This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Voting Is A Sap's Game

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by James E. Miller of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada,

With the U.S. presidential election right around the corner, Americans are getting themselves all in a tizzy to go to the voting booth and remind the holders of public office who they work for.  Because it’s a presidential election, the stakes are looked to as even higher as the media paints the contest between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney as a conflict with extreme consequence.  The statist tramps known as mainstream journalists are championing the race as a great ideological battle.  The fact that the candidates differ little on policy and vision is purposefully avoided.  To the political and intellectual establishment, the show must go on.  Their way of life depends on it.

Already in both the Republican National Convention and Democratic National Convention the party elites took the opportunity to trample on the democratic virtue of dissent.  On the Republican side, Ron Paul supporters were effectively told to get lost as party leaders rammed through a rule change to make it next to impossible to nominate a pure grassroots candidate.  The Democrats, per usual, were no better.  When it came time to vote on whether the party platform should contain language on God and ensuring Jerusalem remains the capital of Israel, the voice vote was disregarded and the language was kept.  And as a Fox News showed, the decision was predetermined by the teleprompter.  In one fell swoop, both of America’s major political parties demonstrated that their own members can’t be trusted.  The irony is that this practice of top-down dictation is wholly reflective of the reality of governance.

No matter how hard boobus Americanus is kicked in the teeth with his own inability to have an effect on government, he still feverishly casts his ballot with faith locked into the system.  This intellectual denseness doesn’t hold for just the U.S. either.  Democracy is still looked to favorably all around the world.  Above the rhetoric of listening to the voice of the people, technocrats removed from the voting process run major world governments.  One look at Europe and it becomes obvious the politically-connected elites are running the show.  The banking system is being saved at the public’s expense.  Some are keen to realize this and are setting about to instill leaders of integrity.  Many remain enraptured with the idea of a government for and by the people.  These people aren’t just blind to the evils of the state; they take enormous pride in their ignorance.

Democracy is a sham.  In its purest form, it is mob rule by childish emotion.  In its representative form, elections are a reoccurring fiction to convince the people they aren’t servants to masters who have become all too acquainted with power.

The ballot box is the last refuge of the half-witted fully convinced of his utter inability to dismember his umbilical cord from the state and take responsibility for his destiny.  It is the chance to press a boot on the neck of your fellow man without the shame of doing so directly.

It is a much believed fairytale that the intentions of government are good but misguided.  But from time immemorial, the state has been a conspiracy levied against the many by the few.   Through the bailouts, printing press rescues, and socialized takeovers, the objective is obvious.  The losers of government throw money at their fellow losers in business to maintain an establishment class of total inferiority.

The job of the political class is to make it so that crises are constantly haunting the electorate.  Herds are easier to tame when frightened and looking for a savior.  The West has become a great pity where suicidal lemmings run toward a cliff disguised as a voting booth. Every aspiring dictator they wish to put in office is a drug that numbs the senses and brings them one step closer to being fully shackled and on their knees ready and willing to serve.

As Gary North puts it, “democracy is window dressing for elite control.”  The people are told they have a voice.  They become teary-eyed at the prospect of casting a vote for a marionette.  The news media bludgeons voters over the head constantly with phrases like “doing your duty” and “participating in democracy.”

Corruption, kick-backs, and corporate cronyism are wrapped up in a shiny box with a bow and sold to the people every election.  The stealing away of all that is important in a functioning society by unaccountable schemers goes largely unnoticed.  The money supply is controlled by a few central bankers.  Law is given the final word by appointed judges.  Regulations are written by bureaucrats. Wars are waged by generals and military complex administrators.  Lawmakers are there for Kabuki Theater.

Leviathan can’t and won’t be tamed through the ballot box.  Reasoning with the state is like reasoning with a lunatic armed with a machine gun.  His two modes of thought are firing cheerfully into an unarmed crowd or keeping a finger itching to pull the trigger once more.

To quote the great author and civil disobedient Henry David Thoreau

I heartedly accept the motto, — “That government is best which governs least”; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe, — “That government is best which governs not at all”; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.

The sad truth is that the majority of men are infatuated with nationalist creeds and looting the pockets of their neighbors.  The absence of such a religion would pit them into the great unknown of actually having to behave like civilized beings.  There would be no liars to look up to who promise a land of milk and honey for votes.  There would be no invaders to honor who are paid to break down the doors of foreign dwellings in the middle of the night and leave pools of blood and piles of bullet shells for children to find their parents lying in.  There would be no leader of the people surrounded by guards armed with militarized weaponry to salute.

The cycle of scaremongering with false threats followed by the reactionary heroism of public officials finding the courage to crush already withered freedoms into dust would come to an abrupt end.  Schoolchildren would no longer learn that government saves them from poking themselves in the eye every second of every day.  Independent critical thinking would make a roaring comeback.  In the end, men would have to make an honest living; which is perhaps the greatest fear of any state bureaucrat.

H.L Mencken accurately described what the state of American politics would become almost a century ago when he wrote:

As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal.  On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

It wasn’t just the average U.S. voter Mencken referred to- it was voters around the globe who still see government as their friend and not an avenue for the slime of society to carry out their violent fantasies.  Unless there is a radical change of thinking, mankind’s intellect will finally begin to resemble that of a dog who after being beaten unmercifully, happily returns to his master’s side ready once more for another round.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:14 | 2792583 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Until stated otherwise, voting counts.  When the winner gets less than 49%, then we have a problem.

Take your defeatist shit elsewhere.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:20 | 2792609 spastic_colon
spastic_colon's picture

ummm....have'nt you heard, Obama has won

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:21 | 2792620 Aziz
Aziz's picture

Rombama won in a landslide.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:26 | 2792631 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

It's even tougher now than ever to be surrounded by morons.

Especially the RP kind.  Think ahead a few cycles, dips.  Is that so hard to ask?

As much as you think you are prepared for a collapse, you ain't.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:29 | 2792643 Michael
Michael's picture

I'm voting for President Barack Obama and voting against every currently sitting congress critter for revenge.

I hope nobody but me votes, so my vote is worth a lot more then yours.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:34 | 2792662 Surly Bear
Surly Bear's picture

Blah blah blah...what a stupid article...I'm voting for Obama

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:37 | 2792667 Pladizow
Pladizow's picture

"If voting changed anything, they would make it illegal." - Emma Goldman

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:27 | 2792861 r00t61
r00t61's picture

"Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:05 | 2792975 Dead Canary
Dead Canary's picture

"Those who don't learn their history, are forced to repeat it in summer school."

~ Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:20 | 2793017 GetZeeGold
GetZeeGold's picture



Never screw with someone named Buffy......if the bitch can carry the don't want none of that.


Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:46 | 2793102 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

I'm voting Libertarian.  I invite you to do likewise or write in Ron Paul.  I want the Republicans to see the votes they lost.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:07 | 2793168 Michael
Michael's picture

Now that's the spirit.

