« AtPac Lawsuit – still seeking closure | Main | Obama’s off and running (updated) »

06 September 2011

Comments

Mike Thornton

I like the term "Regressive"!
I think it's a good description, but certainly other people (both smarter and not as smart) are free to use whatever terms they like.
I think the thing that really bothers you, is that "regressives" have long dominated the debate through the use of language and framing. I'm refusing to play the game according to the rules you want to set and you just don't seem to be able to deal with that.
Oh, well.....

George Rebane

And again MikeT, you saw right through me and the reason I posted your definition for all to see. But now that we know what you really mean by 'regressive', go for it.

Paul Emery

George

It's too bad you chose to use the language you do to describe Islamic radicals. While you may justify your language through your own personal definition, to most people of all persuasions it degrades the message of what you attempt to communicate and puts you in the category of a clubhouse hero that will never get out of the neighborhood. That's unfortunate but I believe that must be what you want to be. You are far too intelligent to see otherwise. I can't think of any other reason you would go that direction other than not to be taken seriously. You certainly wouldn't hear William Buckley, William Kristol or even any of the Conservative writers of the Heritage Foundation or the Cato institute using that language because I think they actually want to be influential and not just a playground barker surrounded by adoring puppys.

It's too bad you choose to go in that direction but it's your choice.

Mike Thornton

I'm glad you're happy!

RL Crabb

After following the exchange on the previous post, it's hard to tell who is more contemptuous of his adversary. We're still four months out from the next election cycle and the hate-filled rhetoric has already reached a fever pitch. How much worse will it get when the game really begins?

It is becoming what Jerry Brown has characterized as a war of all against all. Two philosophies of life and politics that can no longer abide each other.

Ben Emery

My definition of regressives are those who want to put the burdens of society on the backs that can afford it the least.

FDR had a different take on conservatives "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned how to walk forward."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Larry Wirth

Ben, the problem as I see it is that those who "can afford it the least" are "the burden." and the left continually makes it worse through encouraging societal irresponsibility on a grand scale. Or haven't you been paying attention the last fifty years?

Mike Thornton

Larry Wirth

Thank you for proving my point. You are a perfect example of the authoritarian discipline punishment model regressive.

Mike Thornton

I think you're right , Bob.

Barry Pruett

"'Regressives' want the important decisions that govern life, society and the economy of this country (and the world) to be made by the wealthy. The government simply acts as their police force and army. Of course they want courts to settle disputes amongst themselves (largely about how to divvy up the spoils that they make off of or expropriate from the workers) The idea that workers or the poor should have equal access to them or education or anything else is simply a utopian ideal fostered by 'Communists'. They are 'poor' and they are 'workers' so how could they possibly have any idea what is good for society."

I heard all of this socialist rhetoric when I lived in the forner Soviet Union! While Thornton is free to frame and define his own perjorative, I do not know anyone here in Nevada County that fits such definition. While "Regressives" may "want the important decisions that govern life, society and the economy of this country (and the world) to be made by the wealthy," conservatives, much the same as our founding fathers, want the important decisions in life to be made by the individual. Thornton and other socialists want the government to make such decisions for society thereby reducing personal liberty.

It is all about individual liberty. Conservatives want more, socialists want less. It is that simple. Creating perjoratives is just rhetoric.

stevenfrisch

Actually "regressive" is an adjective, meaning "tending to return or revert"; and as defined in Webster's is an entirely appropriate descriptor of the position taken here by George, and many of his fellow commenters.

I'm not sure why George takes such umbrage at the word. He has proposed on many occasions regressing to previous times, legal definitions of rights, cultural norms, definitions of community, and interpretations of constitutional law.

Regressive is a word, like any other word, and people who profess a philosophy of regressing to previous times can easily and appropriately be referred to as regressives. It can be tossed around with as much or little loaded meaning as words like "communalist", "socialist", "communist" or any other word, all words in the original post that George admits are "labels". It is common here for some to use the term "progressive" as a pejorative, so why would regressive be any different?

I think, George, you are protesting too much. Just as you say liberal should wear the badge proudly, why would you not wear the term regressive proudly?

Russ Steele

Paul,

In the late 1950s I had just finished my freshman year in college and was quite proud of my new educational experience. The following summer I was working in the oil fields in Wyoming. One day a few weeks after I started, my dad took me aside and said he had heard some complaints about how I was relating to the other members of the crew I was working on. At the time we were digging ditches connecting well heads to the collection network. Dad said, "Son when you are digging ditches, you talk like a ditch digger, when you are talking to a college professor, talk like a professor," The complaint from the crew was I was using words they did not understand, words and ideas I had learned at university. I think that George knows his audience and he is using words that they understand. If he was writing for the readers of the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, or talking to Bill Buckley's ghost he would use different words, words which some in this audience might not understand without referring to a dictionary.

Before the 91 middle eastern wars, my only reference to “ragheads” was to the Harley riders that wore bandanas around their heads. But, that was before the helmet laws.

Todd Juvinall

MikeT's theory only works if he is in charge. Sort of authoritarian wouldn't you say?

Russ Steele

Barry,

Great insight. Until you have lived out side of the US, it is easy to take our individual freedom for granted. It is worth fighting for!

