Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Prebuttals and Rebuttals

Tonight is the State of the Union Address.

The corporate raider Romney, (I'm agreeing with both D's and R's here.) who pays a lower tax rate on his $21 million per year than most working Americans, will be offering his "prebuttal" to the President's speech under the banner, "Obama is not working".

Maybe Mitt the aristocrat wants us all to think Obama just plays basketball all day, while listening to gangsta rap. He certainly doesn't want us to know the system is rigged in his favor.

Poor Willard! He must be suffering such appalling deprivation. How can he afford to maintain his collection of mansions, condos, and vacation homes?

Lower taxes for the rich is obviously the only compassionate solution.

The poor man doesn't even have room in his car for his dog. He had to ride in a crate up on the roof. Hurricane force winds on a hosed down animal wasn't cruel in any way, right?

I'm sure his prebuttal will resonate with every oppressed aristocrat in America.

Remember last year when the "liberal" corporate media aired both the Republican rebuttal AND the Tea Party rebuttal?

So seeing as how the corporate media is so "liberal" to do that, I suppose we'll be hearing an OWS rebuttal tonight...

Or how about Bernie Sanders' socialist rebuttal?

Ya think?

46 comments:

Jefferson's Guardian said...

I love how conservatives hang on to antiquated and historical clich├ęs as if they have validity today, despite easily retrievable and correct information ("facts") being right at their fingertips. On your last post, one such person, who shall remain unnamed, used the "liberal media" tag as a deflection to a valid point you made.

The mainstream media have become so consolidated over the course of the last thirty years, it's no wonder we never read or hear the truth any longer. Personally, I never watch local or network news. I've resorted to international sources when I want to know what's truthfully going on. The corporate mainstream media are just a complicit sounding board for the ensuing corporate-state, but more often than not it's their sins of omission that prohibit most Americans from learning the truth.

"Liberal media", my ass!

free0352 said...

I got a rebuttal for you.

8.5% + unemployment for the last three years. The price of fuel is up, so is the price of food. The value of your home continues to fall. Bank failures are up, and the dollar is falling to historically low levels. Nobody is hiring. More people are on food stamps every day, nearly half the country.

Want more of this? Vote for Barack Obama.

The Heathen Republican said...

Dave, you mention a lower tax rate than "most working Americans." Just so we're all on the same page, what is the salary range of "most working Americans" and what percentage income tax do you think they pay?

I'd hate to offer some rebuttal based on earning $40,000 a year and for you to tell me that "working Americans" don't earn that much... So what salary range are we talking about?

Shaw Kenawe said...

Free: "Want more of this? Vote for Barack Obama."

Wrong.

Right: "Want more of this? Vote for another Republican president.

A majority of Americans still blame GWB for the disaster that he bequeathed to his successor.

The American people are not stupid, and your claims that Obama caused this are bunk.

You expect a someone to come in and build a house that someone else set on fire in 2007 and nearly burned to the ground while half his workforce is fighting against everything he proposes to rebuild that house?

The American people aren't swallowing that bit of razzle dazzle hokum.

And FactCheck.org upends the lie about the food stamp president.

free0352 said...

Want more of this? Vote for another Republican president.

Yeah, blame Bush. I'm sure that will work.

What is Obama's approval rating again? The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows that 22% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Thirty-eight percent (38%) Strongly Disapprove.

You expect a someone to come in and build a house that someone else set on fire in 2007

It doesn't take three years to build a house. If Bush burned it down (kinda) than Obama bulldozed it and let OWS kids occupy it and gave them more food stamps.

Dave Dubya said...

JG,
"Working the refs" is part of the Right's game plan. Your assessment of corporate media is undeniable. The Right cannot even put the words "corporate" and "media" together. Truth to them is like oil and water...literally and figuratively.

Free,

Nice metaphor. Burned down houses need to be bulldozed before rebuilding them can begin.

Nobody is hiring.

False. Unemployment numbers are reversing.

You list the consequences of a nation Bush-wacked into recession. We will never recover completely, no matter who's president. Giving more to the economic elites will not do a damn thing for the good of our country...and you know that.

And you can cry, cry, cry all day and all night about how rich people don't want to share their money with you. They don't care. They'll give your job to a Chinese and you can eat garbage in the street. They do NOT give a fuck. Then you can smugly starve to death.

Your heroes could give a rat’s ass for our country and our people.