Revenge by any other name is still revenge.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 00:09 | 2793493 economics9698
economics9698's picture

Voting for Obama, you fucking serious?

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 01:28 | 2793590 Michael
Michael's picture

Just think of how bad it will make Reince Precum feel.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 03:21 | 2793689 Michael
Michael's picture

Tony Blair Appointed Senior Advisor to JPMorgan Chase

Tony Blair Confronted At Leveson Inquiry

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 04:30 | 2793739 Dead Canary
Dead Canary's picture

Obama or Romney. Same thing. Vote Ron Paul. Let the fools feel our wrath!

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:34 | 2793256 Overfed
Overfed's picture

Good idea. I want O'bomb-a at the helm when the wheels fly off this bitch. That muffugger can take all the credit.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 00:08 | 2793491 economics9698
economics9698's picture

When the shit dies let the Hispanics clean up on "my people" assholes who fucked up this country with their constant bitching and moaning.  Let the Hispanics clean up their neighborhoods.  

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 01:20 | 2793581 Nostradumbass
Nostradumbass's picture

When did the Presidenet ever slow down the handing over of money and power to the plutocracy?

Betcha can't name one of either party.

Voting is a useless distraction nowadays when the election can be decided by opaque electronic balloting software and a Supreme Court.

Not a (silver) dime's worth of difference between the two selected puppets now vying for the Oval Office at Terror Central.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:38 | 2792673 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture

There is no better alternative than democracy.

Miller is a maniac.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:06 | 2792761 LetThemEatRand
LetThemEatRand's picture

Miller -- like his hero Rand -- worships unelected men and women in sharp suits sitting in boardrooms making decisions for the masses.  He fancies himself one of the future boardroom leaders, when in reality he would be fetching coffee for some other asshole if his vision were ever realized.  He is an academic who hates academics and who holds everyone else to a different standard.  Because he's special.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:47 | 2793106 zerotohero
zerotohero's picture

Um hellooo - this ain't democracy - this is pure shit

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:00 | 2793348 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

Afghanistan is "pure shit" courtesy of amrka, which still has plenty of freefall left in it.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:35 | 2793431 Vidar
Vidar's picture

There certainly is: it's called capitalism. Democracy, and all other forms of stateism, is a sham used by the few in power to dominate the will of the masses as expressed in the free market.


Fri, 09/14/2012 - 00:05 | 2793487 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture

You are a lunatic.


If we gave up democracy and let power fall to whoever at that point had the most money to buy mercenaries we would have hell on earth.


You want warring feudal warlords. You are a maniac.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 01:34 | 2793598 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

Warring Warlords eh? Have you not looked around lately? That's the entire world, one country building Nukes to have dominance? One country invading others to prevent them from having nukes? It's like you people do not even think...


The US is a Feudal Warlord to everyone outside of the US. It's only the comfortable plebes within the country that think otherwise. 

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 16:59 | 2795943 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

You're right, it must be all the 'democracy' that's pushing that agenda. I know that's what I voted for!~sarc

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 01:58 | 2793622 Nostradumbass
Nostradumbass's picture

"If we gave up democracy and let power fall to whoever..."

So just WHOM has the "power" now? The citizens?


Fri, 09/14/2012 - 02:57 | 2793670 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture


Two morons replied to a rocksolid argument with libertardian religion and downvotes. Yet no counterargument.


Yes, abolishing all voted power and letting rich people amass warring mercenary armies battling over the ruins Mad max style is a great fucking idea. Abolishing all courts and law enforcement in New York City will be great. Because your libertard religion says so.


Fucking libertards. You believe anything you read in a fucking book.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 03:23 | 2793691 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Two morons replied to a rocksolid argument with libertardian religion and downvotes. Yet no counterargument.

It is the 'american' way. 'Americans' can not argue against 'americanism'.

They are cornered in propaganda and fantasy.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:30 | 2792646 Rakshas
Rakshas's picture

DIEBOLD RULES!!!!.....................................


errr........................... BITCHEZ!!!

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:31 | 2792651 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

I don't vote. Two reasons. First of all it's meaningless; this country was bought and sold a long time ago. The shit they shovel around every 4 years *pfff* doesn't mean a fucking thing. Secondly, I believe if you vote, you have no right to complain. People like to twist that around – they say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain', but where's the logic in that? If you vote and you elect dishonest, incompetent people into office who screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You caused the problem; you voted them in; you have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote, who in fact did not even leave the house on election day, am in no way responsible for what these people have done and have every right to complain about the mess you created that I had nothing to do with.”

“The next time they give you all that civic bullshit about voting, keep in mind that Hitler was elected in a full, free democratic election”"Now, there's one thing you might have noticed I don't complain about: politicians. Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here... like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There's a nice campaign slogan for somebody: 'The Public Sucks. Fuck Hope.'"

"I have solved this political dilemma in a very direct way: I don't vote. On Election Day, I stay home. I firmly believe that if you vote, you have no right to complain. Now, some people like to twist that around. They say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain,' but where's the logic in that? If you vote, and you elect dishonest, incompetent politicians, and they get into office and screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You voted them in. You caused the problem. You have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote -- who did not even leave the house on Election Day -- am in no way responsible for that these politicians have done and have every right to complain about the mess that you created."

George Carlin

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:51 | 2792720 ThisIsBob
ThisIsBob's picture

"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal."

  (Emma Goldman)

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:43 | 2792903 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture


they'd go to a digital computerized voting machine with zero paper trail

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:55 | 2792732 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

TG.  Keep it that way.  We'll tax you later.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:07 | 2792779 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

   keep in mind that Hitler was elected in a full, free democratic election

Well, guess that's close enough for the 'Murkin version of history...

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 01:36 | 2793600 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

What do the guilt tripped Germans teach something else? I just double checked, yep Hitler was elected into power before he seized the rest of it. 

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 14:25 | 2796166 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

He was appointed Chancellor over a coalition government by Hindenburg.  Saying he was elected in a fair and free election is like saying Ford was elected, or Bernanke was.

If someone came along and crowned Nancy Pelosi President, it would be intellectually dishonest to claim she was "elected," wouldn't it?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:38 | 2792672 Catullus
Catullus's picture

It was just stated otherwise. So, no, it doesn't count.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:39 | 2792680 Meesohaawnee
Meesohaawnee's picture

you are kidding.. right?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:41 | 2792684 defencev
defencev's picture

I agree. The "article" is a total rubbish. Only losers and suckers in real life do not see a difference between the vision of two candidates. A worthless loser will remain a loser no matter what is the outcome. For people who worked hard all their lives , there is a huge difference between economic freedom promoted by Romney and Marxist darkness offered by Obama.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:47 | 2792704 Dr. Sandi
Dr. Sandi's picture

Choose the lies you favor. They won't be honored after the election anyway.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:00 | 2792760 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Posts like this give me a real desire to see Romney elected.  Just for the chance to see comments from the same folks a few years later after nothing's changed.