Mike Thornton

I think Russ sums something up very well when he says: " George knows his audience and he is using words that they understand."

One can easily translate this into: "Preaching to the Choir" or "Dog whistle"

Barry once again goes for using Chapter One of the "Regressive playbook" entitled:
"The Refuge of a Scoundrel"

Barry Pruett

Thorton: I do not understand. What is the "The Refuge of a Scoundrel?"

stevenfrisch

I think he means pumped up false patriotism.

Todd Juvinall

Barry, he has it in reverse. The "rich" in America were the middle class which our country had many of once. That "rich" segment was then taxed into the poorhouse by MikeT's ilk since the Great Society went into gear. I blame the demise of fairness and the lack of upward mobility on MikeT's policies of dependence and punishment instituted by his regressive socialist policies. He favors picking winners and losers in our society by using the government, by regulations, yax policies and graft. Of course our government at the federal level was never intended to do this but with his ilk in charge of the Supreme Court, especially the Warren Court during our lifetime, the socialist achieved much success at wrecking the middle lass and punishing the very people they say they to want to help, the poor. We have transferred in welfare alone (and related programs) over five trillion dollars just in my lifetime and yet the poverty levels are unchanged and the poor are even more dependent on the largesse of the government. So, under MikeT's definition of "regressive" I would suggest his policies are the best example of the term. The poor are worse off because his regressive policies have destroyed the middle class who pays most of the bills and supplies the manpower of the American business engine. I really don't care personally what socialist call me as long as it isn't late for dinner.

I see PaulE has his outrage button on again and is chastising George for using the term "raghead" to describe Islamic terrorists. I personally don't use terms except ones like leftwingnut which seems to rile the lefties too but I am more comfortable with that. PaulE has no problem with James Hoffa calling the little gray haired older ladies "sons of bitches" since we never see him take his buddies from the left to task for their ad hominems. Because he doesn't he has no credibility in what I consider his "phony" outrage on terms and words from the right. It is too late for PaulE and his ilk to gain credibility on this topic since they are only one sided.

stevenfrisch

Really Todd, I see you referred to a poster on you web site as a "vampire", and another as a "stupid liberal' and asked her, "did I jilt you while I was dating", and as "coyote ugly". But I guess you never get more specific that "leftwingnut", eh?

Paul Emery

Todd

I thought you were a fan of Earl Warren. After all you fully support the Warren Commission .

George Rebane

SteveF 747am - no protests at all now that MikeT has given his definition of 'regressive'. But we must remember that when the collectivist labels are used here, they are used within the context of the definitions established in the literature by those who chose their labels. But when MikeT calls me a regressive, it is a label for a semantic (posted here) that he himself has fashioned, and one that none so labeled would agree with. In that sense it is truly an intended pejorative.

An analogy would be my definition and use of 'raghead'. It is a label that none of those murderous religious zealots would use to identify themselves. It is an intended pejorative to communicate my feelings and elicit certain responses from various classes of readers. (BTW, I have found its use to be an efficient and extremely reliable indicator of the respondents' larger political ideologies.)

Mike Thornton

Been outside the US on several occasions, Russ.
The majority of the people I met admire America.
But not the version of it that the regressive movement favors!

Paul Emery

George

You're a smart guy why do you need that filter to determine someones political ideologies. In my opinion it's mostly demeaning to you and I'm confounded as to why you want to do that. If all you are trying to accomplish is to rile up those who oppose you and get chest thumps from your loyal cadre fair enough. That again supports my "playground barker" view of what you intend to accomplish. A very basic question to you George. Why do you do this at all?

Todd Juvinall

Maybe PaulE and MikeT can start their own blog? Then you can enforce your own rules.

BTW, the old saying a broken clock is right twice a day is how I would view the Warren Court. Mostly wrong for America but they did get a couple of things right.

George Rebane

PaulE - "Why do you do this at all?" An excellent question that I ask myself daily; so far, the answer has been on this side of encouraging.

The reasons are diverse, complex, and some of them personal. But for now, let's say that RR provides an open forum for the airing of ideas and observations, some of which are unique, some of which people have/hold but are not/little exposed elsewhere, and all of which seem to be of interest to a growing and diverse cohort.

Readers and commenters seem to like the kind of contentious debate that RR sponsors and makes available to a wider audience. Ultimately, I am a purveyor of ideas about society, Man, and his destiny. To the extent that you find them of interest - be they beguiling or outrageous - you will come.

Todd Juvinall

Frisch reads my blog all the time as do the rest f the leftwingnuts. My pageviews are large. Some loons come there to just attack me personally and they never address the posts. Many of their attacks are very personal and Frisch does this as well. Since it is my blog and I could care less if Frisch or his cohorts can't take a response to their attacks, I lose no sleep. Frisch and the rest of the leftwingnuts never answer any of the questions posed by commenters here an elsewhere but insist the rest of us do. I call that arrogant and a SOP of a liberal. What crack me up about these libs is they never criticize their own ilk's nastiness and the use of ad hominem attacks on us. Tit for Tat, and Frisch and PaulE and the Annie's and KenJ's are just getting back what they insist on dishing out (I delete them for using profanity mostly). George just happens to be a much better wordsmith than people like me but I do enjoy him putting you libs in your place with words you don't understand..