HR,
Your point is taken. I was thinking most middle class working Americans. That said, even the 15% and lower brackets of taxpayers pay a far greater share of their income in other taxes for goods and services than Romney.

Shaw,
As bad as Free wants to paint Obama or other Democrats, the public will still prefer Obama over Mr. “Family Values” and his serial cheating and ethics violations, or Mr. Aristocrat’s $374,327 is “not very much” money.

free0352 said...

False. Unemployment numbers are reversing.

Ohhhh weeee less than 1% from the Christmas bump. Can we call this "Recovery Summer" again!?

and you know that.

Let me tell you what I do know, there are other countries using your political and economic system.

Shall we look at their unemployment rates?

England: 8.4 - a 17 year high.

France: 9.8

Greece: 18.8

Iceland: 9.1

But I know I know, even after three years of failure you'll do it different this time right? We can clearly see the path we're on because other countries have gone down it.

Your heroes could give a rat’s ass for our country and our people.

Say what you want, they aren't interested in financing your life. I guess people will just have to get jobs working for them... oh wait they gave them to China. I wonder what they'll do when you make them pay more taxes? You want to know who the victim is here. The people who carry the water instead of just drink the water. You know, all those people on food stamps you claim don't exist. But what the heck, I guess if enough people are on the government cheese you can count on their votes huh? After all, you are the party of government cheese and HUD houses.

Dave Dubya said...

Ask those unemployed if they'd rather be over here with no health care.

Show them the great utopian Rand World that's better.

You clearly haven't seen the path that leads from rule by the aristocratic elite. There's a lot more than three years of that record to learn from.

Yeah, the poor aristocrats are the victims. So are the persecuted "Christian" majority.

Oh, the humanity! You and the Bible thumpers have a lot in common.

Playing the reverse victimhood card is the typical Right Wing tactic from the Limbaugh deck of marked cards in the rigged game of the radical Right.

Nobody with sense buys it.

S.W. Anderson said...

"Yeah, blame Bush. I'm sure that will work."

Not always and perfectly, but the truth has a way of working most of the time, at least with people still in touch with reality who prefer truth and facts to lies and spin.

The facts of what the Bush administration and Republican-controlled Congress from 1994-2006 did won't go away. The right-wing noise machine can't completely distract from and disappear them. Those who remember and care about facts know who made this mess (as Shaw pointed out), and most people are willing to give discredit where discredit is due.

That's not with Obama, who's done his best to clean up the mess Bush and congressional Republicans left behind, some of it cumulative and dating back to the Reagan era.

In fact, "from February 2001, Bush’s first full month in office, through January 2009, his last, the economy added just 1 million jobs. By contrast, in 2010 alone, the economy added at least 1.1 million jobs."

For a graphic comparison of Bush vs. Obama's job-creation stats, click here.

Now, whether out of ignorance or deceit, quit trying to deny Bush the discredit he so richly deserves. As Bush told us, being president is hard work and he was working hard. What he failed to mention was that he was working hard at doing every wrong, perverse, bad-for-the-country thing he could manage to do. Bush earned all the scorn and derision he's gotten and is getting the old-fashioned way, by working hard for it. It's the legacy he apparently wanted and the one he deserves. So let it be.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Free: "Yeah, blame Bush. I'm sure that will work."


Free, in your answer to me, you quoted some poll about Mr. Obama's approval numbers, but didn't link to it.

I quoted and linked to a recent (January 2012) poll about whom the American people STILL BLAME for the mess this country is in.

It is not liberals/Democrats "blaming Bush, it is THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

The poll illustrates that Americans do not give the GOP a pass on the economic troubles we face and do not lay that blame solely on Mr. Obama. It is clear that Americans see that the GOP and Mr. Bush have a huge responsibility for recklessly puting this country in jeopady.

You dismiss my poll by saying it's nothing more than blaming Bush.

Then you cite a poll that you want us to take as accepted truth about the American people's opinion on Obama?

There's no consistency there.

When a majority of Americans still, after 3 years, hold the GOP and its policies responsible for our financial mess, why on earth would those Americans vote the GOP, and their failed policies, back into office?

free0352 said...

Show them the great utopian Rand World that's better.

We're working on making it here. Slow going, but Obama is our best salesman, since we're the opposite of what he stands for and he's such a failure, we look good in comparison.

You clearly haven't seen the path that leads from rule by the aristocratic elite.