Elsewhere, it's the same kind of crap from folks who still think there's a reason to elect Obama.


Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:14 | 2793194 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Just because it can't get better doesn't mean it can't get worse.....

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:18 | 2793207 nmewn
nmewn's picture

As an example, I'd rather burn it to the ground than to have it stolen.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:17 | 2793387 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture


The right didn't learn anything from electing a minimally conscious bushbaby.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:49 | 2793458 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Flakmeister, Anusocracy, and Mnewm--it's that rare moment I agree with all y'all. 

How's that for some kumbayah, bitchez!

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 02:04 | 2793591 Nostradumbass
Nostradumbass's picture



You are joking - right?



Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:56 | 2792738 Silver Bug
Silver Bug's picture

Ron Paul was the only real politician running. Now that he is out, the best thing you can do is sustain from voting.


Banzai7 Visual Combat Art

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:12 | 2792797 dark pools of soros
dark pools of soros's picture

He's not a politician, he's a patriot

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:40 | 2793276 dubbleoj
dubbleoj's picture

as carlin says, its the public that sucks. RP is legit, but cults of personality will never succeed or change the world, only the public can. 

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:50 | 2793315's picture

The public is not a creature which acts but one that is acted upon. Only the individual can think and plan and work and live.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 03:55 | 2793720 dubbleoj
dubbleoj's picture

absolutely. i say that in hopes of avoiding messianic worship, no matter how qualified RP may be. 

"Sorry boss, but there's only two men I trust. One of them's me. The other's not you. " Cameron Poe

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 03:20 | 2793688 amadeusb4
amadeusb4's picture

Why, because you don't know how to write him in?

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 05:16 | 2793761 dubbleoj
dubbleoj's picture

ever hear of jackson, lincoln, mckinley, garfield, kennedy, reagan? but you go ahead and write him in thinking hes gonna solve all your problems for you. ill write him in too because i think he can do a lot of good, but i prefer to do so knowing hes not some all-mighty superman who shits gold on my doorstep and slays bankers for me. ill get my own gold thanks. 

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:09 | 2792988 Axenolith
Axenolith's picture

The only elective way to change the system at the federal level is to garner "king maker" status in the house and senate by a 3rd party NOT CONCENTRATING ON THE FREAKING HIGHEST OFFICE and getting 20-30 house seats and a half dozen senate seats.  Additionally, the 3rd party that steps up has to QUIT NOMINATING PASTY LOOKING SUN HASN"T SHINED ON THEM FOR 10 YEARS CANDY ASSES and find some people to represent who at least LOOK like they can kick ass AND chew bubble gum.

And that isn't knocking Ron Paul either, he's an old guru dude.  I'm talking that loser Gary Johnson who appears to be libertarian only in as much as the label has the same letters in it as the word libertarian.  We had one like that in the Bay area, who ran against a sack of crap democrat that a 3rd grader could've beaten and there WASN'T a republican contender in the race.  The Libertarian could have cleaned house, but she wasn't an Libertarian, she actually espoused forcing employers to take temp workers on as permanent workers if they'd had a position for 6 months.  She spent NO money or effort in advertising or get-out-the-vote and STILL took approximately 29%!!!

WTF is it with Libertarianism being pretty close to the best political philosophy around but candidate wise they seem to attract an inordinant amount of plants?  It's to freakin' wierd, maybe they ARE all out to get us...

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:06 | 2793364 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

"Libertarianism" has as many "definitions" as it does folks who identify with the label.

which is fine, just define your label if you want to be taken seriously. . .

anyone who votes labels without investigating the beliefs behind the person adopting said label, is a tool.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 01:40 | 2793603 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

Which is exactly what Libertarianism is about, thinking for yourself. 

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 07:52 | 2793913 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture


Libertarianism is the denial of your obligation to other humans in the guise of praising liberty.....

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 14:02 | 2795966 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

YEah: OBLIGATION IS THE BANE OF FREEDOM! 'Responsibility'? That's for everyone else, not me.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:15 | 2792998 Axenolith
Axenolith's picture

Where is William?!?!


We need you to do us a Buzz Lightyear going ---



Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:22 | 2793024 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

Hear about Diebold?

Alaska, like some 24 states across the country, still uses the exact same system which was used to flip an entire mock election in Leon County, FL in such a way that only a manual hand-count of the paper ballots would have revealed that the results had been reversed after the machine's memory card was accessed and manipulated by a computer security expert. The haunting event was revealed in the climactic final scene of HBO's Emmy-nominated 2006 documentary Hacking Democracy. [The full scene is also embedded below.]

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:46 | 2793090 Haole
Haole's picture

SCYTL gives Diebold a run for it's money processing "votes", coming to a 2012 U.S. "election" near you.

Todos sus Diebolds son pertenecen a nosotros, perras.

Obama's second term was assured months ago in my humble opinion.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:08 | 2793368 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Sure voting counts: you get a winner.

What doesn't count is the outcome of that choice.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 02:44 | 2793660 putaipan
putaipan's picture

otherwise stated? ok-   When the winner gets less than 10%, but voter turn out is 80%+ then we will be the answer.

dont' vote! . if by "winner" you mean either one of these shills....Take your defeatist shit elsewhere.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:14 | 2792584 Tsar Pointless
Tsar Pointless's picture

C'mon, why so glum?

Greatest Country in the World, bitchez!

Freedom fries with a Big Gulp to go! Woo-hoo!

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:18 | 2792597 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Except in NYC.  That Marxist city has declared so.  Jeez, if people would just pay attention, we wouldn't be in this predicament.

Just read that Denninger moron.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:29 | 2792642 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Plus 16 ounces of bubbling freedom.

(Pssst, heh youz, over heayh. Could I interest you in some high quality 32oz washable cups?)

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:37 | 2792670 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Is amazing they neglected the 48oz Colt 45 bottles...


or is it 40oz under the new normal?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:12 | 2792792 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Nothing's been neglected, there's some kind of legalistic difference between fountain drinks from "restaurants" and bottles of beer-like substances from delis.

BTW: if you think Manhattan is "Marxist," you're fuckin' nuts.  The proles can't afford to live there--it's the last place in the world that the poor are going to rise up.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:52 | 2793320 Count de Money
Count de Money's picture

You're correct. Big Gulps are still legal because 7-11's are classified as grocery stores. And how can they stop you getting a free refill? And at a self-serve place, what if you tell the person at the counter you're drinking diet. Then get a big cup and fill with what you want.