Russ Steele

Mike,

I am interested to discover how those you met outside the US separated the regressive America from the rest of America. What were the top five distinctive features they disliked about a regressive America? How did you transmit your definition of a regressive America to them for evaluation, or did they come up with it on their own? Did you get your definition from those you met? Perhaps some French students of Chaim Perelman’s regressive philosophy?

Paul Emery

And do you understand his words Todd? It's generally accepted that using obscure language is the sign of a weak argument. Not that we shouldn't increase our vocabulary. Certain words convey unique meanings that can sometimes overcome our atavistic monochronism. What we really strive for is to be polychronistic to the extent of our God given potential to communicate.

Dixon Cruickshank

Correct me if I'm wrong - but in the totalitarian Governments of the last 50 yrs didn't the party elite - rulers get all the best housing and cars and the populous got jack shit - other than bread lines and didn't get any of the cavier they harvested ??

Barry can probably answer this best

Dixon Cruickshank

Hope mine was clear enough Paul

George Rebane

Dammit PaulE, dodge and weave as I may, you always nail me. It must be that ol' polychronistic faculty that let's you keep an ever-vigilant eye on me, no matter what other doings dominate.

Paul Emery

Yes indeed Dixon. The ruling class does lavish themselves. I was in Yugoslavia in 1981, shortly after the death of Tito. We were playing music living on the cheap going from town to town picking up gigs here and there. I remember everytown had at least one fancy hotel and most o the cars in the parking lots were identical black Mercedes with CB radio antennas. I asked my friend about it and he said "Communists, they always stay in the fancy hotels" He was of course referring to the Communist elite. They indeed lavished themselves while the people barely got by. The ruling class adorn their lives no matter what the political persuasion.

Kathy Jones

Russ,

I thoroughly enjoyed reading the questions you asked of Mike. I am curious and waiting for his answers.


Could it be that Mike was raised in a dysfunctional Calvinist home? His definition of "regressive" causes this reader to ponder this possibility.

Mike Thornton

I'd say bombing the crap out of them and exploiting their resources, while demeaning their people(s)cultural(s) and religion(s)had a tendency to come out on the top of the list, Russ.
Supporting repressive dictators was another.
And, yes indeed, Virginia. Democrats can be "regressives" as well!

I'm sorry, but we didn't discuss French philosophers....

George Rebane

"The ruling class adorn their lives no matter what the political persuasion." Hence my criterion for the best form of governance has always been one that sustainably maximizes the minimum income opportunities in the social order.

Paul Emery

I think of the use of the word "regressive" is appropriate not so much as a description of an individual but more as a nostalgia for pre 1910 when we had free land, cheap labor and little or no taxes and lots of room left for the exploitation of the worlds resources by conquering and pljundering other soverign lands (colonialism, imperialism). I keep asking for modern examples of admirable contemporary nations but none emerge except for a vague reference to the economic systems of a couple of Asian city states.

Barry Pruett

"Correct me if I'm wrong - but in the totalitarian Governments of the last 50 yrs didn't the party elite - rulers get all the best housing and cars and the populous got jack shit - other than bread lines and didn't get any of the cavier they harvested ?? Barry can probably answer this best."

Funny you ask! I lived in two different places in Moscow. One had two rooms, 12 foot ceilings, on the third floor (bonus in Moscow to not be on ground floor), ornate architecture. It was beautiful. We left when the cops came around looking for bribes. The second place was on the ground floor, very small and plain. My Russian friends indicated to me that the ornate place was where the apparatchiks lived while the second place was where the commoners lived.

Party elite had cars too. Commoners road the metro. Very true Dixon.

Barry Pruett

Thanks Steve. Because Thornton did not answer maybe you can help me out. How does supporting and advocating individual liberty appeal to "pumped up false patriotism?"

George Rebane

PaulE re 1018am - does that there are so few "admirable contemporary nations" indicate to you that they may not be so admirable, and/or that there has been a worldwide shift towards more politically correct formats of governance?

Mike Thornton

Because you only want "individual liberty" for people who can afford to BUY it, Barry!
The policies that you advocate for make people who can't pay for your brand of freedom, less free. However you hide behind buzz-phrase and simplistic patriotic jingoism as part of the misleading sales pitch. Get it?

Paul Emery

George

I was referring to your inability to give contemporary examples of countries that are "on the right track". No doubt you can give many examples of those that are wrong, example being any nation that has a national health care, which is the entire modern world. Show me some examples that I can check out. Remember contemporary. No going back to 1910 nostalgic America or some mid evil central European plains state of 1450 or whenever.

dkeachie

"That "rich" segment was then taxed into the poorhouse by MikeT's ilk since the Great Society went into gear."