I'm Cuban and Czech. My family lived it. Their experience was it was the Socialists who herded them into the camps. Che Guevara blew distant family members of my mother's heads off in his jail and Castro confiscated their property. My father's cousins when they protested Communism saw their country invaded by the Soviet Union... all in the name if the "99%"

Neither family got any money or decent health care. My Czech family whom I got close to living in Germany sure doesn't miss the communism. They can tell you better than anyone where "From each according to his ability to each according to his need," leads.

Lets look at you on that equation shall we? You policy will obviously drive out wealthy people. Who likes paying taxes? So the only way to get them to stay is to make them stay and pay, OR ELSE. "After all," you'll justify, "they could give a rat’s ass for our country and our people.

God forbid they put themselves and not the fatherland first.

You're the one excited to use the power of Government to make people do things. Not me. That isn't cooperation which is the basis of a functioning society Dave, it's coercion. That is gangsterism at it's finest... and being from Detroit I know gangsters when I see them.

As for Blaming Bush, it's kinda funny. How many years does Obama get to blame Bush? Four? Six? The whole eight?

Reminds me of a Russian story I heard. The General Secretary was passing his position on to the next GS.

The old GS handed the new one two envelopes. One marked, "For when you get into trouble," the second marked "For the second time you get into trouble."

So a while later the new GS got into some trouble, and he opened the first letter. It said "Blame me."

He did, and it worked.

Then later he got into trouble again, and so he opened the second letter. It read "Write two letters."

Obama is on letter number 2.

free0352 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
free0352 said...

Now, whether out of ignorance or deceit, quit trying to deny Bush the discredit he so richly deserves

If you want to know who caused the 2008 bubble the answer is obvious. Stupid investors. Bush didn't do it, heck Obama didn't cause it. It was caused fundamentally by an over dependence on credit. Pure and simple. When you buy on the margin results are predictable.

Of course the other predictable thing is Democrats thinking they can legislate away human stupidity.


Good luck.

Where Obama has gone so wrong, is a fundamental hubris... thinking a few people in Washington D.C. are smart or capable enough to make choices for 300 million Americans. From managing car companies to insurance to borrowing a whole lot of money, there isn't much you think Washington D.C. shouldn't be controlling. The same Washington D.C. that hasn't even figured out it's budget in over 1,000 days.

These people are morons or at least overwhelmed by the totality of the equation - and can't help but be- and you want to give them more responsibility, money, and power.

Um, that will not end well.

Dave Dubya said...

You policy will obviously drive out wealthy people.

They’re free to leave. They are replaceable. Righties are always saying anyone can get rich, right? Who needs them if all they do is buy politicians, pollute the planet, dodge taxes, and dump more of the burden on the middle class. In fact, please, Atlas, please, leave. Go shrug in Somalia. These are the same jerks who told me to “move to Russia” because I disagreed with their war in Vietnam. Well, now it’s their turn. Move to Russia. Maybe Putin is their kind of guy, if they dislike America simply over taxes they can easily afford.

It was the politicians owned by the rich that grew our debt. They should damn well pay for it.

Both justice and freedom require government to have more power than the aristocracy. Your entire argument is as logical as, “Who needs public services, safety nets, laws, rules or cops? I can take care of myself.”

Ah, I see you’re back to the favorite old Rightie false dichotomy. “It’s OUR way or communism”.

okjimm said...

I think Free just makes shit up. I truly do.

My grandmother used to make shit up as well... but then she was 84 and senile...... whereas Free, on his blog profile, describes himself as 'professional lunatic'

Hey, he may be a nice guy and a good father and all that.... but I truly think, based on his caustic writing style that he cherry picks info.... and just makes shit up.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"As for Blaming Bush, it's kinda funny. How many years does Obama get to blame Bush? Four? Six? The whole eight?" --Free

Dear Free,

Why should anyone here listen to your arguments when you, just like FAUX NOOZ, deliberately misinterpret what people write in order to score points. That's not debating, that's making shit up as okjimm correctly observed.

President Obama is NOT blaming Bush for the financial disaster that the GOP handed him, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE.

Got that? Or don't you know how to read?

The American people in poll after poll after poll BLAME BUSH.

As for your diatribe on socialist countries, you leave out the ones that work just fine and where the populations are content with the way things are working: Scandinavia, for example, also, Japan, Canada, Australia. There are problems, to be sure, but remember the socialist country, Candada didn't have a financial meltdown like this country did in 2008 because they had better banking regulations, and their dollar is doing just fine.

