REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Ocasio-Cortez' wish-list

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Friday, October 14, 2022 02:42
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 15296
PAGE 5 of 7

Saturday, February 9, 2019 10:35 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Back to the topic at-hand. With AOC's new wishlist, she has moved from welfare statist to actual socialist, as it seems she wants to control energy production and energy conservation.

However, she's still relying on The Fed, which is a fatal flaw in her thinking. There are a three reasons why its a terrible idea, environmentally, financially, and ideologically, to continue to allow The Fed's continued existence, but I'm not going to go into that now... just too busy. SIGNY

The GOP does not believe that greenhouse gases change the climate. Since CO2 is not a problem in the opinion of the GOP, fossil fuels are not a problem and the cheapest energy will be burning fossil fuel for power. Trump administration on Wednesday (Feb. 6) moved to roll back an Obama-era rule that would make light bulbs more efficient. More CO2. https://qz.com/1546400/ Trump did the same with vehicle mileage standards. More CO2. And coal. More CO2. - SECOND

Well this is one area where I profoundly disagree with Trump specifically and the GOP in general. I also disagree with the LaRouche end of the Libertarians on that issue, since they believe that there is no limit to human growth and development because technology will always find new energy sources. Sorry, but what does that have to do with the topic? I'm not a single-issue voter, and IMHO the first thing that ANY President needs to do BEFORE instituting environmental regulations is to not make them hostage to "free trade" agreements. So AOC can thank Trump for keeping us out of two of the worst free trade boondoggles, and preserving her ability to dream big about possible solutions to the problem, and so can you and REAVERBOT.- SIGNY

You disagree with something specific from the GOP or Trump? Or you disagree with what second posits as the viewpoint of somebody else?
Second never tells the truth when ranting in his tangential diatribes.

So what are you disagreeing with?

Is CO2 your concern?

Yes
Quote:

I have not heard mention of rainforests lately.
I have.

Quote:

Do you feel wildfires add CO2? Instead of growing a little wood and then burning it in wildfires, would it not be better to harvest the wood and restart the wood growth before it is lost to wildfire? The harvested wood would displace some of the need for rainforest lumber.
The problem with wood harvesting is that the lumber companies promote clear-cutting even in old=growth forests, not the forest-thinning (clearing out the many small trees crowding the landscape) which is completely non-economic from a timber POV. That is why I have suggested producing biochar and biofuel in situ for forest-thinning operations ... at least you can get SOME economic recovery from that.
Also, rainforests aren't being cleared for timber, they're being cleared for agriculture. In Brazil, for soy and cattle, in Indonesia and maylaysia for palm oil.

Quote:

I have forgotten the answer to this: does a mature wood consume more CO2, or a growing wood or saplings in a similar footprint? We know that for fauna, the growth stage consumes far more essential resources than the full grown adult - is that the same for flora?

IIRC large trees store more carbon per footprint than small ones. It's a difficult measurement to make, but studies have been done. I'll look it up again when I get the chance.

One way to look at it tho.. while a young sapling can grow 2' per year, a large mature tree can add thirty pounds in one season ... carbon storage unlikely to be matched by a younger, smaller tree.

I had said saplings with similar footprint. Comparable groundspace, skyspace, water absorption. From the growth per year that I've seen in trees, I'd assume they gain numerous pounds, not sure how many would add up to 30.

Old growth trees get burned in wildfires. Doesn't that add CO2? Would it not be more beneficial to harvest the old growth to make way for more new growth, ensuring it would not be wasted in wildfires? No need for rampant clearing, Selective and organized should work.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 9, 2019 10:53 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Before people used "socialism" as a smear, they used "commie". (Now, they use "Russian".) Then, when "socialism" became a smear, left-wing Democrats called themselves "Liberals". When "liberal" became a smear, they opted to call themselves "progressives". Now, I don't know WTF the left-end of the Democratic Party calls themselves, since they've allowed themselves to be pushed off their nomeclature.


Why do "they" have to call themselves something? Do they do it or does the opposition do it to smear? I think we know the answer (I do). > Insert Monty Python skit here <
Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I suggest that people use the already-established definitions, as I do. If you believe that government should have a large hand in funding and determining production, you're a socialist; and if you believe in a national character to socialism (as opposed to global or international socialism) you're a national socialist. If you believe that such a government should be under control of the popular vote, you're a democratic socialist. If you believe that corporations should control government, you're a fascist. If you believe that governments should be under the control of international banks and corporations, you're an international fascist, AKA globalist. If you believe that corporatism is the right economc system but that government needs to step in to ameliorate its worst excesses, then you believe in the welfare state.


^Yep - you subscribe to old, limited, simple minded ways of thinking. That's the past - cya bye.

Trolls must confuse words and language as "old, limited, simple-minded" instead of just simply beyond Troll comprehension. Is your basis Ebonics?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 10, 2019 2:27 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I had said saplings with similar footprint. Comparable groundspace, skyspace, water absorption. From the growth per year that I've seen in trees, I'd assume they gain numerous pounds, not sure how many would add up to 30.
I guess we'd have to compare water uptake because it would be difficult to estimate other measures like "goundspace" (where do you stop measuring? At the drip line? At the last rootlet that you can find?) and "skyspace". So many saplings would equal one mature tree. If you add up a bunch of saplings to the equivalent water absorption of a mature tree, then according to the people who measure such things, the saplings would absorb carbon dioxide at a faster rate.

Quote:

Old growth trees get burned in wildfires. Doesn't that add CO2?
Not in a well-managed forest. It's underbrush that catches fire first. Fire-fighters often talk about how fire "ladders" up into the trees ... first, the grass catches fire, which catches shrubs on fire, which catches small trees on fire, which (eventually) catches mature trees on fire- basically that's when you get a crown fire.

Good forest management depends on reducing the fuels AT GROUND LEVEL. Fires which don't have much ground-level fuel race through the forest quickly, and big mature trees like oaks and redwoods have such thick bark that the bark gets scorched but it never burns the cambium, so the tree survives.

The ideal forest would have a large mix of widely-spaced trees at different ages: Mostly mature trees but also snags (which provide homes for owls etc) and younger trees and saplings to take over for when the older trees die or are cut down.

I read an interesting study many years ago ... some university (probably UC Davis) was doing a study on fire suppression. They had a large plot of forest which they divided into four quarters: One quarter thinned, one quarter they used controlled burns, in a third quarter they used both thinning AND controlled burns, and the fourth quarter they left alone. As luck would have it, their experiment became part of a natural experiment when an out-of-control forest fire raced across their experimental acreage. They got to assess the damage afterwards: The quarter that they left alone developed a crown fire and even the ground was burned. The two quarters that were treated individually suffered some tree mortality, but the quarter that was thinned AND control-burned had the ground-level vegetation burned away but the trees, altho scorched, didn't die.

That's the problem with forest management: it takes a lot of labor to take out the many saplings and also recover dead trees and some timber-worthy trees. Clear-cutting doesn't require that you fell trees accurately and drag them out carefully, or that you pull many small trees with no economic value.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 10, 2019 2:00 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Sigs, I didn't mean to seem argumentative, merely trying to clarify.

Thanks for the info input.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 10, 2019 2:03 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
We should probably start harvesting hemp again, now that weed is being legalized all over the country.

Why isn't that at thing?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Probably because it is Illegal, all over the country. There is no place in America where it is not Illegal.




Quote:

Originally posted:
Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Probably because it is Illegal, all over the country. There is no place in America where it is not Illegal.

Or...

https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/12/13/18139678/cbd-industry-hemp-le
galization-farm-bill


Hemp is now legal. That’s huge for the CBD industry.
Legalizing hemp may also be important for scientists who want to study CBD’s effects.