As for the people in Manhattan, I would call them Champagne Marxists.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:50 | 2793461 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Champagne Marxists?  Yes, but that's only the occasional idealist...most of 'em are too busy looking for a better apartment to worrry about the theory.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:22 | 2793227 piceridu
piceridu's picture

Rumor has it that Homeland Security will be setting up the usual check points...does SS sound familiar?...: Soda Sizer 

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 09:47 | 2794469 pops
pops's picture

Doesn't apply to "diet" drinks.  So you can still get your supersize on, but you gotta commit slow suicide and make Rumsfeld smile while swilling his aspartame while you do it.




Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:15 | 2792589 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Morons don't know how or where to vote, hence Libs hiring busses.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:41 | 2792686 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

The Moron Church will tell them how to vote.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:56 | 2792737 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture


Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:03 | 2792770 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture


Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:17 | 2792594 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 My "Chi" was zapped hours ago! fade the Draghi/Bernanki "PUT"!

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:20 | 2792605 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

So sorry, my HL was soo happy, I doubled down.

Gave up on Fx, after my hit on AUD months ago.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:54 | 2792730 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 That May swoon to 95/ Yes I got hurt on that as well.  A little secret. HEDGE AUD/USD AGAINST AUD/JPY.

  You won't regret it. Use a 30 pip s/l on either side.  Personally I have been doing good with GBP/AUD. it's expensive but 'very' profitable. Just keep an eye on "liquidity"!

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:58 | 2792745 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Actually, I shorted in front of that Chink PMI.

It was a drunken stupor major win.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:08 | 2792778 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 "ilike" ya for free! there is the new/old AAPL slogan?  Good on ya roadsnbridges.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:17 | 2792596 Freewheelin Franklin
Freewheelin Franklin's picture

I was going to post a long quote by Lysander Spooner. Instead, I'll just say, that if you feel you must vote, vote third party. If you lean left, vote for Jill Stein, and if you lean right, vote for Gary Johnson, if nothing more than to say, "fuck you, I ain't happy with this shit", to TPTB.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:27 | 2792622 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Then why vote?  You won't even be reported by anyone other than maybe Beck.

Be a dip, don't vote.  Means you are happy with the Kenyan.  Know Pharsi yet?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:29 | 2792641 fuu
fuu's picture

Hi vic!

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:32 | 2792653 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

I ain't vic.  I'm mynhair.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:38 | 2792675 fuu
fuu's picture

Oops, my bad.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:41 | 2792690 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

No prob.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:54 | 2793327's picture

Where's the kitty?

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 02:29 | 2793647 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

Above you playing with Unicorns.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 01:51 | 2793616 Colonel Klink
Colonel Klink's picture

Holy shit how many lives do you have.  Use to watch you appear and disappear on MW for years.

I see you've gone from pussy to skittle shitting unicorn.

The day Ted Kennedy died I tore up Marketwatch as Teddy K.  Errah, has anyone heard of the Kennedy triathalon?

It's driving, swimming, and running!

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:16 | 2792809 Freewheelin Franklin
Freewheelin Franklin's picture

Then why vote?



Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:57 | 2793336's picture

Money will get you through times of no voting better than voting will get you through times of no money.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:20 | 2792608 Meremortal
Meremortal's picture

One candidate at least thinks like an American. I'll vote for him, just for old times sake.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:45 | 2792695 optimator
optimator's picture

I've voted for the Doctor before, really feels great coming out of the voting booth.  With paper ballots it will lots more fun with that magic marker, being able to write a short missive.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:48 | 2792709 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Which candidate is that, the one that's owned by the bankers or the one that's one of the bankers?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:50 | 2792712 Dr. Sandi
Dr. Sandi's picture

They ALL think like an American.

Most Americans aren't honest enough with themselves to acknowledge that they like rifling through their neighbors' pockets for free money.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 05:39 | 2793771 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

One candidate at least thinks like an American.


The group is all, the group is all.

Signed: an American.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:25 | 2792630 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

Generals gathered in their masses, just like witches at black masses. Evil minds that plot destruction, sorcerers of death's construction. In the fields the bodies burning, as the war machine keeps turning... [/war pigs]

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:29 | 2792639 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Can't we be just satisfied with burning Libs at the stake?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:39 | 2792683 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"Progressives" at the stake...I'm liberal in a lot of ways.

Its time to reclaim the term Liberal.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:51 | 2792718 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Good luck.  They destroyed the democratic party.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:59 | 2792753 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

"Its time to reclaim the term Liberal."

Honorable discourse, reasoned argument, the ability to restate your supposed antagonist's point of view before you can honorably state your own view? ?? ??? oh nvm

otoh, I think that the progressive-->liberal-->progressive douchebags have so smeared the category of "liberal" (and especially Lackoff rhymes with...} that the term could not re-enter any normal/civilized conversation again.  Way too polluted.

Mortimer Adler and the sainted and long-lost Chicago Great Books movement are rolling in their graves.  fucking chicago teachers' strike is the opposite of all of those ideals, perverted as they were.  Killing kids chances with the prospects of any reasonable/modern advancement.  bastards.

- Ned

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:06 | 2792979 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Honorably accepted ;-)

A Liberal (a traditional Liberal) does not use the power of the state to assert his will on those around him.

It is a relatively new phenomenon where a Liberal is associated with a socialist which is a "progessive" in my book. I know why it was done and to good purpose but it is factually wrong. Liberals should (and real Liberals do) despise the the idea of permitting anyone or anything to control themselves, unless its voluntarily on their part.

The examples of "liberalism" we see today (teachers betraying children for a price, state funded birth control, gun control, big gulp control etc. ad nauseum) are not Liberal.

It springs from national socialism...which is decidely un-Liberal. It is the thing they protest the loudest about because they can't bring themselves to recognize it in themselves.

They are not Liberal...they are "liberal" (small L)...that is "progressive"...meaning national socialists and deep down, they know it.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:35 | 2793054 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

you just go on and on and on and on bloviating regardless of reality 'til you foam at the mouth and fall over backwards, don't you


ad nauseum indeed

tell me that fantasy of yours again where wealth isn't power, at least that was entertaining.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:13 | 2793113 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Did you junk me?

Do you have a problem with me reclaiming what a real Liberal is?


Well dickweed?

Do you have a problem with >>>me reclaiming<<< what a real Liberal is?

Fucking terrifying for you isn't it? ;-)

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:22 | 2793230 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

from where I sit the only thing you seem to be adept at reclaiming is bull fæces

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:54 | 2793328 nmewn
nmewn's picture

You are hardly worth my time or effort, being the myopic socialist windbag that you are...but I will ask you THE ONE AND ONLY question that terrifies you the most...again.

What is your problem with libertarians (and the like minded people) reclaiming the mantle of Liberal as their own?

Liberal has never meant socialism. It has never meant envy. It has never meant elitism. It has never meant confiscation of rights, property or liberty by the state. It has never meant FORCE.