You chose to use only totalitarian countries as an example of socialism, and that was a tad bit dishonest.

Tom Harper said...

Mitch Daniels' rebuttal speech was too lame for words. And I've never seen such a wooden speaker. THIS was the Republican's dream candidate? He makes Bill Bradley look animated.

After Obama's SOTU speech, pundits were talking about how optimistic his speech was, and that the more positive upbeat candidate usually wins the election.

And then right on cue, Daniels comes in saying "uuuuggghhh, everything is aaawwful, we're in grave trouble, we're sinking."

Just the Facts! said...

Shaw Kenawe

Support your claim that Fox News deliberately misinterpret what people write with examples.

"I’m a Democrat. But I believe what Republican Abraham Lincoln believed: That Government should do for people only what they cannot do better by themselves, and no more. That’s why my education reform offers more competition, and more control for schools and States. That’s why we’re getting rid of regulations that don’t work. (NOTE, BY END OF SPEECH OBAMA HAD ANNOUNCED 3 NEW GOVT DEPTS OR COMMITTEES TO REGULATE) That’s why our health care law relies on a reformed private market, not a Government program." Obama SOTU 1/24/2012

"The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but cannot do at all, or cannot so well do, for themselves in their separate and individual capacities." A.Lincoln 7/1854 What Abe really said.

"On the day I took office, our auto industry was on the verge of collapse. Some even said we should let it die. With a million jobs at stake, I refused to let that happen. In exchange for help, we demanded responsibility. We got workers and automakers to settle their differences. We got the industry to retool and restructure. Today, General Motors is back on top as the world’s number-one automaker. (Applause.) Chrysler has grown faster in the U.S. than any major car company. Ford is investing billions in U.S. plants and factories. And together, the entire industry added nearly 160,000 jobs." Obama SOTU 1/24/2012

Aah. Hate to tell you this but FORD did not take any help/money/bailout from the Govt.

therightscoop.com/obama-sotu-familiar-rhetoric-failed-record

Didn't need Fox News to find this gem!

Who you gonna blame next for the failures of the President? The GRIT newspaper empire?

free0352 said...

I think Free just makes shit up

Like what, companies will outsource jobs to China? That's common knowledge. That people hide money over seas? That's common knowledge. This is common sense stuff. Everybody knows this stuff.

just like FAUX NOOZ,

I haven't had cabal TV in 12 years, so you may want to ditch that talking point.

deliberately misinterpret what people write

You said people blame Bush. Many do, agreed. Heck, I blame him. I'm one of those people. But my comeback was just because they blame Bush, doesn't mean they like Obama. My poll reinforced that. His poll numbers are low, that is also common knowledge. Bush presided over a lot of problems and America believes that true... but they don't see Obama as a solution anymore. That is also true.

As for the countries you mentioned, Iceland I'm pretty sure is a Scandinavian country, Japan just got done having a "Lost Decade" as a result of following very Obama like policy. That leaves your one country that is doing pretty well... Australia. Oh and Canada. If you added the combined population of both countries together you would get nearly half the population of California. Two data points and you're jumping for joy when I have all of Europe to source. Now who is cherry picking here?

You chose to use only totalitarian countries as an example of socialism

My point was socialism leads to totalitarianism. Socialism is like the totalitarian gateway drug.

S.W. Anderson said...

After spinning the propeller on his beanie three times and doing a little tap dance of self-congratulation, whoever goes by the nickname Just the Facts wrote:

"Aah. Hate to tell you this but FORD did not take any help/money/bailout from the Govt. . . .Didn't need Fox News to find this gem!"

Was that a gotcha, or what?

Actually, no, it wasn't.

Aah, it gives me great pleasure to inform you Obama never said Ford got any help or a federal bailout. Neither did the news media. Neither did Dave, I or anyone I know of.

Now, I know what you're thinking: "But Obama said 'auto industry.' He didn't leave Ford out of it. Gotcha!"

Well, no. Because if the government had failed to bail out GM and Chrysler, most, maybe all of the more than 1,000 businesses that support the automakers would've gone belly up. That would have landed us in a Great Depression for sure. It would have devastated the Upper Midwest economically like nothing seen before. And, BTW, it would surely have either done Ford in or forced the company to move off shore.

So, even though Ford had no need to receive direct bailout funding, the fact that the bailout kept a large, diverse infrastructure of supporting businesses going saved Ford every bit as much as it saved GM and Chrysler.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Just the Facts! said...