Earth to G-String: The claim was that weed was not Illegal, which is Fake Facts aka Libtard Facts.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 10, 2019 2:10 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I think we beat forest managment to death. Forests need to be thinned in order to prvent wildfires, not clear=cut or just taking the valubale timber.

There is also a lot of opportunity to store carbon in wetlands I.e don't drain them, and better farming practices which leave carbon in the soil https://www.carboncycle.org/carbon-farming/

I was particularly interested in the silvo-pasture concept - making pasturage a combination of trees and forage - after reading about the success of silvo pasturage in Central America in not only increasing carbon and water retention but also increasing the milkings from one to two per day. Other papers about temperate=zone dairy farming show that cows with shade increase milk production by about 10% which iirc is somewhere in the realm of what rbest (synthetic hormone) can do. No=till farming is difficult to do but things like windbreaks, green mulch (cover crops like clover), and preserving epehmeral wetlands and streams are just very old farming practices that my dad used to tell me about when he grew up in the early 1900s as a boy on a farm. I remember him specifically telling me how they grew lupines in an area of sandy soil that they were trying to recover for farming, then they would turn the lupines into the soil to increase the organic matter/ water retention. This was a multi-year project, but they were willing to put those years into it.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE mn en poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 10, 2019 2:10 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Anybody who uses "Socialism" or "Socialist" because they know the lowbrows will consider it a smear, are just dead in the head. That's ancient, backward, minimal thinking at best. Think first of the problem and then how to solve it. Be as creative and inventive as you can, everything is on the table. It's called a "Wish List" for a reason. I'd call it a "Should List." We should have energy independence, we should have Health Care for all. And not just average HC, but leading the world health care. We should have free college, we should have... on and on. If you don't put the goals out there you have what we have now - old selfish crabbie rich f*cking white dudes just hanging and f*ck everyone else.



Before people used "socialism" as a smear, they used "commie". (Now, they use "Russian".) Then, when "socialism" became a smear, left-wing Democrats called themselves "Liberals". When "liberal" became a smear, they opted to call themselves "progressives". Now, I don't know WTF the left-end of the Democratic Party calls themselves, since they've allowed themselves to be pushed off their nomeclature.

I suggest that people use the already-established definitions, as I do. If you believe that government should have a large hand in funding and determining production, you're a socialist; and if you believe in a national character to socialism (as opposed to global or international socialism) you're a national socialist. If you believe that such a government should be under control of the popular vote, you're a democratic socialist. If you believe that corporations should control government, you're a fascist. If you believe that governments should be under the control of international banks and corporations, you're an international fascist, AKA globalist. If you believe that corporatism is the right economc system but that government needs to step in to ameliorate its worst excesses, then you believe in the welfare state.

Just keep in mind that there are political and economic dimensions to any description of government, and try not to confuse the two. There are democracies (with votes) and authoritarian governments (without votes, like China), there are centralizing forces (Like the international bank cartel) and decentralizing ones (in the current push towards globalism, nationalism counts as a decentralizing force, as does separatism) there are economic systems where the government controls almost all aspects of production (like the defunct USSR) or is a majority stakeholder in most production (China, own more than 50% of production as State Owned Enterprises or SOEs, plus does NOT have a private central bank), and economic systems where the government does not control or own even the most basic production like energy (the USA).

In reality, nations are a mix of the above.

Also, "Communism" has never existed, since it is international/ global socialism, so calling someone a communist is like calling them a purple dragon. Even socialism has never been instituted 100%. The closest any nations have gotten to socialism are the USSR, China, and Cuba. China is still closer to socialism than Russia or Cuba.

So when I call AOC a "socialist" I mean that she truly wants to control how energy iss produced and used, which means that she wants to control large aspects of production (what is produced, and how) since energy threads its way through every productive ctivity.

Maybe they are just embarrassed to admit they are the most spectacularly failed Party in the history of mankind? The most horrendous examples of Government, they are the Party of Nazi, United Soviet Socialist Republic, Cuba, Venezuela.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 11, 2019 4:57 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Quote:

Thanks for such an excellent display of your ignorance, fool.

A Socialist Government is one which controls all aspects of Production. Like Nazi Germany, for example. This form of Government has failed every time it has been tried. Many consider Venezuela to be the most recent example of this.
No Free Enterprise, no Free Market, and usually no other Freedoms or Liberties.
Maybe your own little world is Socialist, like the company you run, but America is not that way. Yet.



I know that we are a Constitutional republic, but we have democratic socialist
undertones that helps our society as a whole; such as unions, social security,
medicaid, medicare, SNAP, SSI and TANF all designed to meet the needs of the American public. Generally these programs are in place to offset the affects
of capitalism. So, as you can see both the free market/enterprise and social programs do co-exist and have been running smoothly well over 50 years.

You've been watching too much of that Tucker "Fucker" Carlson on Fox. Don't believe the hype Jewels...the shit in your brains will thank you for it.


SGG

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 11, 2019 8:51 AM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:

Thanks for such an excellent display of your ignorance, fool.

A Socialist Government is one which controls all aspects of Production. Like Nazi Germany, for example. This form of Government has failed every time it has been tried. Many consider Venezuela to be the most recent example of this.
No Free Enterprise, no Free Market, and usually no other Freedoms or Liberties.
Maybe your own little world is Socialist, like the company you run, but America is not that way. Yet.



I know that we are a Constitutional republic, but we have democratic socialist
undertones that helps our society as a whole; such as unions, social security,
medicaid, medicare, SNAP, SSI and TANF all designed to meet the needs of the American public. Generally these programs are in place to offset the affects
of capitalism. So, as you can see both the free market/enterprise and social programs do co-exist and have been running smoothly well over 50 years.

You've been watching too much of that Tucker "Fucker" Carlson on Fox. Don't believe the hype Jewels...the shit in your brains will thank you for it.




Their tiny brains can only handle thinking of Government as whatever label they - or someone they listen to - tell them it is. "Someone called it Socialism so ALL of it must be run as a Socialist Government! It's God's and Nature's Law of governing!" As soon as I hear someone labeling like that I know they're full of ill intent (bulls*t), and probably lying or too stupid to know what they're even saying.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 11, 2019 10:02 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I know that we are a Constitutional republic, but we have democratic socialist undertones that helps our society as a whole; such as unions, social security, medicaid, medicare, SNAP, SSI and TANF all designed to meet the needs of the American public. Generally these programs are in place to offset the affects of capitalism. So, as you can see both the free market/enterprise and social programs do co-exist and have been running smoothly well over 50 years.


1) We don't have "capitalism" any more, even if we did once upon a time. "Capitalism" depends on competition, but with the advent of just a few large corporations dominating each sector, what we have is "corporatism". And lately, with the corporations having given up on production in the USA as a source of profit, we don't even have that: We have financialism.

2) "Running smoothly"? For who? If by "running smoothly" you mean the utter destruction of the middle class and transfer of wealth to the ultra-elite, well then .. why yes, it's been "running smoothly" ... for the top 0.01%!!


Quote:

The middle class is still struggling
The superrich are still thriving
Half of all income goes to the top
Most post-recession gains went to the top
Minimum wage can’t keep up
It’s not just about income, but wealth
More wealth is trickling up


https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/12/america-income-inequality
-wealth-net-worth-charts
/

Now, I want to point something out: If you didn't have the years written on the bottom axis, you would be hard-pressed to identify when a Republican was in office versus a Democrat. In fact, the two biggest "equalizing" events ... when the wealth of the wealthy dropped sharply which led to a corresponding relative rise of the non-wealthy ... both began under a Republican President GWB. But in that case, it wasn't because the poor got richer, but because stock values dropped (in 2000, the dot-com bubble, and 2008 the Great Recession), and so did capital gains.