I look Forward to reading your bull feces in the morning.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:02 | 2793350's picture

I love the smell of bull feces in the morning, it smells like... Come to think of it I don't care for the smell of bull feces in the morning at all.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:33 | 2793427 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Beats the breath of a fat cow.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 01:54 | 2793618 Colonel Klink
Colonel Klink's picture

Did someone mention Janet Nepolitano?

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 13:52 | 2795900 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Madeleine Albright?

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 03:07 | 2793625 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

Oh goodness gracious gravy yes, I am so very very very very very very scared.. of the what now? You making an ass of yourself yet again by obtusely misapprehending, misrepresenting and misconstruing another idea? Well you can just relax over there nmewn, I think I'll be ok, honest. Go for it!

Project much?

I mean as far as a 'one and only question that gives someone the heebie jeebies' goes you practically faint to avoid answering this one:  How is wealth not power? What's that? SPEAK UP, man. Say, how is wealth not power, anyway? Have you heard that wealth isn't power? I have, right here on ZH somebody made that claim... I would dearly love to see them try to support it. Especially seeing as if they don't their hollow philosophy implodes into irrelevance under the weight of its own self serving hubris...

"Liberal has never meant socialism. It has never meant envy. It has never meant elitism. It has never meant confiscation of rights, property or liberty by the state. It has never meant FORCE."

Wait, so now you're asserting that by definition Liberals can't experience envy? And what you call 'socialism' is all about it? Well to be fair, you imply socialism is about that and elitism and confiscation of life, liberty and the merican way, and statism, and the total annihilation of private property rights, etc. etc. Of course you know full well that very little of what you claim here, there, and everywhere about that particular ideology is true, as in the past I have repeatedly provided excellent examples contradicting your vain inanities regarding it. But then no facts, examples, or line of reasoning, no matter how solid or easily verified are of any consequence to you, are they nmewn? Not unless they serve your self serving purposes. Note: To obfuscate my point, be sure to jump all over any irrelevant but deliberate inaccuracies I have made in the way I've deconstructed your insipid, false assumption loaded question. If you're having trouble with that have CrockettA or one of the other echochambermaidens show you how it's done.

And then there is the reality in stark contrast to your constant indoctrinated babbling:

“The newspapers said we were going to socialize everything, that the government would own the farms, the corner store, the barber-shop, and the beauty parlor, and that everybody would be working for the state. When that didn't happen, they had to give some explanation. So the explanation was that we had betrayed our principles, we were no longer Socialists and we were now reactionaries, having departed from our original ideals. In effect, we were now traitors, because we didn't do the horrible things they promised we would. They had built up a straw man and now they were knocking it down.”-T Douglas

Hey, that sounds just like you and yours' MO! Amazing!

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 06:26 | 2793786 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Freshly piled fecal matter in the morning...when you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

If wealth is power, why are most nations broke...but you meant personal wealth didn't you? So, clearly the thing to do is have government confiscate all personal wealth, because they've done such a marvelous job of vaporizing the wealth they've already extracted and/or been entrusted with. As shown by, you know, these very nations being dead ass broke.

Fucking doofus.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 13:27 | 2795722 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

"If wealth is power, why are most nations broke?" 

Hunh?  If wealth isn't power, why are most nations broke? See what I did there? You essentially asked, "If wealth is power, why are most nations without wealth?" But I'll humour you with an answer to the second clause of another one of your famously loaded questions: Ruthless Financial Warfare propagated by the likes of you and yours. RE: Iceland.

"... you meant personal wealth didn't you?"

 no, I wasn't referring only to 'personal' wealth, I simply meant wealth, just like I said. It's really a very straightforward question that you are so intent on evading, likely because everything you stand for hinges on doing so.

"So, clearly the thing to do is have government confiscate all personal wealth, because they've done such a marvelous job of vaporizing the wealth they've already extracted and/or been entrusted with. "

Well there you go again, pushing your hand way up my ass in an another attempt to reach my jaw and work it for your own ends. Those are your trumped-up jumped-to conclusions, not mine.  What I've been trying to do is help you to develop an actual understanding of the long list of 'known falses' that you insist on constantly spewing as if they were immutable axioms, in the faint hope that you might become aware of the inherent hypocrisy and destructive nature of what you espouse in doing so. Don't fret, regardless of how glaringly obvious it should be to you by now, I'm not holding my breath in anticipation of you experiencing an epiphany or anything. 

 "As shown by, you know, these very nations being dead ass broke." Again: Hunh? I've 'shown' no such thing. What you consider some of the most 'socialist' nations on the planet, and I have brought forward as prime examples of successfully implemented mixed economies, are (or were in the case of the historical examples) in the top tier of the those few nations on that planet that aren't  'broke', even by any stretch of your limited imagination.

So here we are, and you still haven't actually answered my question regarding wealth/power, you've just failed miserably in another attempt to obfuscate it. What a shock.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 19:06 | 2797392 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Your initial quote, where you tried to divert an otherwise pleasant conversation from what a Liberal your diversion of wealth = power.

"...tell me that fantasy of yours again where wealth isn't power..."

You have postulated that wealth IS power. That was your first mistake. When I query you on who's wealth you begin chasing your tail like a wit...

"... you meant personal wealth didn't you?"

no, I wasn't referring only to 'personal' wealth, I simply meant wealth, just like I said. It's really a very straightforward question that you are so intent on evading, likely because everything you stand for hinges on doing so."

I'm evading nothing, you are and always do.

Now you're saying wealth (in general) is power...apparently. Clearly, I'm conversing with someone in an insane asylum somewhere in the outback with internet access. But I'll play along for just one more make it good.

So now tell me...what do you consider this nebulus thing you're trying to describe as "wealth"? Is it just having more possessions or money than your neighbor? A dollar more, ten more, a thousand, a million? A larger house, car, boat, a plane, more food...what?

You will have to define wealth before you can calculate its power, don't you? (leaving aside you're a half wit, it still needs to be answered by you, who brought it up) I can't do that for you.

 "As shown by, you know, these very nations being dead ass broke." Again: Hunh? I've 'shown' no such thing. What you consider some of the most 'socialist' nations on the planet, and I have brought forward as prime examples of successfully implemented mixed economies, are (or were in the case of the historical examples) in the top tier of the those few nations on that planet that aren't 'broke', even by any stretch of your limited imagination."

If you're referencing Sweden as one of your utopian "mixed economies", I have zero desire to support the King of Sweden's family in the lifestyle he's become accustomed to, by absorbing massive, confiscatory taxation on my labor and then again on whatever I buy with whats left over after those taxes. Monarchs and their families are, for all practical purposes...welfare kings & queens.

But now we've come full circle have some weird belief that economies should be guided, by some benevolent dictator class of regulatory beings I suspect, which goes against human nature itself, upon their assumption of power without much "personal" wealth at all, they begin picking winners & losers for its percieved good for society as they see it or for their own wealth creation, instead of just enforcing the rules.

You're up...

