its bills and keep its promises.

 

One interesting part of the Governor’s remarks involved how ME is clearing up the many years of arrears of Medicare payments to hospitals around the state.  He noted thatthe Democrats in the legislature wanted to “negotiate” a settlement for the arrears of 50 cents on the dollar with the state’s hospitals, which would doom many of them to failure.  The consistent objective of American liberals is to destroy the free enterprise system and make the US a monolithic socialist state a la France.  That battle is underway in ME right now.  

 

Contrary to the Fabian scenario, Governor LePage has insisted on paying the hospitals in full.  “Then we can spend money on other things,” he told the audience.  But more to the point, LePage’s promise to pay the hospitals will thwart Democratic designs to decimate private health care institutions and drive more and more Mainiacs into the arms of the state.  But don’t look for Governor Le Page or anyone in the northern part of ME to go along quietly. 

 

The evening discussion was set up by Madeline Schnapp, who provided a brief but entirely chilling review of the financial stairway to hell of hyper-inflation in Weimar Germany.  In an extraordinary and succinct discussion, Madeline talked about the timing and duration of the appearance of different denominations of paper money used in the Weimar period.  Suffice to say that as the paper lost value, the printing became less and less attractive.  

 

From the start of WWI in 1914 through until 1923, the cost of a loaf of bread went from 0.10 Deutsche marks to 1 trillion marks in December 1923.  The hyperinflation in Weimar Germany, Schnapp noted, wiped out all of the accumulated wealth and savings of the German middle class and left most of the population in poverty.  Attendees at the dinner received examples of Weimar money and a brief presentation showing the rate of inflation during the Weimar inflation.

 

The juxtaposition of Paul LePage and his battle against the downstate, apartment dwelling socialists over spending and debt, and then Schnapp’s reminder about the death of money in Weimar Germany is a powerful pairing.  At the start of 1924, let us recall, Germany wiped out all existing financial assets and introduced a new currency back with real estate and other tangible assets.  When Paul Krugman and his ilk talk about the need for more deficit spending, more fiscal stimuli, they are taking you down the road to Weimar America.  There is nothing at the end of Paul Krugman’s road to borrow and spend save national destruction and personal disaster.  

 

On Monday this scribe will be taking the Bat mobile to Chautauqua, NY, to give a talk on Tuesday evening regarding the morality of regulation in America -- or perhaps the lack thereof.  In an age when the entire framework of left wing liberalism, “the infantile disorder” to paraphrase V.I. Lenin, lies in tatters, maybe it is time to ask why we all don’t do the right thing.  Or if the future of economics is merely a free-for-all for an existing pie of resources, perhaps we should just dispense with the civilities?  

 

Whether you are a Krugmanite progressive-socialist or a classical liberal lost in the 21st Century, in both cases we rely upon a consensus called the rule of law.  But is that assumption still valid?  Many conservatives believe that the left has lost its collective mind and embraced hyperinflation a la Weimar Germany, not to help people in any meaningful way but to simply preserve Democratic political power.  

 

If the political tsunami underway in Maine is any indicator, the November 2012 election will be fascinating and unpredictable.  But while there may be conservative uprisings at the local level, in Washington at the Fed a decidedly orthodox form of state socialism continues to reign supreme.  

 

“If you consider that John Law’s main intellectual error was thinking that shares of stock were just as good as money,” AIER scholar Walker Todd noted recently.  “Ben Bernanke’s error is thinking that derivatives and math models are as good as a scarce commodity in restraining the quantity and promoting the value of money.” 

 

But the beliefs of mere Fed economists are a sublime concern compared to the naked inflationism of Paul Krugman and his fellow travelers in American liberalism.  The battle now is between people like ME Governor Le Page, who want to restore fiscal sanity to American life, and those who merely wish to destroy the private economy and monetary system.  By ensuring that as many people as possible are dependent upon government for their livelihoods, liberals in states like ME are treading the path blazed a century ago.  by V.I. Lenin.  What a shame most of them do not appreciate this irony of repeating the same mistakes over and over again.    

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 08/04/2012 - 17:59 | 2678574 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

You are just flat out WRONG. This is a bullshit lie and you are apparently too lazy to look into the matter yourself in spite of having a clear link to reality above, instead you put up a weak ass cut and paste job.