Seems in other places the repubbys, regressives, Tea Party Symphs, all state that 50% of the country is paying no taxes, and thus, a sizable portion of the middle class pays no taxes, so that is not the problem. The problem is USA capitalism has gone abroad for the lowest labor costs. Abroad has responded well and become better educated and tooled up for manufacturing, and the money they make enables them to buy the goods they produce in sufficient quantity to make the American consumer unnecessary for the megaCorps. Except for a few service jobs, the megaCorps would just as soon have us all drop dead. But they are too polite to mention it, and instead send Romney to weedle us with the notion that all this overseas activity is just as sure as shoot'n bound to make a few jobs here. By reducing the quality of the k-12 schools and jacking the tuition at State colleges and universities, the megaCorps now hope to have a population dumb enough to believe Romney. The megaCorps may have succeeded in this effort.

Regressive I thought referred to taxation, and in particular a system that taxed the wealthiest the least. It seems to me to be an excellent fit, and the are no pejoratives included. Do George, Dixon, Juvinall deny that they favor this sort of system?

@George "But when MikeT calls me a regressive, it is a label for a semantic (posted here) that he himself has fashioned, and one that none so labeled would agree with. In that sense it is truly an intended pejorative.

An analogy would be my definition and use of 'raghead'. It is a label that none of those murderous religious zealots would use to identify themselves. It is an intended pejorative to communicate my feelings and elicit certain responses from various classes of readers. (BTW, I have found its use to be an efficient and extremely reliable indicator of the respondents' larger political ideologies.)"

I fail to see how you make Mike's use of the term regressive into a pejorative. Ragheads has been a pejorative for ages. How many of the 1.1 billion or so Muslims do you, George, think should have the term "raghead" applied to them? All they all "murderous religious zealots" or just a very tiny majority?

dkeachie

"or just a very tiny majority?"

should have been:

"or just a very tiny minority?

See George, even with my college degrees I got swept up into your enthusiasm for condemning a half billion people plus.

dkeachie

@Pruett:

"Thanks Steve. Because Thornton did not answer maybe you can help me out. How does supporting and advocating individual liberty appeal to "pumped up false patriotism?""

If you cannot find a job that pays enough to put a roof over your head, and food in your belly, and health care when needed, your much vaunted "individual liberty" gives a grand selection of places in which to die, just don't do it on private property.

George Rebane

PaulE - my inability to name more of them is because I cannot find any formerly free countries that are on what to me is the 'right track'. There are plenty of formerly totalitarian countries that are liberalizing (see Bastiat Triangle) and are therefore on the right track but have yet to achieve any state that the US should emulate. As I have said many times before - rejoice, collectivism is winning.

DougK ('dkeachie'?) asks questions that have been answered here numerous times. But he does introduce the remarkable notion that it has been corporate America that has ruined the nation's public school system to elect conservative politicians. Astounding. Would dearly like to see the data/rationale to back that one up. But I'm not holding my breath. Nevertheless, this allegation further defines the chasm.

Barry Pruett

@Thornton and Keachie: Individual liberty gives me ability to create my own job. When government controls the channels of production (socialism), government impinges on my individual liberty and therefore impinges on my ability to create my own job...as well as my ability to create jobs for others as they move through society.

Individual liberty is not purchased...it is free and provided to us by the Constitution. With indivdual liberty comes responsibility for one's self. We are free to succeed or fail. My "brand of freedom" is making sure government is small in size and scope so that I can create.

I came from Harvey, Illinois (look it up). I know what it is like to be denied things based on lack of funds. I also had the wonderful experience of watching my parents grow up and provide for us over time...by the bootstraps if you will. The wonderful thing about liberty is the ability to move through the levels in society. In my youth, my family was poor. Through hardwork of my parents, they are middle class. When the government does not pick winners and losers, everyone succeeds based on their own merits...as it should be.

Todd Juvinall

Paul is looking for a ghost regarding economic ideology. The USA is the first country in the history of the planet to pursue the freedom agenda and so I would say it has to be us he is looking for. The rest of the planet has small versions f us and in a purer form because they are small. Singapore, old Hong Kong, Macao. But the liberals have whittled away over the last 70 years and have modified the country into a anti freedom state of taxes, rules and regulations. We in effect have a police state. All the laws have a police presence if the laws are not followed and that goes for a person smoking a cigarette in the park.

George Rebane

Let me amplify and, perhaps, simplify ToddJ's "police state" argument. In the socialists' Agenda21 world the rule is 'If it's still legal today, just wait until tomorrow.' I suggest that this dictum may also be applied as a litmus test for reliably identifying progressives and their footprints.

Mike Thornton

Here is where, George and I agree! (don't worry Chuck, his wingnut membership isn't in jeopardy either)
What's being discussed/debated here are two irreconcilable views of what the guiding principles and values of this nation should be.
I guess you could argue, they could meet in the middle and be watered down versions of each other, but they are essentially incompatible.
I don't think it takes a genius to see that this incompatibility is what's causing the political ans social/economic paralysis the USA is facing.
To the degree that there has been any movement at all over the last (I'll say 30 years)is that, the regressives have been waging an all out war and dragging the country father and farther towards their desired outcome.
But people are now starting to wake up and fight back.
You can argue about who is right and who is wrong, but when the progressive forces organize and start fighting the way the regressives have been doing, the country is going to come apart at the seams.
You can bet your bottom dollar that, the brainwashed foot soldiers of the regressive movement will engage in full out violence and terrorism if they start losing ground.
They're being primed for this each and every day by the regressive propaganda complex.
And while, I know he doesn't see himself that way. George is part of it. I mean he's not Glenn Beck or Bill-O the Clown, but he's part of the regressive/wingnut wall of noise.

