Printable View
Blackshirt.
If you can put rightwing leftwing politics aside for just a few minutes and read the link below, maybe you will understand where I'm coming from. The link is a couple of weeks old and it's from CNN, so it should be on the approved reading list. As I said before this is not a left right issue.
Syria allies: Why Russia, Iran and China are standing by the regime.
[URL]http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/29/world/meast/syria-iran-china-russia-supporters/index.html[/URL]
[QUOTE=Punter127;435665]Blackshirt.
If you can put rightwing leftwing politics aside for just a few minutes and read the link below, maybe you will understand where I'm coming from. The link is a couple of weeks old and it's from CNN, so it should be on the approved reading list. As I said before this is not a left right issue.
Syria allies: Why Russia, Iran and China are standing by the regime.
[URL]http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/29/world/meast/syria-iran-china-russia-supporters/index.html[/URL][/QUOTE]And there is nothing new for me. Syria is a proxy of Iran, and of course, Russia consider the whole Middle East their sphere of influence. China is driven by oil interests, as is the US with Israel / Palestine being the side issue for now.
I have not seen you comment on Obama's poker playing strategy here at all. He has domestic as well as international agendas here with multiple implications and side shows. He hasn't gone all-in yet, so why are you screaming so much. You just consider him a simpleton, a guy who can't even put on his pants right. And so your comments are always driven by whatever Obama do or say. You automatically take the other side.
With reservation, I gave Bush moral support for 6 years, hoping that he was right and I was wrong. He was after all, the Commander-in-Chief. And on this forum, I just try balance the scales against the Gang of 5,6,7,8? Very loud & obnoxious. You know, the Gang that couldn't Shoot Straight.
[QUOTE=BlackShirt;435676]
I have not seen you comment on Obama's poker playing strategy here at all. He has domestic as well as international agendas here with multiple implications and side shows. He hasn't gone all-in yet, so why are you screaming so much. You just consider him a simpleton, a guy who can't even put on his pants right. And so your comments are always driven by whatever Obama do or say. You automatically take the other side.
With reservation, I gave Bush moral support for 6 years, hoping that he was right and I was wrong. He was after all, the Commander-in-Chief. And on this forum, I just try balance the scales against the Gang of 5,6,7,8? Very loud & obnoxious. You know, the Gang that couldn't Shoot Straight.[/QUOTE]Just as I predicted, you are changing your position on Syria to whatever Obama's position is. I thought Bush was a genius, that he was going to get the Iraqi's to open the country up to WMD inspections again without having to spill blood, right until the moment when he entered the country. What a let down.
A big difference between the situations is that Bush was, unfortunately, enough of a consensus builder to get Congressional approval for Iraq. The same Congress that you want to string up thankfully would not give that approval to Obama for Syria.
You have way too much confidence in politicians.
12 dead in Washington DC.
Every time I hear about the latest gun massacre, I think of the NRA and all the effort they have made to ensure wide proliferation of guns in the United States.
[QUOTE=Tiny12;435677]Just as I predicted, you are changing your position on Syria to whatever Obama's position is. I thought Bush was a genius, that he was going to get the Iraqi's to open the country up to WMD inspections again without having to spill blood, right until the moment when he entered the country. What a let down.
A big difference between the situations is that Bush was, unfortunately, enough of a consensus builder to get Congressional approval for Iraq. The same Congress that you want to string up thankfully would not give that approval to Obama for Syria.
You have way too much confidence in politicians.[/QUOTE]That there is a consequence for previous actions. And because of what happened in Iraq, there is a fear factor about Syria. But you can continually blame Obama for everything under the Sun. Unlike you, I am not as savvy as the president and willing to let him make the case for America. I am a team player, until such time I feel the need to exit. Why? Because he was elected, and re-elected. Something the The Gang that Couldn't Straight cannot accept since Day 1.
[QUOTE=BlackShirt;435683]That there is a consequence for previous actions. And because of what happened in Iraq, there is a fear factor about Syria. But you can continually blame Obama for everything under the Sun. Unlike you, I am not as savvy as the president and willing to let him make the case for America. I am a team player, until such time I feel the need to exit. Why? Because he was elected, and re-elected. Something the The Gang that Couldn't Straight cannot accept since Day 1.[/QUOTE]Is there no end to your absurdness? Obama was elected President, not appointed God!
We have every right to speak out against anything he does that we disagree with. What's next a law forbidding us from speaking out?
[B]"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”[/B]
[QUOTE=Punter127;435684]Is there no end to your absurdness? Obama was elected President, not appointed God!
We have every right to speak out against anything he does that we disagree with. What's next a law forbidding us from speaking out?
[B]"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”[/B][/QUOTE]You have, and by all means. I never said you were forbidden. Just saying don't blame him for everything under the sun, just wipe your eyes once in a while.
You will want to adopt this kid. What he says at 13:25 is exactly what I believe and he says it better than I do. I'm not sure if the documentary is supposed to be pro or con, it seems pretty neutral to me, but I'm with this kid. Too bad he'll prolly end up at Guantanamo.
[URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DconsfGsXyA[/URL]
[b]There's none so blind as those who refuse to see[/b]
[QUOTE=BlackShirt;435687]You have, and by all means. I never said you were forbidden. Just saying don't blame him for everything under the sun, just wipe your eyes once in a while.[/QUOTE]Gee thanks for clearing that up, but my eyes are wide open, it's not me that's blindly following Obama.
Happy Constitution Day, check out the link below.
[URL]http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/091613-671242-founding-fathers-gave-us-a-republic.htm[/URL]
[QUOTE=DaddyRulz;435691]You will want to adopt this kid. What he says at 13:25 is exactly what I believe and he says it better than I do. I'm not sure if the documentary is supposed to be pro or con, it seems pretty neutral to me, but I'm with this kid. Too bad he'll prolly end up at Guantanamo.