"Support your claim that Fox News deliberately misinterpret what people write with examples."


This is just one recent example.


Here's another.

And nothing, so far, has come up to refute the fact that FOX News viewers are THE MOST MISINFORMED viewers of cable news.

okjimm said...

'I think Free just makes shit up'

"I haven't had cabal TV in 12 years"

admitting to being grossly under- informed?

Cabal...? A GOP one?

"I think Free just makes shit up"
"Like what," he says.

Like.... "My point was socialism leads to totalitarianism. Socialism is like the totalitarian gateway drug."

oh gees... must go walk the dog... he has some shit to make up.

okjimm said...

... and please, do not cite Rand. She admired serial killers...

http://www.alternet.org/books/145819/ayn_rand,_hugely_popular_author_and_inspiration_to_right-wing_leaders,_was_a_big_admirer_of_serial_killers


and for all her ranting and raving she had no qualms about collecting social security or medicare

http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/149721/ayn_rand_railed_against_government_benefits,_but_grabbed_social_security_and_medicare_when_she_needed_them/

Dave Dubya said...

okjimm,
Thank you.

Conservative icon William F. Buckley knew the woman. On "Atlas Shrugged", WFB:"I had to flog myself to read it." On Ayn, WFB : "Her scorn for charity,for altruism was such as to build up an unfeeling system".

Rand is the Mother of All Sociopaths, enemy of democracy...and a hypocrite.

"Democracy, in short, is a form of collectivism, which denies individual rights: the majority can do whatever it wants with no restrictions. In principle, the democratic government is all-powerful. Democracy is a totalitarian manifestation; it is not a form of freedom."

If you like that one, you'll love, "Arbeit Macht Frei".

No wonder her minions and dupes sound like sociopathic fascists.

HopeyChangy said...

Dave W.

Ya still get tingles up your leg and anus when obama gives a speech?

free0352 said...

admitting to being grossly under- informed?

Masturbating to John Stewart doesn't make you informed. Try reading.

The Heathen Republican said...

"Your point is taken."

Dave, I actually haven't made my point yet, I just wanted you to be specific about a "working American" income, which you seem afraid to do. Are you afraid of offering a specific number because it's easier to refute and you're not prepared to back it up? Anyway, I'll go ahead and make my point.

In your post you say, "Romney... pays a lower tax rate on his $21 million per year than most working Americans..."

But most families pay less that Mitt Romney even though he pays the 15% capital gains rate. Take the median income of $50,221 in 2009. (For those who don't know, median means 50% of people make more and 50% of people make less.)

Someone married filing jointly with an income of $50,221 would pay an effective tax rate of 9.9%. Mitt Romney pays a tax rate that's more than 50% higher. Would you say that the 50% of people making under $50,221 can be safely classifed as "working Americans"? If so, you have to admit "working Americans" do not pay a higher rate than Mitt Romney. (Sources here)

===

I see that you followed up by changing the parameters of your original argument, saying middle class working Americans "pay a far greater share of their income in other taxes for goods and services than Romney." So when you know you'll lose the income tax argument, you move the goal posts to include other taxes? How typical.

You can't back this up because you have no idea how much Romney pays in property and sales taxes, so you should withdraw it as unfounded unless you can offer proof.

Just the Facts! said...

Blogger Shaw Kenawe

For some one who discredits Fox News as much as you do, you sure spend a lot of time talking about them.

Maybe it would be wise of you to spend the same amount of time and effort defending the failures of liberalism. Starting with Solandra.

.americansforprosperity.org/green-scams-2


http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-09-18/news/ct-met-kass-0918-20110918_1_solyndra-loan-guarantee-obama-fundraisers-obama-white-house

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/abc-news-investigations-year-solyndra-scandal/story?id=15199603#.TyIJ5yMv870

Not Fox News here Shaw, who you gonna blame next?

Dave Dubya said...

HR,
Your point on income tax rates is taken. My argument was not restricted to only income tax, was it? Those are not the only taxes paid by the middle class. Add SS and Medicare and the tax rate for the middle class is higher. Add taxes for gasoline, goods and services, and it is a higher still. Do you think Romney's gasoline bill for driving to work is an equal portion of his income as mine?

Oh, that's right. He doesn't even go to work. He gloated about being unemployed.

Consider for a second what impact those taxes have. Who feels it most in respect to their cost of living?