And why do you think so many progressive have had it with Obama?
Because they see him and the national Democrats as caving in, over and over, to avoid the fight that's going to have to happen at some point, unless people are simply willing to give up and become the "Corporate States of Jesus Land"

To be clear, I'm not advocating for violence!
I'm simply saying that sooner or later we're going to have to face the facts of what's happening. Does that mean a new "Civil War" or the peaceful break up of the country, or one side or the other gaining total victory? I don't know!
I think I'm pretty clear on the fact that the RR Regressives won't stand for the USA becoming a country with a progressive social equity/justice agenda. Just ask them.
And how many of the progressives that read this blog are willing to live in a country where someone like Todd Juvinall makes the rules?

Mikey McD

The Thornton's of the world wake up and hate. They sit around all day and hate. They hate until their head hits the pillow at night. They will forever see the productive members of society as meal tickets; enemy targets. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. They claim to celebrate diversity while cramming equality/collectivism down the throats of their fellow man. They push equality until it is time to pay their bills (progressive tax system debate anyone?). They hate the producers who have made it possible for them to live better than the kings of yesteryear. They worship government despite the wars which they claim to despise, middle and lower class KILLING debt (Anyone see Greece in the news?), failures of The State's Education, Dept of Energy, etc. They are anti-war unless it is waged under a democratic president or is waged against the producers (pay your taxes or else!). If regression means a return to personal liberty I gladly wear such a label. The semantics are assbackwards... a progressive destroys and a "regressive" restores.

Steve Enos

Looks like Glenn Beck and Mikey McD are on the same page.

And "Raghead".... it's not only pejorative, it's a racist term.

Mike Thornton

Please add: "Apocalyptic Rhetoric" to the standard regressive toolkit

D. King

"Please add: "Apocalyptic Rhetoric" to the standard regressive toolkit"

Yeah, OK, sure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=PY-mboZkhD0

Todd Juvinall

I am also a in Mikey's camp. He has adequately defined the MikeT, SteveE and F and PaulE ilk quite well. The battle is raging (in a political sense) about where the country is headed and it started with President Wilson. Before him the country was simple and opportunity abounded. Immigration was bringing in all kinds of folks and they all wanted to be Americans and live a better life. Then the nanny state began (Wilson's socialist leanings). As soon as the income tax was in place, everything began to change. Now that little tax on a few has expanded to 25% of our GDP and along with it the power of the government to regulate every little thing. The power of the dollar wielded by the takers enablrtd is what has wrecked our country and why we on the right are trying to save it. It is worth saving. \\The current mess was created by MikeT's hero's in Congress and some old progressive beliefs he has secured from Alinsky and Keynes among others. I would like to know who on the left, say, Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, John Kerry, Teddy Kennedy, which of these would be responsible for any pf the MikeT identified problems of today? My guess is none he only hates the right.

Paul Emery

So George and Todd

What I want to see is an example of a post Colonial, imperialistic empire, country that has harnessed the ingredients to emulate the "prosperity and freedom" that you so admire when were were bloated with free resources and able to exploit workers with no restrictions such as child labor laws and workplace safety regulations let alone a reasonable working wage. Let's bring back hydraulic mining while we're at it, pesky government infringement on our free enterprise. Yes, let's go back to pre 1910 when all was hunky dory and we had indentured slave labor from China build our railroads and sweat shops for children and 16 hour work days. Let's regress to the good old days when Lake Erie would catch fire, when the Columbia River was choked with logging debris. Let's eliminate nasty government interference on our freedom to die of disease before government requirements for clean water and air. Let's go back to the days when we had license to give a reward for Indian scalps and we could march entire tribes of human beings from Oklahoma to Florida losing 60 % to disease and starvation so real estate speculators could open up new land for sale and development.

Yes, thankfully we've come a long ways but that's the way things were in the Golden Era before 1910 before unconstitutional government interference took away our freedom.

Are we over regulated? Sure in many instances but reverting back to some golden era with little or no government is, well, regressive.

Mike Thornton

Thanks King.
The Al Gore piece is great!! But hardly and example of "Apocalyptic Rhetoric"

TJ Writes:

"it started with President Wilson. Before him the country was simple and opportunity abounded."
This is clearly a statement coming from someone blinded by Euro-Centric White Privilege.

Still confused about why the term "Regressive" is appropriate.........

Now this is known as attacking via "Straw Man"

TJ Writes:

"The current mess was created by MikeT's hero's in Congress and some old progressive beliefs he has secured from Alinsky and Keynes among others. I would like to know who on the left, say, Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, John Kerry, Teddy Kennedy, which of these would be responsible for any pf the MikeT identified problems of today? My guess is none he only hates the right."

(A) I don't "hate" the right. I would never try to get into a hating contest with the likes of Todd, since he hates more than any 10 people I've ever known.
(B) I have no hero's in Congress. I do think Bernie Sanders is pretty cool, but I don't see him as a hero.
(C) I have repeatedly criticized Democrats and people on the left, when I've thought they were wrong. Sometimes I've been correct in my criticisms and sometimes not. In addition there are conservatives that I respect, even if I don't agree with them. Unfortunately they have been ostracized from the Republican party by the likes of people such as Todd.
Too bad!