Stop repeating nonsense because it justifies what you want to believe instead of the real world- go to the Treasury site, get a calculator, and DO THE FUCKING MATH. Hell, just look at the damn treasury reports. As you are apparently bent on propagandizing for your stupid damn team, I will assist for FY 1998 in order to illustrate the depths of your ignorance. For the Clinton years it is easier because the Treasury reports put the previous year in the next column.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/1998/1998_sep.htm

September 1997 debt- 5,413,146,000,000

September 1998 debt- 5,526,193,000,000

And you seriously claim a fucking SURPLUS? In what alternate mathematical Sheepiverse does a crystal clear 113,047,000,000 increase in debt equal a surplus???? How do you distort certain mathematical reality to put up something as blatantly and verifiably full of shit as you have done? It is the same for every year you claim a non existent surplus for. Please, in clear English, explain how a deficit increase equals a surplus. I am dying to hear what level of duplicity and what sort of reality defying verbal gymnsatics are required to make your farcical claim.

This oughta be a fucking hoot.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 16:30 | 2678468 sessinpo
sessinpo's picture

And who does the budget? Um, the president? No. Hmm. Oh yea, congress. Both parties play games.

Arguments on both sides are horse crap.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 15:57 | 2678428 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

http://jimcgreevy.com/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

Every year of the Clinton presidency has a debt. Please provide a citation for your numbers. 

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 20:46 | 2678766 boiltherich
boiltherich's picture

Every year of every presidency since Johnson was in office has seen a fiscal year increase in the debt.  We at ZH are sophisticated enough to know that the government has used what amounts to off balancesheet raids on the SS trust fund every year to make it appear as if there was an annual fiscal surplus, or at least lower deficits, because they took in more than they spent, hence the term surplus, but that is misleading at best and we all know it because it was done by stealing from the future. 

The real point being made by the partisan left and right is not that Clinton did not really have a surplus, it is that the two presidents before him and especially the one after had enormous fiscal deficits in spite of this theft from the workers of America.  Total debt did actually climb under Clinton as I posted above, by 700 billion from 1995 through 2000, but it climbed by almost 5 trillion under BushCo and is still out of control under Obama with at least as much of the blame reserved for the economic and international disaster Bush left him with.  And mind you that near 5 trillion in new debt he stuck us with does not count a single penny of the debt/lower living standards under his rule from secret loans and bailouts the Fed gave to the very richest corporate pigs in the nation.  So, you can at LEAST double that 5 tril to 10 if not 15, because even though it is not a debt on the federal government's books we the people will still have to pay it in the end.

By the way, the only real source for debt information is Debt to the Penny at the Treasury web here... http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np  Every day accounts are settled and posted, you can enter any date range to see the increases, though they used to seperate out debt held by the public and intergovernmental debt which they dropped not too long ago, you can still see the total public debt for any range back to the dawn of the computer age.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 22:17 | 2678897 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Actually, my point would be there has NEVER been a president that was not in it for his buddies. In the modern era, they are just the same buddies. Whether it adds to the debt or not, the theft is from us all through lost opportunities and higher priced assets.

Those treasury numbers? The FED gave over 16 trillion in backstops to corporations, nations and banks. Sen Sanders was nice enough to get that tidbit in the record books.The real national debt is in excess of 29 trillion dollars. Makes that FED audit more interesting all the time.Trusting any number produced by the government is just laughable.

Look into the Exchange Stabilization Fund sometime. Nice reading, if you like treason.

The Elites run this little operation (we are just a British colony afterall, why do you think Central Banking was spread acrosss the globe? No one does colonization like the Elites). 

Americans are just upset because they are losing their standard of living. That is what a global work force does. Especially if you take the time to train it. Control of the wage structure has always been a matter of numbers of available workers. Each side uses it to their advantage ( The Black Death that reduced workers and empowered those that survived, the use of immigration to combat unions and specialized work forces (computers anyone?)). 

You want the magic bullet? ELIMINATE LEGAL TENDER LAWS. The best weapon in the arsenal for the common man. He can even vote for it and get it made into an amendment to the Constitution. It would do more to level the playing field than any other action by the public barring revolution.

 

 

 

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 14:06 | 2678256 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

One of the best lies ever told. People confuse budget numbers with the government expenditure numbers. It is a myth that continues to live on. In fairness though, the accumulation of government debt was quite low during his terms, but that owes more to revenues from the dotcom market and housing than any policy Clinton put forward. 