Sat, 09/15/2012 - 01:28 | 2798039 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

"Your initial quote, where you tried to divert an otherwise pleasant conversation from what a Liberal is..."

It's plain you find your public mental masturbation pleasant, I don't. It disgusts me when you attempt to drag the same concepts through the mud over and over again, ad nauseum, despite being corrected as often as I catch you doing it.

You can feign ignorance all you wish,  but I am sure you are aware this conversation goes back much farther than just this thread, to a previous discussion of ours where you just 'couldn't bring yourself to accept that wealth is power'. If you are unable to recall why: don't worry because I do. But if your memory really is that short allow me to refresh it with the response I gave:

It doesn't matter that you can't accept it, it's reality. I think I see your problem...

And that was that; I haven't checked in awhile, though I'm pretty certain the conversation ended right there. But now I've forced your hand so you can't evade the matter any longer if you expect anyone serious to take you seriously ever again. Excellent.

 No surprise that you want to start circumlocuting by obtusely niggling over semantics; par for the course. Suits me as I already have your number on that one: During the course of our previous conversation, it was well established that the subject was wealth in a form that could be transferred from one person to another. Eg. by inheritance. There, definitions all done. You ok with the words "is" and "power"? or do we need to delve into any ambiguities you are scheming to employ for deflecting there too? Any bells ringing yet? If not, prepare yourself, yours is about to be rung again.

Ballz back in yer court... earn it, you're the absolutist meritocrat, after all.


"If you're referencing Sweden as one of your utopian "mixed economies", I have zero desire to support the King of Sweden's family in the lifestyle he's become accustomed to, by absorbing massive, confiscatory taxation on my labor and then again on whatever I buy with whats left over after those taxes. Monarchs and their families are, for all practical purposes...welfare kings & queens."

Sure, great, Sweden is an excellent example. I have never referred to it as a utopia, of course, but then that's just you speaking for me unasked and unwanted, as you are wont to do; like anywhere else the Swedes have their problems, but an egregious national debt isn't one. The people of that nation have been whittling away at the powers of the Monarchy since the 18th century. They are now little more than powerless ceremonial figureheads that the Swedes voluntarily tolerate/support for their own amusement, one of the perks of having a national balance sheet in the black. IE it's the peoples' choice, and the Throne don't dictate or guide squat; the Monarch is the people's subject, not their leader. I'm sure there are some Swedes that don't like paying for it, but nobody beheads them if they voice that opinion. No 'Patriot Acts' there, their constitution holds. You like echochambermaidens, Swedes like Princesses. Tax rates are high, but so is everything else that matters to those of us who would rather exist in the real world; important items like income, civil rights, access to world class health care and education, potable water, socioeconomic mobility, transparent gov't that does what it is paid to do or gets shown the door, etc, etc.

So, is that another of your misconceptions cleared up for you then? Or let me guess, you decided long before you even read this comment that you're were going to remain obdurate, regardless.


"But now we've come full circle have some weird belief that economies should be guided, by some benevolent dictator class of regulatory beings I suspect, which goes against human nature itself, upon their assumption of power without much "personal" wealth at all, they begin picking winners & losers for its percieved good for society as they see it or for their own wealth creation, instead of just enforcing the rules."

 Wow, that one was so choco-block full of previously debunked presumptions and misrepresentations (shocked I am , shocked I tell you!) that I am at a loss as to where to start...

you have some weird belief that economies should be guided, by some benevolent dictator class of regulatory beings..."

 I most certainly do not believe anything of the sort, how blithely ignorant of you to argue I would. I don't like 'dictators', I like elected representatives who are competent in the task that I'm paying them to perform. They are my employees, so I expect nothing less. So any that

"... begin picking winners & losers for its percieved good for society as they see it or for their own wealth creation, instead of just enforcing the rules.."

are worthy of the boot, in my book. All clear on that one now too?

"...upon their assumption of power without much "personal" wealth at all...

I found this the most interesting bit in your entire comment, but I'm not sure I get your implication exactly, and as I certainly don't want to be accused of taking it out of context, I am obligated to ask: are you actually suggesting that only those with what you would consider a 'just' amount of personal wealth on hand are fit to govern?


Sat, 09/15/2012 - 10:55 | 2798495 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"Eg. by inheritance. There, definitions all done."

Its like pulling a healthy tooth with you isn't it? And I notice you did not include the link to our past conversation, I wonder why? ;-)

Be that as it may, now that you've bobbed/weaved/danced around what you consider "wealth" it comes down to monetary inheritance that you really have a problem with. You again, provide no number attached to this inheritance which is what I was trying to deduce from your chasing your tail around...and you still have not. Is it a dollar more than your neighbor or a million dollars more?

Lets just say its a million for the sake of argument/debate...and step outside the bounds of reality that it has already been taxed once upon earning, by government itself, therefore, any debt to society has already been paid at earning.

Who gets to divy it up, where will it go and to what pupose? You want some governmental body/board to do it don't you? Who picks this board or is it elected? How are the candidates chosen? Their friends and relatives will have to be investigated to assure that a member doesn't parcel out "societies" new found wealth improperly (see cronyism)...greed and avarice attach to humans...not institutions.

And the billionaire land owner who has no cash whatsover to speak of (or under the magical one million dollar cash theshold) what of him on this slippery slope to communal living in hell for all? Does the state/board seize some or all of his property upon death? And sell it to whom in order to raise a monetary figure for the public coffers? If there is no "wealth" who buys it?


"...upon their assumption of power without much "personal" wealth at all...

I found this the most interesting bit in your entire comment, but I'm not sure I get your implication exactly, and as I certainly don't want to be accused of taking it out of context, I am obligated to ask: are you actually suggesting that only those with what you would consider a 'just' amount of personal wealth on hand are fit to govern?"


I was talking about those stupid board members of yours that would have to be appointed/elected to steal, ahem, re-distribute anothers wealth. We have them now already and it wouldn't stop...again, greed & avarice is a human condition. Its called patronage and leads back to what I'm saying above.

If the wife or nephew or friend has one of these board members in their pocket, the board member can take a small salary (obviously from Mr.Rich Guys estate above) and nephew/friend will feed him, provide refreshments, entertainment (whatever) knowing Mr.Board Member will in turn take care of him in like fashion with Mr.Rich Guys (now soceties) wealth.

As another aside, in this new land of state mandated "wealth equality" without merit, wealth becomes a smaller number descriptor for all until we find the laptop you're reading this on is subject to confiscation upon your death. Of course, you will have no use for would be dead...but your wife or children might.

Sun, 09/16/2012 - 17:30 | 2800845 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

You dance like Elaine from Seinfeld.

"Its like pulling a healthy tooth with you isn't it? "

 What, getting me to allow you to put your hand up my ass far enough to work me like a muppet? You can bet your fat head it is. Dream on.