Unlike TJ, I'm not a rabid, ideologue. I just simply have beliefs and perspectives he doesn't like, so he has to demonize me as he does with everyone and everything else that he fears and hates.

D. King

"...labor from China build our railroads and sweat shops for children and 16 hour work days."

Really? LOL! I guess some things never change.

Paul Emery

That's history D. King before "government regulations"

Mike Thornton

It's kinda funny how easily people like Paul Emery and myself just knock the snot outta you guys. You're lucky Steve Frisch and Ben Emery come here with one hand tied behind his backs!
George, you definitely need a better "bench"!

Kathy Jones

Paul,

You need to take note that almost all the things you says about exploited workers are all taking places in the world that America supports/needs and takes loans from to try and stay afloat. It is big governments big daddy approach, that has caused jobs for the middle class to leave our shores. With this exodus goes takes away home pay checks and the tax flow into governments treasury.

Has government interfered or helped the bottom line?

It is the bottom line that makes all the difference. Businesses are not IN business to provide jobs, jobs are a RESULT of business. Business has a single purpose, to make money, PERIOD!

When government, via greasing today's unions, gets in the way of that single purpose of business, business WILL find a way to accomplish its goal... someplace(else)! We now see the result of the big daddy approach, America is suffering as a result. There is nothing government can do now to create jobs, they just need to get out of the way.

Mikey McD

The Thornton's of the world wake up and hate. They sit around all day and hate. They hate until their head hits the pillow at night. They will forever see the productive members of society as meal tickets; enemy targets. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. They claim to celebrate diversity while cramming equality/collectivism down the throats of their fellow man. They push equality until it is time to pay their bills (progressive tax system debate anyone?). They hate the producers who have made it possible for them to live better than the kings of yesteryear. They worship government despite the wars which they claim to despise, middle and lower class KILLING debt (Anyone see Greece in the news?), failures of The State's Education, Dept of Energy, etc. They are anti-war unless it is waged under a democratic president or is waged against the producers (pay your taxes or else!). If regression means a return to personal liberty I gladly wear such a label. The semantics are assbackwards... a progressive destroys and a "regressive" restores.

dkeachie

I'll bet the cries of individual liberty will end with the first camper on BLM or forest service land near any of our TEA PATSYMPs here....

George, when was the last time regressives voted FOR an education bill that increased taxes?

D. King

"Thanks King.
The Al Gore piece is great!! But hardly and example of "Apocalyptic Rhetoric""

Sorry, let me fix that for ya!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzSuP_TMFtk

There's nothing like scaring the crap out of kids; right?

Then there's this little gem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXvpDoGrRGU

Some people just can't be scared anymore.

Boo! 2012 is coming!


Mike Thornton

"Onward Wingnut Soldiers, Marching as to War, with the Book of Glen Beck, Going on Before"

Kathy Jones

Why would anyone think more money will improve education?

Some of the best education (defined by results), taking place in America today does not depend on tax dollars!

Paul Emery

Kathy

I don't disagree with you about your reasons for business to exist. That's distorted however by the big government funded military industry that diverts trillions of our tax dollars building military stuff to support our useless and unconstitutional wars. That has nothing to do with capitalism and is in fact the opposite. When government through military adventurism creates a need and nurtures the conditions to support a justification for production then taxes the productive sector to fund itself it has nothing to do with building a better mousetrap at a lower price or providing essential goods and services. Not to say we don't need a military but it's way out of control and becomes a self fulfilling cycle through the billions spent by special interests and lobbying to elect supportive legislators.

Kathy Jones

Paul,

Why do you think "we the people", for so long, have elected legislators who bend to special interest?

To be honest with you, I would rather have people EMPLOYED by the military industry ("common defense" is charged in The Constitution) than those who just suck off of the productive.

Russ Steele

Mike,

I have not seen any white flags of surrender, I think that you are assuming way too much. There are many more readers than there are participants in these verbal wars. We are gaining new voices, Kathy Jones being an example, and new readers. And, perhaps you have noted there are no new voices from the left, just same old tired echo of liberal talking points.

A quick look at QuantCast shows that Rebane's Ruminations traffic continues to grow and the number of page views per person has shown a huge jump, indicating that people are not just visiting the current page, but going back to read past posts as well as the current post.

D. King

Paul Emery said:

"That's history D. King before "government regulations""

That's right now in your redistributive world.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/aug/27/disney-factory-sweatshop-suicide-claims

You see Timmy, to redistribute wealth you must redistribute labor. That Chiner could use some them Gob-ment Reg-U-lations!

BTW, that’s what the new patent laws will do; redistribute jobs.

Todd Juvinall

I am so happy to see these screeds by PaulE and MikeT because they show the readers what has happened to a human brain when it is sucked out and replaced with socialism.

With the demeanor and attitude shown by MikeT, I would dare say he will be on the breadlines real soon.