Why do you think that there has been a surge of populism on both the right (Tea Party, Trump) and the left (Occupy, AOC)? Because everything's going so well?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 11, 2019 10:40 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

I know that we are a Constitutional republic, but we have democratic socialist undertones that helps our society as a whole; such as unions, social security, medicaid, medicare, SNAP, SSI and TANF all designed to meet the needs of the American public. Generally these programs are in place to offset the affects of capitalism. So, as you can see both the free market/enterprise and social programs do co-exist and have been running smoothly well over 50 years.


1) We don't have "capitalism" any more, even if we did once upon a time. "Capitalism" depends on competition, but with the advent of just a few large corporations dominating each sector, what we have is "corporatism". And lately, with the corporations having given up on production in the USA as a source of profit, we don't even have that: We have financialism.

2) "Running smoothly"? For who? If by "running smoothly" you mean the utter destruction of the middle class and transfer of wealth to the ultra-elite, well then .. why yes, it's been "running smoothly" ... for the top 0.01%!!


Quote:

The middle class is still struggling
The superrich are still thriving
Half of all income goes to the top
Most post-recession gains went to the top
Minimum wage can’t keep up
It’s not just about income, but wealth
More wealth is trickling up


https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/12/america-income-inequality
-wealth-net-worth-charts
/

Now, I want to point something out: If you didn't have the years written on the bottom axis, you would be hard-pressed to identify when a Republican was in office versus a Democrat. In fact, the two biggest "equalizing" events ... when the wealth of the wealthy dropped sharply which led to a corresponding relative rise of the non-wealthy ... both began under a Republican President GWB. But in that case, it wasn't because the poor got richer, but because stock values dropped (in 2000, the dot-com bubble, and 2008 the Great Recession), and so did capital gains.

Why do you think that there has been a surge of populism on both the right (Tea Party, Trump) and the left (Occupy, AOC)? Because everything's going so well?

.



This.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 11, 2019 11:17 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

I know that we are a Constitutional republic, but we have democratic socialist undertones that helps our society as a whole; such as unions, social security, medicaid, medicare, SNAP, SSI and TANF all designed to meet the needs of the American public. Generally these programs are in place to offset the affects of capitalism. So, as you can see both the free market/enterprise and social programs do co-exist and have been running smoothly well over 50 years.

1) We don't have "capitalism" any more, even if we did once upon a time. "Capitalism" depends on competition, but with the advent of just a few large corporations dominating each sector, what we have is "corporatism". And lately, with the corporations having given up on production in the USA as a source of profit, we don't even have that: We have financialism.

2) "Running smoothly"? For who? If by "running smoothly" you mean the utter destruction of the middle class and transfer of wealth to the ultra-elite, well then .. why yes, it's been "running smoothly" ... for the top 0.01%!!



Quote:

Quote:

The middle class is still struggling
The superrich are still thriving
Half of all income goes to the top
Most post-recession gains went to the top
Minimum wage can’t keep up
It’s not just about income, but wealth
More wealth is trickling up


https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/12/america-income-inequality
-wealth-net-worth-charts
/

Now, I want to point something out: If you didn't have the years written on the bottom axis, you would be hard-pressed to identify when a Republican was in office versus a Democrat. In fact, the two biggest "equalizing" events ... when the wealth of the wealthy dropped sharply which led to a corresponding relative rise of the non-wealthy ... both began under a Republican President GWB. But in that case, it wasn't because the poor got richer, but because stock values dropped (in 2000, the dot-com bubble, and 2008 the Great Recession), and so did capital gains.

Why do you think that there has been a surge of populism on both the right (Tea Party, Trump) and the left (Occupy, AOC)? Because everything's going so well?

Looks like a correction under Reagan also, around 1987.
Looks like the Bottom 90% lost about 12% of their share under Clinton, and another 8% under Obamanomics.

Although Obamanomics (and, obviously, Clinton) was a boon for getting poor poorer and rich richer, this trend started with the surge in 401K activity and Mutual Funds. Prior to that, the Commoner could not really partake in the Stock Market.
This graph goes back about 40 years. The prior 200 years are not shown. I already stated that the Socialists like FDR are constantly trying to drag down the nation - he was able to drag out a simple depression for more than a decade via his incompetence.
None of that is in the Constitution, and most of it was declared to be temporary programs when first enacted.
I guess the first 180 years of America must have been abject failure, without Socialist. Has everybody forgotten that the Socialism Experiment of the Colonists is what caused mass starvation and the ensuing First Thanksgiving, requiring charity from the Natives?

It seems the nation has ADHD. Does nobody remember the first couple decades of Reaganomics, where effectively every body who wanted a job had a job. Before Unions demanded that we ship Jobs overseas, before Voters Elected Economy Mis-Managers. Before Clinton wasted the Peace Dividend and sent Federal Debt Skyrocketing.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 11, 2019 3:08 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Looks like a correction under Reagan also, around 1987.
Savings & loan collapse of 1986-1995.
Quote:


Looks like the Bottom 90% lost about 12% of their share under Clinton, and another 8% under Obamanomics.

Although Obamanomics (and, obviously, Clinton) was a boon for getting poor poorer and rich richer, this trend started with the surge in 401K activity and Mutual Funds. Prior to that, the Commoner could not really partake in the Stock Market.

Huh? If the rich are getting richer with the stock market, why would the poor be getting poorer with the stock market. And if that's not what you're saying ... what ARE you saying?

Quote:


This graph goes back about 40 years. The prior 200 years are not shown. I already stated that the Socialists like FDR are constantly trying to drag down the nation - he was able to drag out a simple depression for more than a decade via his incompetence.

The Great Depression was a worlwide phenomenon. What do you think FDR should have done differently?
Quote:


None of that is in the Constitution, and most of it was declared to be temporary programs when first enacted.
I guess the first 180 years of America must have been abject failure, without Socialist. Has everybody forgotten that the Socialism Experiment of the Colonists is what caused mass starvation and the ensuing First Thanksgiving, requiring charity from the Natives?

There was also starvation during the day of the Robber Baron. Let's not be one-sided in our reading of history.

Quote:

It seems the nation has ADHD. Does nobody remember the first couple decades of Reaganomics, where effectively every body who wanted a job had a job.
And the Federal deficit expoded to then unheard-of heights?

Quote:

Before Unions demanded that we ship Jobs overseas,
Wow, there you lost me. Please provide some historical examples of this happening.
Quote:

before Voters Elected Economy Mis-Managers. Before Clinton wasted the Peace Dividend and sent Federal Debt Skyrocketing.
This is counterfactual. Please look up the Federal deficit under the various Presidents, because ... like wealth inequality ... you would be hard-pressed to see where Ds were in power as opposed to Rs. Clinton reduced the deficit and GWB exploded it with a) tax cuts b) Medicare Part D, and c) multiple Mideastwars.

Besides, I think you're overusing the word "socialist". FDR was saving the "capitalist" system, not overthrowing it. His welfare-statism puts him squarely in the "liberal" column. It wasn't until WWII, when much of production and financing was effectively nationalized (for the war effort) that the USA became somewhat socialist. I don't know if you rememeber, but goods were even rationed during the war. So the time period that you would probably consider as representing the best of America (The War Effort) was veering towards socialism, and the part that you consider "socialist" was really liberalism.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. nk I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 11, 2019 7:13 PM

REAVERFAN


Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is under fire because she’s right
https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/ocasio-cortez-donald-trump-how
ard-schultz-socialism-medicare-green-new-deal
/

Ocasio-Cortez is exactly right. Schultz may think calls for Medicare for all are “un-American,” but the vast majority of Americans support it. Consider the following:

Reuters poll: 70 percent support Medicare for all, including 52 percent of Republicans.