[URL]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DconsfGsXyA[/URL][/QUOTE]Hey Daddy, I just got around to watching the documentary, turns out I'd seen it before, but I watched again anyway. I agree with you.
I watched the video, in particular to see what quote DR connected with. Interesting stuff. I have seen those stereolithography machines (AKA 3 D printers) in person and the molded prototypes they can generate. They're immensely useful in design iteration because if you had to do the same with actual steel molds it would cost a fortune. Those machines are expensive and will never see widespread use. Sure, some folks could start up small operations and make guns, but outside of personal use they'll be regulated like other manufacturers. I don't see it changing the gun debate significantly.
[QUOTE] "There's this Fukuyamaist idea that history had ended after the Cold War and that if we could just tweak neoliberal democracy, everything's going to be fine forever; that somehow, this is like the final political form. I mean, this is ridiculous. And you can see it. There's no evidence of a political program anymore - in the world; in America. There aren't genuine politics. There's the media telling you that Barack Obama versus Mitt Romney is the epic clash of ideology when we both know they're globalist neoliberals. I mean, they both exist to preserve the interests of this relatively autonomous class of Goldman Sachs bankers." [/QUOTE]Who ever heard of Fukuyamaism before? Who thinks everything will be or could be fine forever? The kid talks as if this is some widely held belief, which is ridiculous. Maybe it's just part of his marketing gimmick. Now on the latter part of what he says though, there's actually a shred of common ground I share with him. Which is -- a disdain, or wariness, of what I have referred to before as the 'rich elite'. There is absolutely a system in place, both in the US and worldwide, where the wealthiest individuals and corporations continue to amass more wealth and power. I've posted such facts and figures before, like the top 5% receiving 81.7% of the new wealth created over the past three decades. This wild economic inequality is one of the world's great problems. Where the kid goes wrong however is calling both Obama and Romney equal in their support of the rich elite, calling them both "neoliberals". Neoliberalism encompasses right wing ideologies such as small government, private sector deregulation and free markets. I doubt few politicians actively or consciously support the rich elite, but the power and wealth of this group is not something that can be changed easily or quickly. It has evolved in proportion to the spread of capitalism. To gauge whether a political leader is acting to "preserve" this group, simply look to their policies. Policies like financial regulation, higher taxation of high incomes, the Buffett Rule, and expansion of social programs, act to counter the forces favoring the rich elite. Obama is absolutely [I]not[/I] a neoliberal. Romney, and several posters on this board, yes.
[URL]http://www.forbes.com/sites/harrybinswanger/2013/09/17/give-back-yes-its-time-for-the-99-to-give-back-to-the-1/[/URL]
The progressives will have a heyday (sp) griping about this.
I have known Harry for about 35 years.
Don B
Don B's post and article ("Give Back? Yes, It's Time For The 99% To Give Back To The 1%") is a great example of neoliberal propaganda. No surprise from the neoliberal Forbes magazine.
[QUOTE=Esten;435704]Don B's post and article ("Give Back? Yes, It's Time For The 99% To Give Back To The 1%") is a great example of neoliberal propaganda. No surprise from the neoliberal Forbes magazine.[/QUOTE]Yep, economic liberalism represents everything you hate and despise. You'll never get over your misconception that profits are spent on yachts and planes, when they're actually mostly reinvested and grow the economy, making everyone wealthier. Bono came around. He now believes capitalism, not aid, is the key to alleviating poverty.
[QUOTE=Esten;435702] Neoliberalism encompasses right wing ideologies such as small government, private sector deregulation and free markets. [/QUOTE]
So you support big government, extensive private sector regulation, and markets that aren't free. That's a recipe for stagnation or disaster. Name one country that's benefited from those policies. While I believe you're a social democrat, that sounds a lot like communism or facism.
Nice move Daddy.
[QUOTE][QUOTE=Esten;435702]I watched the video, in particular to see what quote DR connected with. Interesting stuff. I have seen those stereolithography machines (AKA 3 D printers) in person and the molded prototypes they can generate. They're immensely useful in design iteration because if you had to do the same with actual steel molds it would cost a fortune. [highlight]Those machines are expensive and will never see widespread use.[/highlight] Sure, some folks could start up small operations and make guns, but outside of personal use they'll be regulated like other manufacturers. I don't see it changing the gun debate significantly.[snip][/quote][quote]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." -- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
"Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1.5 tons." -- Popular Mechanics, 1949
"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year." -- The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957.
"But what...is it good for?" -- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." -- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977.
"640K ought to be enough for anybody." -- Attributed to Bill Gates, 1981, but believed to be an urban legend.
"This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us." -- Western Union internal memo, 1876.
"The Americans have need of the telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys." -- Sir William Preece, chief engineer of the British Post Office, 1876.
"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?" -- David Sarnoff's associates in response to his urgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s.
"While theoretically and technically television may be feasible, commercially and financially it is an impossibility." -- Lee DeForest, inventor.
"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better than a 'C', the idea must be feasible." -- A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found Federal Express Corp.)
"Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" -- H. M. Warner, Warner Brothers, 1927.
"I'm just glad it'll be Clark Gable who's falling on his face and not Gary Cooper." -- Gary Cooper on his decision not to take the leading role in "Gone With the Wind."
"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you make." -- Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies.
"We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out." -- Decca Recording Co. rejecting the Beatles, 1962.
"Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax." -- William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, British scientist, 1899.[/quote][/QUOTE]No doubt Esten is a card carrying member of the 'flat-earth society'.
jejejejeje.