Paul Emery

But Kathy "Common Defense" is not a justification for military spending gone mad and useless wars that cost trillions. We have military bases in over 100 countries including strategic bases from WWII.

George

Once again. Is the 3 trillion dollars we'll on the war in Iraq money well spent?

Paul Emery

typo

George

Once again. Is the 3 trillion dollars spent on the war in Iraq money well spent?

Steve Enos

Yet again...

Another off topic peresonal attack post by Todd above... review his "07 September 2011 at 02:30 PM" post.

Hey George... you ever going to address Todd's endless, off topic personal attacks?

Paul Emery

Todd

Let me ask you as well.

Was the 3 Trillion spent in Iraq money well spent.

Barry Pruett

Thornton: It os very revealing that you think that Bernie Sanders (the only true socialist in Congress) is "pretty cool." Be that as it may, I have a wuestion for you and Keachie:

Individual liberty gives me ability to create my own job. When government controls the channels of production (socialism), government impinges on my individual liberty and therefore impinges on my ability to create my own job...as well as my ability to create jobs for others as they move through society.

Individual liberty is not purchased...it is free and provided to us by the Constitution. With indivdual liberty comes responsibility for one's self. We are free to succeed or fail. My "brand of freedom" is making sure government is small in size and scope so that we can create. When the government does not pick winners and losers, everyone succeeds based on their own merits.

Please tell me how individual liberty, the freedom to succeed or fail if you will, is a bad thing.

Thus far, you have not convinced the readers herein.

Steve Enos

Mike T. didn't say anything like "individual liberty, the freedom to succeed or fail if you will, is a bad thing".

It's a BS question and a BS attept to define the other.

It's like asking Barry if he still beats his wife... it's a straw question set up that is false.

Mike Thornton

Russ:
The truth is that most progressives won't waste their time coming here.
I do it for the entertainment value.
Using another boxing analogy, more often the fighter simply doesn't know that it's time to throw in the towel.
We'll have to see what Kathy brings to the table, but I'll tell ya that I'd take Emery, Frisch and Emery over any five of the folks that have been pitching for your team here!
I just looked at TJ's last comment, so let's make that any seven

George Rebane

PaulE re 232pm - first, please see Stratfor on this post
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2011/09/the-geopolitics-of-the-united-states.html

Given our larger role as the world's hegemon, 'was the Iraq war fought wisely (e.g. costing $3T, etc)' would draw a NO from all quarters of the political spectrum. But the answer to 'was it necessary to contain Iraq and Iran in order for the world's major oil supply on the Arabian peninsula to remain intact (we recall Iraq already had to be beaten back in 91)' requires a more complex answer, and doesn't lend itself to a reasoned discussion by current participants. But as your host, I'm obliged to give it a try.

Barry Pruett

So Enos...then individual liberty is a good thing then.

Mike Thornton

I(for one) would be happy to have a reasoned discussion about the Iraq/Iran situation and the war. We could start with your premise that "Iraq already had to be beaten back in 91"
They had to be "beaten back" from what and why?

George Rebane

A good place to start a review of the first Gulf War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1441

Mike Thornton

I'd like to know your reasons and analysis, George.
I think you would agree that there are many areas of dispute regarding the justification for the UN Resolution.
Frankly, I'm a bit surprised you would even cite a UN Resolution. Usually the UN is held in pretty low esteem around here....

Barry Pruett

Note to readers...Enos, Thornton, and Keachie will not express an opinion as to whether individual liberty is good or bad. Very revealing.

Paul Emery

George

Americas role as the world's hegemon is certainly a topic that freedom loving people like me would love to engage in. In this case I'll likely ...tarian you since I'm firmly influenced by Ron Paul. Either way I think it is an immoral position and financially one we can't afford and historically has led to the ruin of any nation that tries to take it on.

Todd Juvinall

PaulE, where did you get three trillion for the Iraq war. My recollection is both Iraq and Afghanistan total about one trillion. Regarding the expenditure of American treasure. I supported the wars and so did most Americans. Many democrats, including Hillary Clinton made impassioned speeches in support of the resolution to use force. It was a bipartisan war. So, we have spent a lot of money and we have lost brave men and women killed and wounded. I say the war was America's attempt to kill the terrorists over thre then over hwere. It worked for the renaider of Bush's term and then they came back right after Obama was elected.

MikeT is a big fan of the only socialist in the Senate. I think that is great. It shows us all what a loser he is supporting one nut at the exclusion of the rest. What a hoot!

SteveE comes back to do his consistent whining and never addresses any post on its merits. I think he belongs on the lefty blogs (since he only complains about conservatives never about liberal slander) but he prefers to come here and cry and complain. The five posters on the lefty blog miss you SteveE. Go over there and complain about Stoos.

Steve Enos

Barry... your "Enos, Thornton, and Keachie will not express an opinion as to whether individual liberty is good or bad. Very revealing" post is BS!

Barry you posted your question at 3:20 and I'm posting this answer at 3:57!... you need to back off and take a breath before making another personal attack Barry.

You se Barry I work and I was on a con call with City staff for a development project I'm working on in San Juan Bautista and it took a few minutes to respond.

I say a few minutes as it was 37 minutes from the time tyou asked YOUR quesiton to my response... chill for a bit before making another personal attack in the future Barry.