Romney and his fellow aristocrats’ "burden" is utterly negligible. Not so with the middle class.

Dave Dubya said...

Just The FOX(R),
How about you compare the "failure of liberalsm" to the failure of the unregulated capitalism of Wall Street?

Which one hurt the country more?

free0352 said...

the failure of the unregulated capitalism of Wall Street?

Without capitalism we'd still be in the 18th century. Somehow dave, I doubt you could survive plowing a field for very long.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Just the Facts wrote: "Blogger Shaw Kenawe

For some one who discredits Fox News as much as you do, you sure spend a lot of time talking about them.

Maybe it would be wise of you to spend the same amount of time and effort defending the failures of liberalism. Starting with Solandra."

That's called redirection and changing the subject. A ploy politicians use when they've been cornered with the truth.


Apparently what I posted, a factual answer to your request for evidence that FOX News absolutely does misinform its audience, stunned you so you came back with an unconnected statement.

Solyandra has nothing whatsoever to do with your request for proof that FOX News misinforms.

Nice try.

But I made my point, you didn't.

Just the Facts! said...

Shaw, I checked your sources, surprise! They were admittedly left wing, anti Conservative sites.Some were a yr old.

Keep drinking the liberal kool-aid Shawn, while over looking non Fox News reports such s this.

Ener1--a company that manufactures batteries for electric cars, and that received $118.5 million in federal stimulus money, and that Vice President Joe Biden visited last year the day after President Obama’s State of the Union Address—announced today (1/26/2012) that it has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

You see Shawn, govt is rotten at picking the winners and losers in business, and under our Constitution has no business doing so.
Hang in their buddy, one day you too will be called a loser by your favorite liberal.

Dave Dubya said...

Free,
What they hell did unregulated Wall Street do to bring us out of the 18th century? Don’t worry. We’re headed back to the 18th century style aristocracy rule.

Shaw,
Maybe Just the FOX(R) would like to crow about the sparkling success conservativism brought us with a war on drugs. But he won't. Just the FOX(R) never answers questions. He has no answers, unless he copys someone else's words. He is a troll, and not a very bright one at that.

okjimm said...

"Masturbating to John Stewart doesn't make you informed." -Free

Stewart? To be honest I always preferred Andy Rooney. Oh, gees... what a woody he could raise!

"Try Reading"- Free

Oh oh oh... from my current perusals..

“People who know little are usually great talkers, while men who know much say little.”
― Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Not that I will admit to knowing much, as each day unfolds I discover more that I did not know'....I just glean,however, from your writings, that you know little, and, indeed, 'make shit up'

It is symptomatic of the Tea Party movement. If I do not like the truth, if the truth does not fit what I believe. Just make shit up.

It smacks of fanaticism. Eric Hoffer in his book, "The True Believer" a short philosophical foray into understanding mass movement said,

“All mass movements generate in their adherents a readiness to die and a proclivity for united action; all of them, irrespective of the doctrine they preach and the program they project, breed fanaticism, enthusiasm, fervent hope, hatred and intolerance; all of them are capable of releasing a powerful flow of activity in certain departments of life; all of them demand blind faith and singlehearted allegiance.”

This is still relevant, and to me... the epitome of the new Right Wing of the Republican/Tea Party. your writing is a good example.

oh, but back to Stewart.... I do love the man. I watch "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" every time it is on Cabal TV. Sends me rushing for a wet towel.

Have a good day, Free. The dog and I are reading "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich". I have to help him with the big words...and his understanding of WWII is scanty. I will help you, too, if you ask nice.
You do seem to be a cheerful guy, after all.

okjimm said...

oh oh oh.... and Free....I still take slight umbrage to your insinuation that I do not read. Please, for your perusal..
Naomi Klein, "The Shock Doctrine"
Thomas Frank, "The Wrecking Crew"

or... for cold, dark nights, to stimulate your non-Cabal mind,

any E.L. Doctrow, Jim Harrison,Cormac McCarthy.

free0352 said...

LOL, I see I touched a nerve. I'd half believe you were reading all those books if you could form connected thoughts. Here's my suggested reading list for you.

Horton Hears a Who by Dr Suess

Every Body Poops by Minna Unchi

The Little Engine That Could by Watty Piper

Those seem more in line with your level. Now go watch some TV and let John Stewart and Rachel Maddow do your thinking for you.

free0352 said...