 

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 14:34 | 2678293 brettd
brettd's picture

The conservative congress (newt) forced Clinton to retreat from his version of socialized health care and revise welfare...it certainly wasn't his default position.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 14:54 | 2678322 koaj
koaj's picture

the bond market exploded in mid 93 prompting clinton to shelve hillarycare. newt and co offered an obamacare type plan to counter hillary care

 

clinton had very little to do any "surplus". neither did newt....nothing a little stealing from social security over to the genral fund couldnt fix

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 20:23 | 2678744 boiltherich
boiltherich's picture

4,973,982,900,709.39 Debt on Sept. 29, 1995

5,674,178,209,886.86 Debt on Sept. 29, 2000

Difference= 700,195,309,177.47

January 21, 2001 5,727,776,738,304.64

January 20, 2009 10,625,053,544,309.79

Difference= 4,897,276,806,005,.15

Clinton had far better balanced budgets and will go down in history as the man that presided over the most prosperous era in American history. Bush accumulated as much debt in his terms as all previous presidents until 1994 and left the economy in shambles, a depression for 99% of Americans, fighting two wars with still to be determined trillions in unfunded liabilities yet to be piled onto future presidents and citizens, and most here think the new debt added since Obama took office is somehow his fault, I say I am shocked he has been able to keep the nation alive this long given the cesspool of incompetence and theft unparalleled in history perpetrated by the Reagan/Bush/Bush reign of kleptocracy.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 12:43 | 2679548 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

You are out of your mind. Clinton's terms were probably the most structurally destructive since LBJ.

Debt is a problem- but ultimately it is akin to putting weight on a moving vehicle, eventually it will slow it down and stop it with massive interest payments.  With NAFTA, China, Glass-Steagall, and the Financial Servies Modernization Act ol' Bubba poured sand into the gas tank. He took actions that seriously undercut the ability of the nation to function in the long term.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 13:31 | 2678197 Dburn
Dburn's picture

Whether you are a Krugmanite progressive-socialist or a classical liberal lost in the 21st Century, in both cases we rely upon a consensus called the rule of law.  But is that assumption still valid?  Many conservatives believe that the left has lost its collective mind and embraced hyperinflation a la Weimar Germany, not to help people in any meaningful way but to simply preserve Democratic political power.  

 

Start Arresting bankers and apply the rule of law to everyone Ignoring the banks and all the other crimes that were byproducts of the banks crimes, for the sake of political expediency, by both Democrats and Republicans inspires zero confidence in any particular political platform, especially since it's well known that politicians who tell the truth don't get elected. We also deserve a significant heaping of the shit that has come out of that. Politicians must lie to get into office and then we act surprised that they lied. Politicians that tell the truth are quickly defeated in any primary as voters are too damn scared of what a change in the status-quo means to them personally : ME , ME , and more of ME defines the attitude of today's voters. It's the selfishness of each voter who lets there own personal situation/belief system override the foundations of what this country was supposed to be about.

Even addressing the main culprit in today's shit economy seems beyond the capability of both parties , including the libertarian party. The Rule of Law is the Glue of that holds a Disparate messy democracy together no matter how tenuous the stickiness of the glue is. Fairness in the application of the Rule of Law means arresting people who have shit loads of money and power they have collected by stealing the money and then committing even more crimes. Not one politician running for office has mentioned any of this. This Left/right bullshit is just a big scam. Anyone who falls for it without addressing the root cause of the extreme FAIL that represents this economy is wasting breath.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 19:59 | 2678719 boiltherich
boiltherich's picture

There is plenty of blame to go around politically speaking for our economic problems, but the debt machine that has made certain we cannot ever get out from under is a GOP invention pure and simple, because they held the strings of power more than the left and they are the ones that insanely cut taxes (revenues) while being too chickenshit to cut spending in any honest way.  They in fact increased spending and at a faster clip as a % of GDP than even Obama has.  Funny how many on the right are screaming sedition over Obamacare but had NO problem with a vast new drug company welfare program costing 44 billion per year under BushCo.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 20:08 | 2678731 Haager
Haager's picture

No repocrat will seriously cut spending - it wouldn't be honoured by TPTB

Funny thing: I had some thoughts today about the curse of the Fed/fiat-currency issue desperately needing a growing debt constantly. Signing the agreement in 1913 looks more and more like  Mephisto selling his soul to the devil by signing a contract.

 

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 14:36 | 2678297 brettd
brettd's picture

Corzine?

Holder?

Chu?