Fox News poll: 70 percent support raising taxes on those making over $10 million a year.

Bloomberg poll: 62 percent support tuition-free college.

Kaiser Foundation poll: 92 percent support having Medicare negotiate with drug companies to lower drug prices.

Hart poll: 63 percent support $15 minimum wage.

Yale/George Mason poll: 81 percent support the Green New Deal plan.

There is a wide gulf between the political center and the moral center.

Dr. Martin Luther King used to teach that “cowardice asks the question, is it expedient? And then expedience comes along and asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? Conscience asks the question, is it right? There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right.”

Politicians worry about donors. They hear from lobbyists, from special interests, from corporations that can spend unlimited money in political campaigns without revealing it.

The moral center is concerned with what is right — and what can work.

What is different now is that the moral center — what is right — is also increasingly popular. The political class is running scared because more and more people understand that the rules have been rigged to benefit only the few. So Trump and Republicans and billionaires like Schultz yell “socialism,” “Venezuela,” “extremism,” “radicalism.” They need to spread fear to protect a discredited political center.

Don’t fall for it. Medicare for all isn’t socialism; it’s common sense. A living wage isn’t radical; it’s a moral imperative.

We now suffer an extreme inequality not witnessed since before the Great Depression. It is time for the moral center to make itself heard.

And now a new generation of leaders is rising that just may be ready to take on the fight. Like AOC, they will come under intense fire. They will succeed only if we build a popular movement strong enough to overcome the resistance.

AOC is young and smart and charismatic, and she and her colleagues may help us begin to heal a nation.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 11, 2019 7:41 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Well... She's young and charismatic. 2 out of 3 ain't bad.


I have been arguing with people that she brings up a lot of good points... Stuff that I've been saying for YEARS now, but never gets any attention.

Unfortunately, gaffe after gaffe out of her mouth is shutting out a lot of minds to good things she's saying. I'm glad she's finally got people talking about some of this stuff. I just hope she doesn't ruin it by getting enough people to just dismiss everything she has to say because it comes with so much stupid attached.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 12, 2019 4:08 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Quote:

Their tiny brains can only handle thinking of Government as whatever label they - or someone they listen to - tell them it is. "Someone called it Socialism so ALL of it must be run as a Socialist Government! It's God's and Nature's Law of governing!" As soon as I hear someone labeling like that I know they're full of ill intent (bulls*t), and probably lying or too stupid to know what they're even saying.


Yep, I agree 1000%. I'll give you an "for instance" - I have Latino friends that swear by Trump (I know, go figure), and they follow his every move as though they had discovered gold in the hills of California in 1849. Anyway,
I've seriously tried to explain to them their misguided devotion to his Trumpness. I've told them how he sees all Latinos (and brown people in general) as Mexicans and that ultimately he will look to deport ALL Latinos
regardless of citizenship status. First the "illegals" and then, little by little, all brown peoples.

It's what I tell my Christian friends, watch out! If you can force someone, by law, to have a baby against their will. It won't be long before you are rounded up and persecuted for your religious beliefs. Trump operates on his wims, purely on what makes him feel good in the moment. That's the way dictators work, just ask the North Koreans. Trump idolizes Putin and Kim, and wishes to be like them. Let's see if he has the balls to defy the Constitution - the law of the land.

P.S. Let me add that he's already challenged the Constitution by blatantly flying in the face of the Emoluments clause (to name one).


SGG

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 12, 2019 4:49 AM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

Looks like a correction under Reagan also, around 1987.
Savings & loan collapse of 1986-1995.
Quote:


Looks like the Bottom 90% lost about 12% of their share under Clinton, and another 8% under Obamanomics.

Although Obamanomics (and, obviously, Clinton) was a boon for getting poor poorer and rich richer, this trend started with the surge in 401K activity and Mutual Funds. Prior to that, the Commoner could not really partake in the Stock Market.

Huh? If the rich are getting richer with the stock market, why would the poor be getting poorer with the stock market. And if that's not what you're saying ... what ARE you saying?

Quote:


This graph goes back about 40 years. The prior 200 years are not shown. I already stated that the Socialists like FDR are constantly trying to drag down the nation - he was able to drag out a simple depression for more than a decade via his incompetence.

The Great Depression was a worlwide phenomenon. What do you think FDR should have done differently?
Quote:


None of that is in the Constitution, and most of it was declared to be temporary programs when first enacted.
I guess the first 180 years of America must have been abject failure, without Socialist. Has everybody forgotten that the Socialism Experiment of the Colonists is what caused mass starvation and the ensuing First Thanksgiving, requiring charity from the Natives?

There was also starvation during the day of the Robber Baron. Let's not be one-sided in our reading of history.

Quote:

It seems the nation has ADHD. Does nobody remember the first couple decades of Reaganomics, where effectively every body who wanted a job had a job.
And the Federal deficit expoded to then unheard-of heights?

Quote:

Before Unions demanded that we ship Jobs overseas,
Wow, there you lost me. Please provide some historical examples of this happening.
Quote:

before Voters Elected Economy Mis-Managers. Before Clinton wasted the Peace Dividend and sent Federal Debt Skyrocketing.
This is counterfactual. Please look up the Federal deficit under the various Presidents, because ... like wealth inequality ... you would be hard-pressed to see where Ds were in power as opposed to Rs. Clinton reduced the deficit and GWB exploded it with a) tax cuts b) Medicare Part D, and c) multiple Mideastwars.

Besides, I think you're overusing the word "socialist". FDR was saving the "capitalist" system, not overthrowing it. His welfare-statism puts him squarely in the "liberal" column. It wasn't until WWII, when much of production and financing was effectively nationalized (for the war effort) that the USA became somewhat socialist. I don't know if you rememeber, but goods were even rationed during the war. So the time period that you would probably consider as representing the best of America (The War Effort) was veering towards socialism, and the part that you consider "socialist" was really liberalism.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. nk I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

1. No, 1986 continued, one year 1987 was the correction, according to the graph you posted.

2. Your graph shows that the Bottom went from about 59% to about 52%, a drop of about 7%, or 12% of the 59. Then it dropped from about 53% to 49%, difference of 4%, or 8% of the 53.
The rich pay Fund Managers to get them a return. The highest EARNERS took advantage of 401Ks early and often, while poor delayed and refused.

More when I have time.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 14, 2019 11:17 AM

REAVERFAN

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 14, 2019 12:09 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:

Their tiny brains can only handle thinking of Government as whatever label they - or someone they listen to - tell them it is. "Someone called it Socialism so ALL of it must be run as a Socialist Government! It's God's and Nature's Law of governing!" As soon as I hear someone labeling like that I know they're full of ill intent (bulls*t), and probably lying or too stupid to know what they're even saying.


Yep, I agree 1000%. I'll give you an "for instance" - I have Latino friends that swear by Trump (I know, go figure), and they follow his every move as though they had discovered gold in the hills of California in 1849. Anyway,
I've seriously tried to explain to them their misguided devotion to his Trumpness. I've told them how he sees all Latinos (and brown people in general) as Mexicans and that ultimately he will look to deport ALL Latinos
regardless of citizenship status. First the "illegals" and then, little by little, all brown peoples.

It's what I tell my Christian friends, watch out! If you can force someone, by law, to have a baby against their will. It won't be long before you are rounded up and persecuted for your religious beliefs. Trump operates on his wims, purely on what makes him feel good in the moment. That's the way dictators work, just ask the North Koreans. Trump idolizes Putin and Kim, and wishes to be like them. Let's see if he has the balls to defy the Constitution - the law of the land.