Here's my answer to Barry's 3:20 question:

I believe individual liberty is not "good"... I believe individual liberty is a "GREAT" thing!

PS to Barry... as George and Russ know for a fact, I'm a big gun rights supporter!

Paul Emery

Todd

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302200.html

"Writing in these pages in early 2008, we put the total cost to the United States of the Iraq war at $3 trillion. This price tag dwarfed previous estimates, including the Bush administration's 2003 projections of a $50 billion to $60 billion war.

But today, as the United States ends combat in Iraq, it appears that our $3 trillion estimate (which accounted for both government expenses and the war's broader impact on the U.S. economy) was, if anything, too low. For example, the cost of diagnosing, treating and compensating disabled veterans has proved higher than we expected. "

Also here but you have to read it and add up the total costs including ongoing estimated support for veterans services and further aid for reconstruction if Iraq that may bump it to 3.5 T or more

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf

Todd Juvinall

Paul, those are guesses. What are the actual costs?

Mike Thornton

I'd say, I pretty much agree with Enos. I would add however that great rights come with great responsibilities. They exist together and go hand in hand. Unfortunately there are some among us, who don't know how to place nice and we need some kind of structure to keep them from exercising their "individual liberty" in a way that violates the "individual liberty" of others.
It's interesting how some of you always go for the overblown statement.
I say "Bernie Sanders is kinda cool" and TJ comes back with the statement that I'm a "big fan". He just made that up! This is why you guys are so easily discredited. You raise phoney controversies and make crap up.
And on top of that it's always the SOS!
Try getting a little creative once in awhile.
And notice once again that George had to step in and protect TJ again!
Man you would think the guy is a little too old to have to have daddy cleaning up after him everyday

Todd Juvinall

Here is a link that does a ticker like the one for the national debt. It is at 1.2 trillion.

http://costofwar.com/en/

Todd Juvinall

We all appreciate our liberty. It is always under attack from people politically and criminally. That is why we have elections and jails. It usually removes the bad guys.

Paul Emery

Todd

Read the link and add up the numbers. The WP analysis is pretty reputable I believe. Other than that believe whatever you want.

Mike Thornton

"Hold on Elizabeth, I'm coming to see ya honey!"

TJ just made a rational and intelligent (dare I say inclusive) statement without attacking someone or resulting to the use of tripe and hyperbole.
Will wonders never cease!

Kathy Jones

Paul,

Just a thought, how many American jobs have been created due to Pentagon contracts?

Would those people have been unemployed without those contracts?

Income tax started in 1913 to pay for war expenses.

While none of us know all the details or war/contracts, we do need this structure from the Pentagon. And yes, ALL parts of government SHOULD have the money before it is spent.

Russ Steele

Paul,

I now see part of your problem, you think that the Washington Post is a credible source.

Kathy Jones

George,

I was reading a Lee Child's book this afternoon, and the desert people who wear cloths over their heads were called "Towel Heads", and I thought of you!

Rag, towel, rug, cap, hat, etc., some people sure like to pick at gnats to subvert the discussion!

George Rebane

MikeT re 342pm - I cited the UN resolutions because these might be the most broadly accepted international voice that sanctioned Iraq and supported the use of force to expel it from Kuwait and put sufficient sanctions on its containment in its own borders. My overall geostrategic position re the US pretty well matches what STRATFOR has presented - there's no reason for me to repeat it since it's been posted here recently and several times before.

However, the position of hegemon that America has had since 1945 is truly a conundrum. It has been continuously railed against by those of communist/socialist sympathies during the Cold War, and now that this 'war' is over the left has redoubled its assault on America's strength and has been joined by the Ron Paul wing of the libertarians.

I believe the benefits to the world of America's role as sheriff are manifest and widely acknowledged in places like Europe, Japan, Taiwan, NZ, Australia, Canada, Mexico, and those double dealing sumbiches in the oil rich middle east. Don't expect you to agree with any of this, but you asked my opinion.

As PaulE knows, the 'Rebane foreign policy' would have us pull our force projections back to requiring no foreign bases, make explicit our national interests (none of that fairness and justice crap which no one believes anyway), and play a tit-for-tat policy (q.v.) which has been shown overwhelmingly to lead to good co-operation between such 'players'. Please excuse the bare bones summary.

Paul Emery

Russ

And how about the CRS report? Did you read it?

dkeachie

"Some of the best education (defined by results), taking place in America today does not depend on tax dollars"

Sure, in affluent homes where the college degree holding parents have enough time and money to continue their own kids ed. Unfortunately, unless those parents are willing to take in borders from the ghettos, it is not a plan that works for anything more than a small minority.

Let's see, when an American company opens a plant abroad, do they hand over the plans to a bunch of construction interns?

Do they just show the workers a picture or two of what the finished product might look like, and then hope for the best?

Seems to me they POUR money into the projects to make sure that everyone knows what they are doing. If the kids in USA classrooms had a clue about how business can help, when they choose to, they'd be hopping mad about the schools they are in.

Todd Juvinall

Here Paul, one more time.

http://costofwar.com/en/

The comments to this entry are closed.