 

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 13:19 | 2678176 Uncle Keith
Uncle Keith's picture

Lipstick on a pig...

 

LePage is still talking about redistribution of monies - UP THE CLASS LADDER INTO THE WAITING HANDS OF THE SELECT FEW. When 70% of our economy is consumer driven, it is best to make sure the bulk of the spenders are not indebted until 2026. Keeping money in circulation ensures a healthy economy. Keeping the money away from The Bullionists (go ahead, look it up...) and Horders is also a pretty good policy.

 

Mr. Whalen can try to obfuscate this by making Weimar Germany refereneces; equivalencies; etc... But, in the end, it's the same GOP/Tea Party Bullshit: How to best keep the money in the hands of the "Right" people.

 

Utilitarianism is winning out in Maine. LePage is a one termer and tool of the greedy; dupes; anti-intellectuals.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 15:30 | 2678370 unwashedmass
unwashedmass's picture

 

i'm from maine, live in Maine. And frankly, even the republicans don't think much of Mr. LePage at this point. He's a catastrophe for just about everyone except the very tiny minority at the top, and....sad to say....his relatives. 

He exemplifies the very, very worst of the elitist crew --- mainly because, he ISN"T and elitist,  just a toady..........

which is really sad for Maine. 

 

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 19:54 | 2678714 boiltherich
boiltherich's picture

And yet the right in this nation wants to elect Romney, LePage X 100.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 11:20 | 2679380 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

No one WANTS to elect Romney.  He's just the candidate, so folks have to stump for him, because he's gotta be better than that other guy.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 14:15 | 2678267 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

If keeping money incirculation was all that was required, then Weimar would have been the best economy in the world. As would have Mussolini's Italy, Hitler's Germany or Bush and Soetero's Amerika. 

As for the bullionists, please find a single citation to back up your claim. The economic history is quite clear on the advantages of sound money versus fiat. Use of the term, "horders" demonstrates a complete ignorance of leisure value and time preference, as well as a total lack of understanding of capital formation.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 13:32 | 2678202 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

Got anything to back up your assertion that the ME Gov. is talking about redistributing wealth upwards?

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 14:39 | 2678301 brettd
brettd's picture

How the fuck is paying your bills and honoring your (predecessors) commitments considered "redistribution"?

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 18:09 | 2678583 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

As I doubt anyone will make that clear I will hazard a guess- the logic can only be that they will repay bonds which will presumably only flow to big banks.  That nobody can say who owns the bonds is likely a secondary issue.  I don't pretend to know the details of the state debt in Maine, but I would bet that massive state pension shortfalls are a piece of the puzzle on the debt side and that private pension funds investing in those bonds is another fromt he funding side. Was some of it poofed into existence and bought by the big banks? That is very likely another piece but I don't see anyone coming up with information on exactly who owns their debt and what generates the shortfall.

At this point I am part of the "Let the Muthafucker Burn" Party so its a bit of an academic question, but I hoped they had some hard data I didn't.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 13:20 | 2678162 Disenchanted
Disenchanted's picture

 

 

 

American Liberalism and American Conservatism(as both are defined and understood in today's world) are both infantile disorders.

A lot of ignorant cunts on either 'side' flapping their gums and launching flecks of spittle on each other while projecting meaningless bullshit.

With many of the participants being paid quite well to muddy the waters and ensure the status quo is protected.

 

That's my .02...

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 13:05 | 2678145 boiltherich
boiltherich's picture

Liberal root word is LIBERTY.  Too many confuse political and economic partisanship with the goals of true liberals, which is FREEDOM from government intrusion into the private lives of citizens.  I know a lot of people that would be labeled liberal here, I have never met a single person that is actually PRO abortion, only people in favor of safe and legal choice remaining an issue between a doctor and patient, as I am in favor of it because unlike most of you I remember well when abortion was not legal or safe, but it went on anyway.  No government at any level, or for that matter other citizens should be sticking their fat asses into the bedrooms of other citizens, nor curtailing rights based on religious hatreds and superstitions. 

If it just so happens that most people identifying as "liberal" register as democrats rather than republicans it is because in order to be a liberal you have to have the ability to think independently, most on the right I know either have no such ability or refuse to use it for their own reasons.  The talking points of the Reichwing controlled media are not being spewed onto the airwaves to accuse people on the left, they are instructions to the borg on the right, that is why they are talking points rather than discourse and logic tested reason. 