Dave,

Capitalism brought us out of the 18th century. Prior to this the world economy was built on Mercantilism. I think I read that in one of those history book things I read from time to time.

Funny, but it has always seemed to me liberals wanted to return us to a hybrid Social-Mercantilism. Funny how they call that regression progressive. I can see them demonizing the East India Company even as they taxed the middle class to bail it out just like Obama did Goldman Sachs and General Motors and AIG.

free0352 said...

For some one who discredits Fox News as much as you do, you sure spend a lot of time talking about them.

Truer words were NEVER spoken. I'm starting to think 80% of Fox's ratings are made up by Dave Dubya, and Okijim. I haven't watched Fox News for more than 2 minutes in 3 years and they still won't stop bringing it up like I care about it.

Dave Dubya said...

Free,
Thank you for arguing against something that was not my point.

You Righties love to pretend that we progressives are arguing that all capitalism is bad and all corporations are evil.

You do love your straw men and distractions...

Wanna talk about Ayn Rand some more?

free0352 said...

Wanna talk about Ayn Rand some more?

Uh, she's dead Dave, she died. I'm right here. You're having a debate with me, not Ayn Rand. Do I like Ayn Rand? Absolutely. But Objectivists aren't cult members and and Objectivism isn't a cult. Arn Rand was human being and like all humans she wasn't always right. Take our dissconnect over abortion. I like about 35% of Libertarians am pro life - Rand in no way was. So you can try to paint me with Rand wallpaper all you care to but if you want an honest debate it won't work because while Rand has influenced my thinking she doesn't do it for me.

Shaw Kenawe said...

JtF: "Shaw, I checked your sources, surprise! They were admittedly left wing, anti Conservative sites.Some were a yr old."


JtF, you apparently don't understand that truth has a liberal bias.

BTW, what the hell difference does it make how old the links are that show FOX News has been misleading its viewers? That just proves how long they've been distorting and misrepresenting facts!

Missed again.

Just the Facts! said...

Shawn,
I don't care what you say or claim to know. You have and will not change my mind about so called liberals.
Anything that you can used to deflect from the liberal failures you will use including this thing you have with Fox News. It's pathological!

Has it ever once dawned on you that I may not have cable or watch Fox News? Has it ever entered your mind that there are other sources of news available?

Try these links for other news and opinion sources outside Fox News. Then report back how your handlers told you to respond.

owntheworld.com/( Fox News noted once, but not as source)

http://sadhillnews.com/ (Fox and CNN noted together as background for person quoted)

http://jamesdelingpole.com/ (Fox not sited as source anywhere)

http://weaselzippers.us/(first 7 stories, not one from Fox, but instead from ABC, MSNBC, IPT POLITICO RCP, WEEKLY STANDARD, CHICAGO TRIBUNE)

www.burtfolsom.com/ (Fox last mentioned 1/29/2010)

Shaw Kenawe said...

Dear JtF, it was YOU who demanded I produce facts that show FAUX NOOZ misinterprets and misrepresents the news.

Remember?


"Support your claim that Fox News deliberately misinterpret what people write with examples." --Just the Facts

When I did just that, you didn't like the evidence. Then YOU misdirected and claimed the sites that had actual snap shots of FOX's stupid presentations were liberal, as if that had any bearing on the facts.

Now you're whining about it all after YOU brought up the matter and then was shown the evidence that my claim was correct. And now you protest that you never watch FOX.

Man, you're all over the place on this, making absolutely no sense.
\
Let's just drop the matter and agree that you messed up. M'kay?

Just the Facts! said...

willing to drop, not willing to agree with your definition of me, never.

Anonymous said...

A month ago, we joked when we said that for Obama to get the unemployment rate to negative by election time, all he has to do is to crush the labor force participation rate to about 55%. Looks like the good folks at the BLS heard us: it appears that the people not in the labor force exploded by an unprecedented record 1.2 million. No, that’s not a typo: 1.2 million people dropped out of the labor force in one month! So as the labor force increased from 153.9 million to 154.4 million, the non institutional population increased by 242.3 million meaning, those not in the labor force surged from 86.7 million to 87.9 million. Which means that the civilian labor force tumbled to a fresh 30 year low of 63.7% as the BLS is seriously planning on eliminating nearly half of the available labor pool from the unemployment calculation. As for the quality of jobs, as withholding taxes roll over Year over year, it can only mean that the US is replacing high paying FIRE jobs with low paying construction and manufacturing. So much for the improvement.