And I notice you did not include the link to our past conversation, I wonder why? "

How patently disingenuous of you, but I confess that omission was laziness on my part. I was tired. It's worth noting that you haven't bothered to include any links to it yourself,  though I certainly don't wonder why at all....Oh right, you have great memory, it's just really freaking short; how convenient. Well here then, REFRESH IT:

The irrelevant 'numbers' to which you refer indicate nada more than the order of magnitude; other than that they have nothing to do with the principle (wealth is power) that we are talking about. Contrary to all your wishful thinking and blustering circumlocution, this is not in any way some envious, covetous, or otherwise blasphemous argument concerning how much wealth I'll have remaining in my name when I die compared to you or anyone else.

This is just about you and your self-serving hypocrisy, and you know it. Try not to be too flattered, that wasn't meant as a compliment.

"... it comes down to monetary inheritance that you really have a problem with"

No, as the 'absolute meritocrat' in the room (well, apparently 'absolute' up to the point where you might have to make a personal sacrifice for your principle, at which point you revert to bellum omnium contra omnes faster than a chain smoking Ayn Rand signs up, under another name, for medicaid to pay for lung cancer treatments) that's your paradox to rationalize, not mine.

So brushing away all the presumptive foregone conclusions (do they represent a tacit capitualtion on your part regarding 'wealth is power'?) that make up the lion's share of your comment, as per usual, let's get this thread back to the actual subject being scrutinized, the only shred of which is to be found in your 'aside', however beside the actual point it is:

"Of course, you will have no use for it (wealth) would be dead...but your wife or children might."

Wow, you figure? But that hardly answers the question I put to you.  The question I put to you regarding  that platitude in the previous thread, and you eventually got 'round to figuring out you couldn't deny the answer is 'no' to, was:

Has the recipient of an inheritance earned  that wealth?

So, now that you're all caught up, again, will you just drop doing that ridiculous Benes Shuffle of yours and answer the fucking question already so that we can get on with this:

In what way is wealth not power?

You're obviously having trouble here, it's like you're desperate for this conversation to remain mired in the mud for some reason (that I've outlined repeatedly). So why not get one of the fluffers to lend you a hand? Or does the question stop them dead in their tracks as quickly as it does you?

Cue 'deer in headlights' image.


Sun, 09/16/2012 - 17:38 | 2801345 akak
akak's picture

I was forced to reply here just to prevent your incessant, shameless and narcissistic bumping of your own bullshit post.  Your arrogance and ignorance are only exceeded by your laughable sophistry and preening.

Sun, 09/16/2012 - 17:53 | 2801369 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

Just trying to make sure you lot earn it! But at least you admit you didn't drop in with anything relevant to add, you ungulate in the photons you. Good on ya!

Thanks for another grin 'kak, you're a peach!


Sun, 09/16/2012 - 19:27 | 2801546 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Classic GoFigger post...chasing your own tail around expecting a meal at someone elses

"Has the recipient of an inheritance earned that wealth?"

I've already said no they haven't (on more than one occassion) and that it doesn't matter one wit. It has nothing to do with your perception of merit or earning, it has everything to do with the deceased perception of merit. If the deceased has said this portion will go here and that portion will go there its no concern of mine or yours. Its his or hers...not yours or mine.

And you stll will not place a dollar figure on it GoFigger...because you know it a slippery slope downward...down to 200k here in the states junior. You're also afraid of getting tied down to that number...I wasn''re being deceptive. Just like your afraid of me reclaiming Liberal.

But it doesn't matter as your corresponding question of wealth equalling power is also your perception of a false choice. It is not...not even remotely.

I have already said, character and integrity is what matters...not wealth. I have known wealthy with impeccable character & generosity and then some real miserly assholes. Both characteristics appeared in them even though they were all wealthy. I have also known some poor get-r-dones who should be sainted for their good works and others who I wouldn't piss on if they were writhing in agony on fire at my feet. It was the same, they were poor (relative to the above) some were flawed individuals others were not.

Wealth does not equal power just as poverty does not equal being powerless.

You're kinda hung up on other peoples wealth and/or inheritance aren't you? You must have been cut out of a "rich" uncles will because you didn't merit (in his eyes) one single nickel of his earnings.

Seems like he was a man of keen insight ;-)

Thu, 09/20/2012 - 02:41 | 2813750 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

Leave my family out of this, if you don't mind. I was saving coming back here in hopes you might have something interesting, but all I get is the standard derogatory wishful thinking and:

"I have already said, character and integrity is what matters...not wealth

But character and integrity are why wealth does matter, especially with regards to how it is obtained.

"Wealth does not equal power just as poverty does not equal being powerless."

No, but there's a sliding scale between the two. One extreme: death by poverty. The other: death by hedonism (guessing), or mb during transplant surgery at 110 years old.

Tex, none of these rationalizations, circumlocutions, 'must bees' and other misconceptions of yours illustrate that wealth isn't power. Not one.

Not sure what it's like behind that screen door you refuse pass through, but outside of it I've seen plenty of 'character and integrity' get trumped by power, regardless of how much those qualities may matter to you or anyone else.

So now we're right back to:

 Wealth is power; you don't have to accept it, it's reality. I think that I see your problem.

And that's obviously exactly where you want this to stay.  I know precisely why.

As for reclaiming 'Liberal', I repeat: why on earth would I object? Be my guest!

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:50 | 2792716 Dr. Sandi
Dr. Sandi's picture

Only if we use Cons as the firewood, for a fair and balanced reign of terror.


Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:52 | 2792726 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Bet Boner would burn brightly.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:58 | 2792747 HelluvaEngineer
HelluvaEngineer's picture

Black Sabbath FTMFW!

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:32 | 2793055 Axenolith
Axenolith's picture

Shit, only 7 thumbs up so far for War Pigs???  What, is this forum filled with lite/emo rock listening pansies?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:22 | 2793397 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

Mark Lanegan Band ~ Blues Funeral

whole album to listen to, loud.  have at it.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:32 | 2792654 q99x2
q99x2's picture

Not only that but the US is using voting machines that have been outlawed in Germany and Ireland.

What the hell is taking the revolution so long?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:34 | 2792661 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Why worry about voting machines while you only have to prove who you are to buy beer?


Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:40 | 2792685 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

Those top comments prove my point.  I love it.

Morons rule!  At least on ZH.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:53 | 2792728 spastic_colon
spastic_colon's picture

when you play into the hands of sarcasm; who is the moron?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 21:26 | 2793038 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture


Where's the bozo button?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:26 | 2793406 Cathartes Aura
Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:42 | 2792689 Democratic koolaid
Democratic koolaid's picture

Democrats are Comunists.

voter fraud in Arizon "the whole Arizona Cardinals were registerd and voted togehter"

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:45 | 2792698 The Fonz...befo...
The Fonz...before shark jump's picture

I agree with everything except I use the term "chumps" as opposed to saps

It's not the people that vote that count it's the people who count the votes

Joe Steel (aka Stalin)

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:57 | 2792719 crusty curmudgeon
crusty curmudgeon's picture

I know're from Happy Days!  Must be after the jumping of the shark days.