The really mentally and emotionally damaged among us are those that cling in terror to the past and crow about their moral superiority which they are so convinced they have all of that they are totally blind to their own faults.  They are greedy, insecure, xenophobic, homophobic, and they may or may not take pleasure in fucking things up for everyone else but that is almost always the result of being near one.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 08:54 | 2679238 northerngirl
northerngirl's picture

LOL!  Really?  The Liberal Democrat's I know are marching to the same beat as their party leaders, not seeing too much independent thinking.  Yes, I am a registered Democrat, (DFL), get off your soap box, stop the name calling and look for what will unite instead of dividing.  I am so sick and tired of all the finger pointing and just flat out lies coming from both sides.  Post's like yours do nothing to bring this country together it only galvanizes the perceived differences. 

 

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 17:53 | 2680223 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

I keep challenging liberals to name the Democrat equivalents of Ted Cruz, Dick Lugar, Charlie Crist, Mike Castle, et al. (Need I go on?) No, sorry, Mr. Independent Thinker Democrat, but the only actual, real, measurable, tangible, quantifiable revolt against party elite that I can see is coming from Tea Party/Republican/Sarah Palin quarters. Period. Love 'em or hate 'em, they are the only actual agents of change. (There were another half dozen such examples in Texas alone last week where Republicans rejected the choices of the party elite.) Democrats? You know, the 'independent thinkers'? Hm. Nope. Not so much.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 19:13 | 2678664 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

I hate to be the one to point this out, but use of the word "homophobic" does not reflect the ability to 'think independently'.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 21:07 | 2678751 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

For the edification of the person who junked me, in order for something (anything) to be deemed a phobia, first, obviously, fear has to be present. Although I cannot say that *fear* per se even remotely appears to be the defining emotional component underlying most people's reluctance to enthusiastically embrace and endorse homosexuality, homosexual marriage, homosexuals taking little boys home with them from the adoption agency, etc., I am actually willing to concede this point, arguendo, because I do think that a lot of such people do in fact have questions or concerns about how this could impact society and the innocent. Not sure that that is properly characterized as "fear," but, oh well.

However, in order for something to qualify as a phobia, that fear also has to be both irrational (without any rational basis) and, moreover, it must interfere in one carrying out one's normal and customary activities of daily living.

Does anyone really want to try to make the argument that the latter are commonplace among all those individuals routinely slurred with the canard "homophobic?"

I have both black widow and brown recluse spiders living in my woodpile. Stoking the furnace is something I ALWAYS do with heightened situational awareness. I am not anachrophobic.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 11:18 | 2679376 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

   anachrophobic

A typo invented a nifty word, but it doesn't have anything to do with spiders.  That'd be something like fear of encountering time-inappropriate technology or custom.

The spider thingie would be "arachnophobic."

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 16:34 | 2680060 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

Thanks. You know, too, you might be correct in that I inadvertently created a useful word; to wit: Every once in a while, Art Bell would have a guest on to discuss forbidden archeology (ancient artifacts reflecting inappropriately advanced technology). I never found it convincing, but it was always fun to listen to. Anyway, my word could be used to describe the attitude of the mainstream archeological community as described by Mr. Bell's guests.

Dunno why someone junked you. Personally, I appreciate it when people point out my mistakes, especially when they do so in as kind a manner as yours.

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 17:30 | 2680191 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

I have a few fans who'll junk me any time I post, they're just not very diligent.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 16:40 | 2678481 sessinpo
sessinpo's picture

"If it just so happens that most people identifying as "liberal" register as democrats rather than republicans it is because in order to be a liberal you have to have the ability to think independently"

The fact that the majority of persons dependent on government would argue against that statement. Biting the hand that feeds you doesn't work very well. And has been demonstrated by simple interviews with protesters, the liberals there don't even know what they are protesting. My favorite was a group protesting outside a Carl Rove speech. When the protester was asked why they were protesting, he stated, "I don't want Rove to become president."

 

LOL - Well, I concur. I don't want Rove to be president either. But at least I have enough knowledge to know Rove isn't running for president.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 13:56 | 2678244 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

And yet American liberals are apparently incapable of individual thought or action on even the most basic level. They hammer two themes-

1) It is the job of the government to provide for me and any family members I don't want to be inconvenienced with.

2) It is the job of government to accomplish this by taking more from someone else to do this.