P.S. Let me add that he's already challenged the Constitution by blatantly flying in the face of the Emoluments clause (to name one).


SGG



LOL... Look at you white knighting for these ignorant Mexican Americans who aren't intelligent enough to make up their minds on how they feel about things for themselves.

You do realize that your attitude here is EXACTLY the same as somebody calling a black dude an Uncle Tom for not behaving exactly as black people are expected to, right?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 19, 2019 4:24 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Quote:

Look at you white knighting for these ignorant Mexican Americans who aren't intelligent enough to make up their minds on how they feel about things for themselves.


Do you even know what "white knighting" is?

Quote:

You do realize that your attitude here is EXACTLY the same as somebody calling a black dude an Uncle Tom for not behaving exactly as black people are expected to, right?


So, if I see you playing in traffic, I should just mind my business and keep walking. Good to know.


SGG

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 19, 2019 4:54 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Quote:

You do realize that your attitude here is EXACTLY the same as somebody calling a black dude an Uncle Tom for not behaving exactly as black people are expected to, right?


No. I'm talking about people that don't get that Trump is insulting a whole race right to their face. They support a man who has said that Mexicans are rapists, drug dealers and human traffickers. These same people are "Christians" who support a man who traumatizes little children by separating
them from their parents, some as young as two years old, who, experts say, will be scarred for life...even if they were to be reunited with their parents.

This sick motherfucker knows that he's doing this, purposefully. This is what I talk to them about. People being lied to and manipulated in order to keep them from applying lawfully to gain asylum. Fucking scumbag. And supporters
believe his phony bullshit. They think that he's defending the border. They cover their racism with the false belief that he's actually worried about
protecting Americans. BULLSHIT! He's actually sucking Putin's dick and fucking
Americans. Do you think for a moment he gives two shits about you? He does things without thinking....what am I saying, he doesn't have a brain.

Of course, you can say whatever the fuck you want...but me...a racist! Ha!
If Trump wins another term, you'll see. He'll round up every non-white person
and feed them to the lions. Deportations will have a new record, that's the
one area he will top Obama. Fucking douchebag!


SGG

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 19, 2019 5:12 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Quote:

It's what I tell my Christian friends, watch out! If you can force someone, by law, to have a baby against their will. It won't be long before you are rounded up and persecuted for your religious beliefs. Trump operates on his wims, purely on what makes him feel good in the moment. That's the way dictators work, just ask the North Koreans. Trump idolizes Putin and Kim, and wishes to be like them. Let's see if he has the balls to defy the Constitution - the law of the land.



What about this paragraph? You completely skipped over this one.
Is it anti-semitic?


SGG

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 19, 2019 11:25 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:

You do realize that your attitude here is EXACTLY the same as somebody calling a black dude an Uncle Tom for not behaving exactly as black people are expected to, right?


No. I'm talking about people that don't get that Trump is insulting a whole race right to their face. They support a man who has said that Mexicans are rapists, drug dealers and human traffickers. These same people are "Christians" who support a man who traumatizes little children by separating
them from their parents, some as young as two years old, who, experts say, will be scarred for life...even if they were to be reunited with their parents.

This sick motherfucker knows that he's doing this, purposefully. This is what I talk to them about. People being lied to and manipulated in order to keep them from applying lawfully to gain asylum. Fucking scumbag. And supporters
believe his phony bullshit. They think that he's defending the border. They cover their racism with the false belief that he's actually worried about
protecting Americans. BULLSHIT! He's actually sucking Putin's dick and fucking
Americans. Do you think for a moment he gives two shits about you? He does things without thinking....what am I saying, he doesn't have a brain.

Of course, you can say whatever the fuck you want...but me...a racist! Ha!
If Trump wins another term, you'll see. He'll round up every non-white person
and feed them to the lions. Deportations will have a new record, that's the
one area he will top Obama. Fucking douchebag!


SGG



I can't tell if you're doing a parody bit here or if you're absolutely delusional.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, February 20, 2019 9:49 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:

You do realize that your attitude here is EXACTLY the same as somebody calling a black dude an Uncle Tom for not behaving exactly as black people are expected to, right?


No. I'm talking about people that don't get that Trump is insulting a whole race right to their face. They support a man who has said that Mexicans are rapists, drug dealers and human traffickers. These same people are "Christians" who support a man who traumatizes little children by separating
them from their parents, some as young as two years old, who, experts say, will be scarred for life...even if they were to be reunited with their parents.

This sick motherfucker knows that he's doing this, purposefully. This is what I talk to them about. People being lied to and manipulated in order to keep them from applying lawfully to gain asylum. Fucking scumbag. And supporters
believe his phony bullshit. They think that he's defending the border. They cover their racism with the false belief that he's actually worried about
protecting Americans. BULLSHIT! He's actually sucking Putin's dick and fucking
Americans. Do you think for a moment he gives two shits about you? He does things without thinking....what am I saying, he doesn't have a brain.

Of course, you can say whatever the fuck you want...but me...a racist! Ha!
If Trump wins another term, you'll see. He'll round up every non-white person
and feed them to the lions. Deportations will have a new record, that's the
one area he will top Obama. Fucking douchebag!


SGG



I can't tell if you're doing a parody bit here or if you're absolutely delusional.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

A whole year of parody?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 21, 2019 11:10 AM

REAVERFAN

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 22, 2019 9:12 AM

REAVERFAN


Mercers are behind the anti-AOC campaign.

The Billionaire Trump Donors Behind the “Job Creators Network”
https://news.littlesis.org/2019/02/21/the-billionaire-trump-donors-beh
ind-the-job-creators-network
/

What is the Job Creators Network, and who is behind it? The short answer is that it’s a Trump-tied, billionaire-backed front group associated with an infamous right-wing public relations executive. It’s part of a network of other astroturf groups that all fight tooth-and-nail to defend elite interests against progressive efforts to regulate corporate power – and all while posing as defenders of “Main Street.”

Perhaps, then, it’s no surprise that the Job Creators Network is using Amazon’s decision to pull out of NYC – which many, of course, viewed as an egregious example of corporate entitlement – as an excuse to go after a progressive politician who is seen as a leader in the growing effort to curb corporate power.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, February 22, 2019 3:59 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


I found myself, once again, defending AOC in real life yesterday.

I really think it's sad she's being destroyed over the whole Amazon thing in NY. I keep hearing "she's stupid. she says stupid shit. she drove out tens of thousands of jobs with the stupid shit she says".

Yanno what? That might all be true... But she's "stupid" enough to have the courage to say a lot of shit about how the working class is screwed, and how it's only going to get worse. The middle class is disappearing, and by the time my niece is my age it won't exist anymore.

Big Businesses in bed with our political "leaders" who are all bought and paid for by them absolutely love AOC. They love how the loss of Amazon in her state is going to make people turn on her. She will be a great example to any other young politicians who have a bigger heart than a brain out there to keep their fucking mouths shut and tow the Big Business line or else.


People keep talking about a civil war brewing. I don't think it's going to happen the way, or for the reasons that they think it will though. It won't be about race or political affiliation. It will be about class warfare.

Big Business better figure it out. Our government stopped working to protect us a long time ago. We have laws against monopolistic monoliths and anti-trust, but they are never enforced. What the yellow jackets recently did in France is only a small sample of what's going to happen here when workers collectively raise their hands in disgust and say fuck it.


And I'm sure at that time, all of the newspapers like WaPo that are owned by Big Business will call us the bad guys.



Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, February 23, 2019 2:00 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I found myself, once again, defending AOC in real life yesterday.

I really think it's sad she's being destroyed over the whole Amazon thing in NY. I keep hearing "she's stupid. she says stupid shit. she drove out tens of thousands of jobs with the stupid shit she says".

Yanno what? That might all be true... But she's "stupid" enough to have the courage to say a lot of shit about how the working class is screwed, and how it's only going to get worse. The middle class is disappearing, and by the time my niece is my age it won't exist anymore.

Big Businesses in bed with our political "leaders" who are all bought and paid for by them absolutely love AOC. They love how the loss of Amazon in her state is going to make people turn on her. She will be a great example to any other young politicians who have a bigger heart than a brain out there to keep their fucking mouths shut and tow the Big Business line or else.


People keep talking about a civil war brewing. I don't think it's going to happen the way, or for the reasons that they think it will though. It won't be about race or political affiliation. It will be about class warfare.

Big Business better figure it out. Our government stopped working to protect us a long time ago. We have laws against monopolistic monoliths and anti-trust, but they are never enforced. What the yellow jackets recently did in France is only a small sample of what's going to happen here when workers collectively raise their hands in disgust and say fuck it.


And I'm sure at that time, all of the newspapers like WaPo that are owned by Big Business will call us the bad guys.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Were you defending AOC at work? Family?
What/why did you defend? Communism? Socialism? Illiteracy?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2019 12:40 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Quote:

I can't tell if you're doing a parody bit here or if you're absolutely delusional.

Do Right, Be Right. :)



Me? Delusional?

Naaaaahhhh!


sgg

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2019 1:28 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I found myself, once again, defending AOC in real life yesterday.

I really think it's sad she's being destroyed over the whole Amazon thing in NY. I keep hearing "she's stupid. she says stupid shit. she drove out tens of thousands of jobs with the stupid shit she says".

Yanno what? That might all be true... But she's "stupid" enough to have the courage to say a lot of shit about how the working class is screwed, and how it's only going to get worse. The middle class is disappearing, and by the time my niece is my age it won't exist anymore.

Big Businesses in bed with our political "leaders" who are all bought and paid for by them absolutely love AOC. They love how the loss of Amazon in her state is going to make people turn on her. She will be a great example to any other young politicians who have a bigger heart than a brain out there to keep their fucking mouths shut and tow the Big Business line or else.


People keep talking about a civil war brewing. I don't think it's going to happen the way, or for the reasons that they think it will though. It won't be about race or political affiliation. It will be about class warfare.

Big Business better figure it out. Our government stopped working to protect us a long time ago. We have laws against monopolistic monoliths and anti-trust, but they are never enforced. What the yellow jackets recently did in France is only a small sample of what's going to happen here when workers collectively raise their hands in disgust and say fuck it.


And I'm sure at that time, all of the newspapers like WaPo that are owned by Big Business will call us the bad guys.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Were you defending AOC at work? Family?
What/why did you defend? Communism? Socialism? Illiteracy?



Family. I have a few people I will actually talk politics with in real life because even if we disagree on something the conversation won't turn into some rabid name calling bullshit fest like it always does here. None of them are at work. No room for politics at work. There's ZERO ROI on even discussing it there.

As for the what/why question, I spelled it out in the quote you just posted. Read it again.

The middle class is disappearing, and your DOW is the number one contributor to that process. You're not going to find a single Neo-Con or Neo-Liberal Corpratist shill in office that is going to do a goddamned thing about it either.



Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2019 6:52 AM

CAPTAINCRUNCH

... stay crunchy...


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I found myself, once again, defending AOC in real life yesterday.



How did you defend her?

Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I really think it's sad she's being destroyed over the whole Amazon thing in NY. I keep hearing "she's stupid. she says stupid shit. she drove out tens of thousands of jobs with the stupid shit she says".



Where are you hearing this? You and JSF... "I heard... someone said... I read somewhere..." WTF?

Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
People keep talking about a civil war brewing.



So you have heard of that? And where did you hear it? Maddow? No? Source is important. Was it from the same people that said there was an invasion at the border? Rapists and drug smugglers crawling across from Mexico? (trick question) Did you notice that this conclusion was being voiced at about the same time on a bunch of these Media outlets and online pundits, almost like it was coordinated? The same ones that say things like "the Main Stream Media... bark bark Obama..." even though they are part of the main stream media? They try to distance themselves from Trumps blather about the press is your enemy, "we're not that press." Do you sense an over all pattern happening? Could you see it as a new way to rev up The Base? You have to have fresh meat for the followers, right? Like you have to have original programming for tv. Like you need a Nunes memo that is going to blow things open and arrests will be made, Pelosi in jail. Q-Anon, The Awakening... they keep feeding Trump's people Bull Sh*t and they keep lapping it up.

Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
And I'm sure at that time, all of the newspapers like WaPo that are owned by Big Business will call us the bad guys.



Have you ever read the WaPo? Or do you only know it from people saying negative things about it online? You just found out that it's owned by Bezos so your knee jerk reaction is to hate because he's so f*cking rich and you're not, right?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2019 9:52 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
How did you defend her?



I'll invite you to re-read the same post I just invited JSF to re-read. Yanno.. the one you quoted.

Quote:

Where are you hearing this? You and JSF... "I heard... someone said... I read somewhere..." WTF?


Are you kidding me? You didn't hear about how Amazon was withdrawing their 2nd headquarters from NY? You haven't heard how the media, Republicans and establishment Democrats are tearing her apart for it?

It's not my job to deliver papers to your house. Get a paper boy.


Quote:

So you have heard of that? And where did you hear it? Maddow? No? Source is important. Was it from the same people that said there was an invasion at the border? Rapists and drug smugglers crawling across from Mexico? (trick question) Did you notice that this conclusion was being voiced at about the same time on a bunch of these Media outlets and online pundits, almost like it was coordinated? The same ones that say things like "the Main Stream Media... bark bark Obama..." even though they are part of the main stream media? They try to distance themselves from Trumps blather about the press is your enemy, "we're not that press." Do you sense an over all pattern happening? Could you see it as a new way to rev up The Base? You have to have fresh meat for the followers, right? Like you have to have original programming for tv. Like you need a Nunes memo that is going to blow things open and arrests will be made, Pelosi in jail. Q-Anon, The Awakening... they keep feeding Trump's people Bull Sh*t and they keep lapping it up.


I hear it from the left and the right. I hear it from people on Youtube. I hear it from people in real life. It's not my fault you're going to pretend this is the first time you've ever heard of it. Shit... Marcos is all on board with the idea.

EDITED TO ADD: And what... Am I supposed to be quoting sources like CNN and the WaPo who can't write an article or do a single segment without using "sources say", "anonymous sources say", "a source close to X person said"?

Give me a break.

Quote:

Have you ever read the WaPo? Or do you only know it from people saying negative things about it online? You just found out that it's owned by Bezos so your knee jerk reaction is to hate because he's so f*cking rich and you're not, right?


Not in years. Fucking trash rag.

I don't know how you can support Cortez and Bezos at the same time.

I can't even imagine why you would, other than they the only thing they have in common in the whole world is that both don't like Trump.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 28, 2019 5:14 PM

REAVERFAN



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 1, 2019 11:07 AM

REAVERFAN


Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Wants the Country to Think Big
The Democratic socialist star came to D.C. to ‘swing for the fences’ and fix America
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/alexandria-oca
sio-cortez-congress-interview-797214
/

...we have never gotten out of desperate situations in this country with a scarcity mindset. We have never austerity’d our way to prosperity, ever. It’s never happened. The only way we got out of the Great Depression is through a massive injection of public investment, and also a massive expansion in public ambition and the idea of what is possible in America. We’re not gonna get out of this through incrementalism. We need moonshots.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 1, 2019 11:58 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Seems Cortez is being investigated for laundering over $6,000 to her boyfriend with campaign funds.