“If pigs could vote, the man with the slop bucket would be elected swineherd every time, no matter how much slaughtering he did on the side.” Orson Scott Card

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:00 | 2792759 The Fonz...befo...
The Fonz...before shark jump's picture

HAha and you're a very recent homer Simpson...

But great quote thank you...

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:48 | 2792710 roadsnbridges
roadsnbridges's picture

I just luv how so many RP idiots on here do not understand election cycles, and want it all now.

Ain't gonna happen, just because of you.  It's a process you diks don't comprehend, or are unable to comprehend,  Go ahead and vote the Kenyan.  Just remember to save the last bullet for yourself, otherwise those Muslims will crucify you on a cross.  Wake the F up.

Fri, 09/14/2012 - 06:58 | 2793816 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

"When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
Go, go, go like a soldier,
So-oldier ~of~ the Queen!"

- Kipling

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:52 | 2792725 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

A long rehash of stuff most of the regulars here have long known, but it's a mistake to believe in vast hordes of "boobus Americanus."

Take a look at voter turnout.  Take a look at political involvement by ANY measure.  Most folks really aren't fooled--it doesn't take a genius like Miller to figure it out.  Heh.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:57 | 2792741 Catullus
Catullus's picture

The only downside I see to not voting is that jury duty rolls are created by voting. So as intelligence people stop voting, what is left is this group of complete dipshits that will end up deciding your fate on jury. Those dipshits are the same people who believe the garbage that comes out of a prosecutor's or judge's (most likely a former prosecutor) face.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:50 | 2792929 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

not true

i always vote, never get called for jury duty

wife never votes and often does jury duty

3rd party for the muther fucking win( /sarc kinda...they dont win but i do kinda i fuck it why vote)

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:23 | 2793400 pods
pods's picture

Well Amerikans have been bred to "appeal to authority."

I love jury duty. 

Not only do I get to judge the case, I get to judge the law.


Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:58 | 2792748 alphazero
alphazero's picture

Optimism is a pervasive disease of miscalibration and hope, motivating human endeavor of the impossible and highly improbable. “Hope is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of our greatest strength, and our greatest weakness.” Optimistically, but futilely, so many attempt to subvert the inexorable laws of nature (the impossible), yet dare not challenge the fabricated laws of man (the improbable). Most frantically flap their arms in vain, as if to defy gravity, rather than simply stray from a beaten path. Whereas the former requires lunacy, the latter – cognition and a simple exercise of free will.

It’s a matter of choice. Consent to anything but natural law, either explicit or implicit, is strictly voluntary; therefore, as The Declaration of Independence states, “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”. The State typically enforces obedience to man’s law (positive law) by threat of violence, the propagandizing of social norms, patriotic brainwashing, and deception. As I have never consented to be governed, nor signed any social contract, nor particularly care for the social palatability of my behavior, my choices are solely dictated by personal sensibility and the probability of adverse consequence.

Man has an inherent desire for free will and self-determination, whereas the State wishes to limit and destroy the exercise thereof. The State views men as nothing more than sedated subjects of a controlled social experiment – lab rats to be subtlety enticed through a maze, forever too preoccupied with what may be around the next corner to consider either the design of the experiment or their handlers.

Goethe once said, “None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free.” Restated, none are so hopelessly controlled as those without the awareness of choice. The construct of a false dichotomy is a logical fallacy intended to manufacture consent to the powers that be, by preventing the realization of a true alternative. It is particularly effective, as the subjects wrongly believe they have exercised free will and a degree of self-determination. Lysander Spooner wrote, “A man is nonetheless a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.”

It is the privileged few that select the candidates for an election, and thus create and preserve the false dichotomy. Media propaganda, legalism, and/or election process microstructure exclude popular grassroots candidates from consideration. However, consider the 1912 Presidential election where there may have been a real choice – Taft versus Wilson. Taft was more popular than his Democratic rival. Roosevelt entered the race, thereby splitting Taft’s vote, and Wilson won the Presidency, garnering less than 42% of the popular vote, though Taft and Roosevelt combined for over 50%. Wilson soon after signed the Federal Reserve Act into law. Rather than believe the system is broken, consider it perfected. There are other voting methods that would remedy this sort of triparty gamesmanship, but none will be adopted, for this is a fail-safe for those charged with creating the false dilemma. Furthermore, with secret balloting it matters not who votes, but who counts the votes.

Consider the current deplorable state of the State and the 2-party system, which is analogous to the following:

A two-headed coin is tossed and u can only bet on tails. Are you going to play that game?

Some will reply,” I am merely choosing the lesser of 2 evils”, but is that not similarly analogous to the following:

Two rival state-sanctioned criminal gangs are vying for your membership. Do you volunteer for initiation?

Of course, the true alternative is to simply abstain from voting. Participation in this sort of political charade encourages bad behavior, endorses the outcome of a logical fallacy, and provides a mandate to a dictator masquerading as a public “servant”.

Some will now retort, “If you don’t vote, you can’t complain”, which is yet another logical fallacy, as it is THEY who collectively endorse a false dilemma and choose their King. Take responsibility for your action and realize I had nothing to do with it.

To which they might reply, “It may not be a perfect system, but it’s still the best one there is.”

And then, with exasperation comes their last line of defense – “You can’t change the world.”

To which I reply, “Perhaps I am an optimist. I place my hope neither in the subversion of nature, nor a man-made logical fallacy, but in a true alternative. Rather than an inexorable law of nature, this false dilemma is a fabricated law of man, and its abolition not impossible, but merely improbable.”

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 20:52 | 2792933 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

wish and hope in one hand

shit in the other

see which gets full faster

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 22:00 | 2793149 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

I wished and hoped that BB would eviscerate the USD today and fill my holdings with value, and since I ate all that Wenslydale things aren't exactly motoring where the sun don' .... oh nm, here we go;

Wait, what was the second thing I am supposed to do again?

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 23:36 | 2793433 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture


Two rival state-sanctioned criminal gangs are vying for your membership. Do you volunteer for initiation?

Of course, the true alternative is to simply abstain from voting. Participation in this sort of political charade encourages bad behavior, endorses the outcome of a logical fallacy, and provides a mandate to a dictator masquerading as a public “servant”.

"voting" merely encourages one's mind to believe in a "choice" and that voting will influence an outcome.  anyone in amrka that still believes a "vote" matters in any way, at this stage of the game, isn't paying attention, nor letting themselves acknowledge the obvious truths.

which is fine, but doesn't mean a thing beyond chatter.

Thu, 09/13/2012 - 19:59 | 2792751 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

I'm voting for the guy that's going to prosecute the real perpetrators of 9/11.   As soon as I figure out who that is.

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