Everything is a riff off of those basic concept, at bottom it is a bunch of idiots telling themselves and each other how bright and sophisticated they are to mask their stupidity and incompetence. Personal choices and responsibility for anything be damned, its all about someone else providing them with what they feel they should have by virtue of their having a pulse.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 12:40 | 2678096 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

As I recall Lenin lost in Germany. And he was replaced by a thing called "National Socialism." so perhaps Stalinism is the answer then! Anywho this is a private Army funded by the Fed...along with everything else I might add. I don't see a "communist solution" coming to the USA...especially once the whole Syrian debacle requires a massive Army of Occupation courtesy of the USA and Britain just to keep those massive stockpiles of chemical and biological agents out of the hands of...hopefully...anyone over there.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 13:10 | 2678154 spooz
spooz's picture

What, are you a shill for the military industrial complex?  Don't want that trough snatched away by cutting military spending.  Lets scare the sheeple with another weapons of mass destruction ploy to beef up the anti terrorism agenda. Blow me. Unless I missed your sarcasm, of course.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 12:59 | 2678137 Everybodys All ...
Everybodys All American's picture

Stalin mass murdered twenty million of his own people. I don't even know how to respond without getting mad for this kind of ignorance.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 12:30 | 2678075 Divine Wind
Divine Wind's picture

 

 

 

In my personal experience, most liberals are a complete waste of carbon.

Abortion, gubment checks, be nice to the earth and cry for a tree, free love, what is yours is mine, if you got rich it had to be illegal, blah blah blah.

The world would be a far better place if you all would just see things my way, come over the the RIGHT side, get a job and earn your own take.

How many times do I need to say this?

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 13:41 | 2678223 deepsouthdoug
deepsouthdoug's picture

It take a complete waste of carbon to know one.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 12:28 | 2678063 Binko
Binko's picture

What a terrible article. The author talks about a couple of random speeches at a conference somewhere. Then mentions a "political tsunami" in Maine. Then stops without even the slightest explanation of what he's talking about or how those speeches tie in with current reality.

Can we have a little bit of editorial control over the article postings here?

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 12:24 | 2678060 GOLDTEETHSILVER...
GOLDTEETHSILVERFILLINGS's picture

Hemorrhoids?

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 11:50 | 2678003 booboo
booboo's picture

"Suffice to say that the main theme of Governor LePage’s comments to the audience at Leens Lodge, which included a number of advisers who own the state’s debt, is that the State of Maine is going to pay its bills and keep its promises"

Sooo, telling the debt holders to roll up those pieces of paper and stuffing them up their kiester was not an option for the Gov? If that option is not on the table then they will continue to mis-price risk and eventually the propery owners who have to foot the bill will be all run off their land just like the indians...........wait just a minute, I see a Trail of Tears in our future.

Other then that the BAT Mobile around these parts is what they call the County owned DUI RV in which everyones alcohol induced partay ends. Be careful Chris, the state needs your money too.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 11:46 | 2678002 Tinky
Tinky's picture

Relative to this article, Simon Black's contributions are both outstanding and indispensible.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 11:56 | 2678019 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

When it comes to this kind of performances, it always takes an 'American' to outdo another 'American'.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 12:19 | 2678053 Kayman
Kayman's picture

Is your Anti-American bleatings petty jealousy or do your handlers have a greater plan for their squeaky little mouse ?

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 11:46 | 2678000 dick cheneys ghost
dick cheneys ghost's picture

Lets start by ending the petro dollar system............

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 11:45 | 2677996 LawsofPhysics
LawsofPhysics's picture

So, the liberals are socialists and LePage is a fascist and the taxpayer loses again. Nothing short of total reset fixes anything. Bring it.

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 14:47 | 2678313 brettd
brettd's picture

True.  But history shows us that after the reset, the powerful still have power/wealth.

The Middle class gets hammered back to povery....So mainly what we gain is clarity...but what a price to pay, eh?

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 12:53 | 2678123 Everybodys All ...
Everybodys All American's picture

and what does a reset look like? Who is your George Washington?

Sat, 08/04/2012 - 11:59 | 2678026 mkarolusa
mkarolusa's picture

So someone who believes in paying one's debts and being fiscally responsible is a facist?

Sun, 08/05/2012 - 11:12 | 2679370 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

What do you think of the debt ceiling debate?

More than anything, it's a debate over whether we're going to pay for all those so-called "unfunded liabilities."

Which side are YOU on? 

Heh.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!