$6k is small potatoes, and probably the lowest dollar amount I think any of the corrupt politicians on either side would ever be convicted of.

Shouldn't have pissed off the richest man in the world though if you were going to be shady with your campaign funds. You've got to be squeaky clean if you're going to go up against the owner of Amazon and the Washington Post.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 6, 2019 3:14 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Seems that this thread hasn't been getting much love lately... I'm going to take a few guesses why. (No Fox News links)

https://nypost.com/2019/03/05/ocasio-cortez-aide-accused-of-funneling-
1m-into-private-accounts
/

Ocasio-Cortez aide accused of funneling $1M into private accounts

https://nypost.com/2019/03/02/ocasio-cortezs-chief-of-staff-might-have
-broken-campaign-finance-laws
/

Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff might have broken campaign finance laws

https://nypost.com/2019/02/28/alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-campaign-may-h
ave-illegally-paid-her-boyfriend-complaint
/

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign may have illegally paid her boyfriend




Goddammit Cortez. Can you please stop being the single politician that's saying things that need to be said if you're just another crooked politician that the Establishment Corporatists on either side can bury under this bullshit to silence your voice?



Every fucking one of them are corrupt before taking office.

Even in the rare event that she might not be herself, she's already affiliated herself with those that are who have done questionable things that undermine the legitimacy of anything that she has to say about anything.

In the end, it's the American Worker who's the loser here.

The rich keep getting richer.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 6, 2019 4:25 PM

REAVERFAN


Your problem here is that it's all bullshit.

Do you know who's behind this fake attack? The Koch brothers.

National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) is a front group and industry funded right-wing political and policy lobbying organization. NLPC was founded in 1991 by Peter Flaherty and Ken Boehm, who previously worked for "Citizens for Reagan".[1]

NLPC is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt foundation and a former "associate" member of the State Policy Network, a web of right-wing “think tanks” in every state across the country.[2] https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/National_Legal_and_Policy_Center

What is the State Policy Network?

The State Policy Network (SPN) is a web of right-wing “think tanks” and tax-exempt organizations in 49 states, Puerto Rico, Washington, D.C., Canada, and the United Kingdom. As of October 2018, SPN's membership totals 158. Today's SPN is the tip of the spear of far-right, nationally funded policy agenda in the states that undergirds extremists in the Republican Party.

SPN describes itself as a network and service organization for the "state-based free market think tank movement," and its stated mission is "to provide strategic assistance to independent research organizations devoted to discovering and developing market-oriented solutions to state and local public policy issues."[1] It was founded in November 1991[2] and incorporated in March of 1992.[3]

SPN groups operate as the policy, communications, and litigation arm of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), giving the cookie-cutter ALEC agenda a sheen of academic legitimacy and state-based support.

Many SPN groups are and often write ALEC "model bills."

In the states, SPN groups increasingly peddle cookie-cutter "studies" to back the cookie-cutter ALEC agenda, spinning that agenda as indigenous to the state and giving it the aura of academic legitimacy. Many SPN groups, such as the Mackinac Center in Michigan, have been accused of lobbying in their states, in violation of IRS rules for non-profit "charitable" organizations.

Some SPN groups, like the Goldwater Institute in Arizona, also contain litigation centers funded by national foundations to defend or pursue the SPN/ALEC agenda.

SPN shares many of same sources of funding as ALEC, including Koch institutions.

The Kochs' Americans for Prosperity provides the "grassroots" boots on the ground for this agenda.

Although many SPN groups claim to be independent and non-partisan, they promote a policy agenda -- including union-busting, attacks on the tort bar, and voter suppression -- that is highly-partisan and electoral in nature. SPN President Tracie Sharp told the Wall Street Journal that she had always felt Wisconsin and Michigan were only "thinly blue," and that the GOP has been put on better footing by the unions' slide. "When you chip away at one of the power sources that also does a lot of get-out-the-vote," she says, "I think that helps -- for sure."[4]
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=State_Policy_Network

So you see, anyone can see that this is just a smear attempt from the Koch brothers' fascist libertarian reichwing flying monkeys.

It'll go nowhere, no wrongdoing will be found, but they'll be able to use it to smear her for the rest of her long career. If it costs her some money, even better. They've got more than enough to do this over and over.

AOC is a superstar of the left, and has replaced Hillary as the Emmanuel Goldstein of the reich wing.

Now you're educated about what's going on. You're welcome.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 6, 2019 5:37 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Your problem here is that it's all bullshit.

Do you know who's behind this fake attack? The Koch brothers.

National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) is a front group and industry funded right-wing political and policy lobbying organization. NLPC was founded in 1991 by Peter Flaherty and Ken Boehm, who previously worked for "Citizens for Reagan".[1]

NLPC is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt foundation and a former "associate" member of the State Policy Network, a web of right-wing “think tanks” in every state across the country.[2] https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/National_Legal_and_Policy_Center

What is the State Policy Network?

The State Policy Network (SPN) is a web of right-wing “think tanks” and tax-exempt organizations in 49 states, Puerto Rico, Washington, D.C., Canada, and the United Kingdom. As of October 2018, SPN's membership totals 158. Today's SPN is the tip of the spear of far-right, nationally funded policy agenda in the states that undergirds extremists in the Republican Party.

SPN describes itself as a network and service organization for the "state-based free market think tank movement," and its stated mission is "to provide strategic assistance to independent research organizations devoted to discovering and developing market-oriented solutions to state and local public policy issues."[1] It was founded in November 1991[2] and incorporated in March of 1992.[3]

SPN groups operate as the policy, communications, and litigation arm of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), giving the cookie-cutter ALEC agenda a sheen of academic legitimacy and state-based support.

Many SPN groups are and often write ALEC "model bills."

In the states, SPN groups increasingly peddle cookie-cutter "studies" to back the cookie-cutter ALEC agenda, spinning that agenda as indigenous to the state and giving it the aura of academic legitimacy. Many SPN groups, such as the Mackinac Center in Michigan, have been accused of lobbying in their states, in violation of IRS rules for non-profit "charitable" organizations.

Some SPN groups, like the Goldwater Institute in Arizona, also contain litigation centers funded by national foundations to defend or pursue the SPN/ALEC agenda.

SPN shares many of same sources of funding as ALEC, including Koch institutions.

The Kochs' Americans for Prosperity provides the "grassroots" boots on the ground for this agenda.

Although many SPN groups claim to be independent and non-partisan, they promote a policy agenda -- including union-busting, attacks on the tort bar, and voter suppression -- that is highly-partisan and electoral in nature. SPN President Tracie Sharp told the Wall Street Journal that she had always felt Wisconsin and Michigan were only "thinly blue," and that the GOP has been put on better footing by the unions' slide. "When you chip away at one of the power sources that also does a lot of get-out-the-vote," she says, "I think that helps -- for sure."[4]
https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=State_Policy_Network

So you see, anyone can see that this is just a smear attempt from the Koch brothers' fascist libertarian reichwing flying monkeys.

It'll go nowhere, no wrongdoing will be found, but they'll be able to use it to smear her for the rest of her long career. If it costs her some money, even better. They've got more than enough to do this over and over.

AOC is a superstar of the left, and has replaced Hillary as the Emmanuel Goldstein of the reich wing.

Now you're educated about what's going on. You're welcome.




That's all well and good, and hey, you might be right.

Don't you find it funny, the parallels to your story here compared to the stuff Trump's been going through the last two years?

The only difference that I see is that I'm willing to keep an open mind about AOC, where you already had your mind made up about Trump being Putin's cockholster before he even took office.


I mean, really... what's the difference between you yelling "Koch Brothers!" and Trump defenders yelling "George Soros!".

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 6, 2019 7:23 PM

REAVERFAN


There's a huge difference. The Kochs actually spend millions taking over state governments and ramming through legislation they want.

Soros gave some money to some liberal causes when Bush was president. He hasn't really done much since. He spends most of his money supporting democracy in Europe now.

The Koch-Soros comparison has always been a red herring.

As for what Trump's going through, people have been indicted and jailed, and now that SDNY and the Dems are involved, he's in deep doo doo.

It was AOC who got the testimony to start the investigations of his financial crimes.



No grandstanding, like the Repubs. She just asked questions and got answers like a pro.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 7, 2019 11:09 PM

REAVERFAN


Did I call it or what?

A conservative group alleges Ocasio-Cortez and her allies ran a PAC scam. But there's no evidence of wrongdoing.
While the structure of her campaign and its vendors might be confusing, it's not illegal, campaign finance experts said.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna980121?fbclid=IwAR2HL3RUqdIswDnNE
cgnwcVqQQWICD1uJvoTdsZBfM2QzSreS6lOgWmrZEo

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, March 7, 2019 11:15 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


We'll see.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, March 8, 2019 12:56 PM

REAVERFAN



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 16, 2019 12:10 PM

REAVERFAN


More stunning brilliance from Ms. Ocasio-Cortez.

Wilbur Ross is worth $700 million, and he got taken down by a bartender from the Bronx.

She not only caught him in a lie, she most likely kicked the citizenship question right off the 2020 census.

It gets hilarious at 3:00. Cummins really cracks me up, too.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 23, 2019 12:23 PM

REAVERFAN


Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Blames Right-Wing Media For Daily Death Threats
“There’s clearly a correlation between the intensity of Fox News and Breitbart and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-death-threats-
ring-wing-media_n_5c95ea12e4b057f7330b184e


"Ocasio-Cortez said there was “clearly a correlation” between the intensity of the critical coverage of her on widely watched conservative cable network Fox News and far-right media outlet Breitbart “and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”

She feels “safest when I’m home” in the Bronx, she added, and revealed how Capitol Police had now advised her against sharing her schedule due to the ongoing threat to her security."

I've seen reichwingers criticize her for riding in SUVs. Don't they know she needs security wherever she goes now?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 23, 2019 1:20 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Blames Right-Wing Media For Daily Death Threats
“There’s clearly a correlation between the intensity of Fox News and Breitbart and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-death-threats-
ring-wing-media_n_5c95ea12e4b057f7330b184e


"Ocasio-Cortez said there was “clearly a correlation” between the intensity of the critical coverage of her on widely watched conservative cable network Fox News and far-right media outlet Breitbart “and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”

She feels “safest when I’m home” in the Bronx, she added, and revealed how Capitol Police had now advised her against sharing her schedule due to the ongoing threat to her security."

I've seen reichwingers criticize her for riding in SUVs. Don't they know she needs security wherever she goes now?



That's what happens when you make yourself a celebrity. How many house reps can you name? She's on the short list.

I'm going to guess that more than 90% of Americans couldn't even name 10 US house reps. I'm probably being exceedingly generous here.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 23, 2019 7:39 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Blames Right-Wing Media For Daily Death Threats
“There’s clearly a correlation between the intensity of Fox News and Breitbart and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-death-threats-
ring-wing-media_n_5c95ea12e4b057f7330b184e


"Ocasio-Cortez said there was “clearly a correlation” between the intensity of the critical coverage of her on widely watched conservative cable network Fox News and far-right media outlet Breitbart “and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”

She feels “safest when I’m home” in the Bronx, she added, and revealed how Capitol Police had now advised her against sharing her schedule due to the ongoing threat to her security."

I've seen reichwingers criticize her for riding in SUVs. Don't they know she needs security wherever she goes now?

Is this Troll suggesting that the gas-guzzling vehicles and firearm usage should not be controlled/permitted/regulated by the State - which is a subsidiary and employee of The People, The Electorate, The Voters?

This Troll is arguing on behalf of all Conservatives, the reasonable folk.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 23, 2019 7:45 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Blames Right-Wing Media For Daily Death Threats
“There’s clearly a correlation between the intensity of Fox News and Breitbart and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-death-threats-
ring-wing-media_n_5c95ea12e4b057f7330b184e


"Ocasio-Cortez said there was “clearly a correlation” between the intensity of the critical coverage of her on widely watched conservative cable network Fox News and far-right media outlet Breitbart “and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”

She feels “safest when I’m home” in the Bronx, she added, and revealed how Capitol Police had now advised her against sharing her schedule due to the ongoing threat to her security."

I've seen reichwingers criticize her for riding in SUVs. Don't they know she needs security wherever she goes now?



That's what happens when you make yourself a celebrity. How many house reps can you name? She's on the short list.

I'm going to guess that more than 90% of Americans couldn't even name 10 US house reps. I'm probably being exceedingly generous here.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

If you limited your 90% of Americans to 90% of Liberal Americans, which defines the Low-information Voter demographic, you would be spot on.
I don't know of any reasonable, or well-informed, aka Conservatives who couldn't name 10. But yeah, Democrats are oblivious.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 23, 2019 8:48 PM

REAVERFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Is this Troll suggesting that the gas-guzzling vehicles and firearm usage should not be controlled/permitted/regulated by the State - which is a subsidiary and employee of The People, The Electorate, The Voters?

This Troll is arguing on behalf of all Conservatives, the reasonable folk.

Nice trolling with your nonsensical lack of logic. Russian, all the way.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, March 23, 2019 8:50 PM

REAVERFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:

Originally posted by reaverfan:
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Blames Right-Wing Media For Daily Death Threats
“There’s clearly a correlation between the intensity of Fox News and Breitbart and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-death-threats-
ring-wing-media_n_5c95ea12e4b057f7330b184e


"Ocasio-Cortez said there was “clearly a correlation” between the intensity of the critical coverage of her on widely watched conservative cable network Fox News and far-right media outlet Breitbart “and all those folks and the amount of threats that we get.”

She feels “safest when I’m home” in the Bronx, she added, and revealed how Capitol Police had now advised her against sharing her schedule due to the ongoing threat to her security."

I've seen reichwingers criticize her for riding in SUVs. Don't they know she needs security wherever she goes now?



That's what happens when you make yourself a celebrity. How many house reps can you name? She's on the short list.

I'm going to guess that more than 90% of Americans couldn't even name 10 US house reps. I'm probably being exceedingly generous here.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

If you limited your 90% of Americans to 90% of Liberal Americans, which defines the Low-information Voter demographic, you would be spot on.
I don't know of any reasonable, or well-informed, aka Conservatives who couldn't name 10. But yeah, Democrats are oblivious.

More Russian trolling.

Nothing intelligent, just standard troll-spew with 0 facts or logic. You guys are busy! I guess this weekend has you all frazzled, given the amount of copypasta you're putting out currently.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, March 25, 2019 8:15 AM

REAVERFAN




They literally just got the DCCC to announce that organizations that attempt to primary incumbents will be blacklisted.

Yay, democracy!


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Thu, March 28, 2024 16:32 - 9 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 16:19 - 3412 posts
Well... He was no longer useful to the DNC or the Ukraine Money Laundering Scheme... So justice was served
Thu, March 28, 2024 12:44 - 1 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, March 28, 2024 11:18 - 2071 posts
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 05:27 - 6154 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL