Ahh, finally - a nice, reasoned voice on these recent events.

You notice how much less interest there is in this reasonable article than there would be in something more inflammatory.

Dave

Dave,

I did notice that, now that you mention it. A thinly veiled attempt to clean up your mess, and even having the "fairness" to include the attack on the Obama worker. How caucasian of you. Happy now bucko?

I would characterize it as extremely smarmy, but hey thats just me, cynical Pablo.

While I agree that McCain/Palin are not responsible directly for this troubled young woman, it should remind them that there are troubled people who may act on their cries of terrorist socialist in violent and dangerous ways.

Well Dave, you're probably right, but give it a chance. It's only been posted a couple of hours, and most reasonable people are in sleepy land.

Well, I don't suppose many people here at BC can be described as "reasonable." But still.

Actually Dave, I agree with you. It's a good article. Of course early elections in this country were in many ways far more contentious than they are now, including this one. Can you imagine what those early elections could have been like had there been today's communication technologies and 24/7 media coverage?

B

It is unfortunate that the McCain/Palin campaign has spent so much time jacking up their audiences with inflammatory rhetoric and airing advertisements like the one today which essentially said that we could avoid a "testing" of our president if we elected him instead of Obama (which Joe Lieberman who supports McCain said the same exact thing Joe Biden said: that any candidate would be tested as Clinton was and Bush was early in his presidency) rather than spending time on the issues.

As I said in my own opinion piece: Character, Assassinated McCain and his running mate have run a fractured, nasty campaign, illustrated by the fact that even their own workers are telling tales.

You may wish to sound fair and balanced, Dave, and admittedly this young girl is one sick puppy, but both McCain and Palin believed her fantastic story and were all to ready to lend their support to a girl who was, to my mind, clearly making up something too weird to be true. And scarily racist to boot.

The majority of Americans are sick to death with the negativity of the Republicans this season. I hope that results in a Democratic victory. If it doesn't, the the country is in deep trouble.

And please try and face it, Dave. The huge majority of the lies and innuendo and certainly the fear mongering and whipping crowds into frenzies has come from the Republicans.

Already knowing what the Republicans have on their agenda I pay much less attention to what they are saying than what the left is saying.

And what I'm getting from the left is every bit as hate-filled and deceptive as what McCain and Palin are being accused of. Obama himself has done a fair job of staying above the mudslinging, but his surrogates and partisans are as bad as anything I've ever heard.

Remember the MoveOn.org video I posted a link to in the comments a while ago? It maintained that electing McCain would bring about a nuclear attack on Iran and the death of babies as an immediate and direct result. Come on. That kind of extreme BS is just ridiculous.

You might want to take some time to go out and read some of what's on sites like Democratic Underground and DailyKos with a more objective eye. It's pretty scary.

Dave

None so blind as those who as those that will not see.

Commentaries (1708-1710)

Matthew Henry

None so blind as those that will not see.




Must review comments before publishing....

So when Dave believed her story, it "epitomized much of the anger and bitterness of this election season," and now that the story has been proven false, it demonstrates "the increasingly ugly and angry tone of the presidential campaign"? Either condition proves his point?

Perhaps she's just a sick individual, and pundits believe what they want to believe regardless of facts.

IIRC, immediately after the 2006 elections that a rather vicious series of attacks were launched right here on BC against Nancy Pelosi, featuring a very unflattering picture of the Speaker.

Who were those people?

#6 -- Lisa Solod Warren

rather than spending time on the issues.

Ah Lisa, the good old Obama stand-in line. We are not buying it from him so what makes you think we would buy if from you? Get real girl and stop sounding like a campaign speech.

were all to ready to lend their support to a girl who was, to my mind, clearly making up something too weird to be true.

Lisa and her mind reading crystal ball readings to her mind.

And scarily racist to boot.

Only someone who exploits racism as a tool would make such a statement about it.

The majority of Americans are sick to death with the negativity of the Republicans this season.

Well that all depends on which majority your taking about. So speak for yourself.

The huge majority of the lies and innuendo has come from the Republicans.

That statement is the biggest lie of them all! I defy you to list one lie about Bill Ayers and Obama's conection to him that was a lie?

Franco,

Tell us one thing about the Ayers/Obama connection that was NOT innuendo. And, tell us anything substantive regarding their relationship - recount for us what they did together, what they talked about, what they may have schemed about that you know. Anything! The fact is that you know nothing and neither does McCain and company. It is nothing but innuendo. Innuendo is a very small baby step from a lie, for it certainly cannot be counted as truth.

Dave may be correct concerning the things he has found on the internet. But the McCain/Palin campaign has been making these personal attacks in their stump speeches, in their main line national and regional TV and radio advertising and via direct mail.

Still today, relatively few people look to the internet for their news. TV remains king. Most of the internet sites, whether right or left, are essentially preaching to the choir. The radical views and personal attacks that appear on most of those sites are rarely seen by the majority of people.

By comparison, the negative Obama ads have focused on McCain's policies. Few, if any, have attacked his character. The majority of McCain's ads have attacked Obama personally. There is a significant qualitative difference.

B

This is a good story...but I am confused with "Cities like Detroit, Chicago and Philadelphia have a history of celebratory violence associated with sporting events, and there is concern that an Obama victory may be as likely to touch off rioting as an Obama defeat."

I believe the writer meant "a McCain victory may be as likely to touch off rioting as an Obama defeat"

Here's just three things I've heard about in the last 24 hours or so:

First - the ludicrous article posted here at BC by Selwyn the Dukester.

Second - Mail and email being circulated by christian fundamentalists claiming that an Obama presidency will result in atomic war, gay marriage in every state, and THE END OF THE FUCKING BOY SCOUTS!!! (You know, if the first of those things happened, would anybody left standing really give a shit about the other two?)

Third: A letter circulating around the Johnson County, Indiana courthouse refering to Obama as a "black Hitler." The "circulator" was the head of the Johnson County election commission.

I could have provided links to all of those things above, but it's late, and I'm tired. Your all on your own.

B

Doctor,

No. He had it right the first time.

B

Baritone, you forgot the assinine one that Obama wasn't born in the U.S., so he can't be president... after all Hawaii isn't a state.

#13 -- Baritone

Tell us one thing about the Ayers/Obama connection that was NOT innuendo. And, tell us anything substantive regarding their relationship

That was my question Baritone. Do you always answer a question with a quesiton?

On December 21, 1997, Barack Obama wrote a short review of William Ayers' book

Obama's Weathermen Pals Should Worry You - Reported by and African American on National Review. I hope we don't here the cry of an "Uncle Tom" here.

It is nothing but innuendo. Innuendo is a very small baby step from a lie, for it certainly cannot be counted as truth.

Bullshit! You are not willing to look at the truth. Which is why after a close working relationship did Obama say that Ayers was just some guy in the negborhood. Why?? It is not the truth. And that's what McCain and Palin are saying and asking why. I am asking and millions on the internet are asking why.

Come on Baritone, I have seen much more itellectual honesty out of you before. If you where honest about it now, you would be asking the same exact things if McCain was an unknown young Senator that had had this same relationship being exposed with him and say David Duke, and you can't deny it.

And if McCain said, oh hell, "he's just a guy who happens to live in the neighborhood" you would be calling foul from the roof tops.

These are the questions that a presidential candidate should address. Because Bill Ayers is fare from some old dried up 60's radical. He wanted then, and he wants right now the overthrow of the US government and so doses the ilk he sleeps and works with.

It is what his whole life is about and that is an indisputable fact. You can go to Bill Ayers own web site and she a full letter accountin for his trips to Venezuealy to laud Chavez, Castro and screem to the Caracas crowds donw with the US and and Long live the revolution. His last recorded trip was in 2006. You can check it out yourself.

Now, if David Duke had last attended and night cross burning in 2006 and spouted out about white power and controling that the black race, you and all of the MSM would be all over young unknown senetor McCain to fully explain his relsionship with Duke and no one would rest until McCain came up with full accounting on all quesitions.

How you would you feel if McCain tried to answer all of it with "I want to stay on the issues". Pretty fucking weak answer wouldn't you say.

Prairie Fire was written by Bill Ayers and his wife in 1974 which was only 15 years before both of them came out of hiding and started their current academic and teachings project which is exactly what they do today. Prairie Fire is what is in in thier hearts, minds, and the work they do today is for its ends. Nowone could work with them and not know this, that would be impossable.

William Ayers' forgotten communist manifesto: Prairie Fire

The three links I proved here are the max number I can put in one post. I have 12 more of equal relevance but a starting point has to be establishing first.

I defy you to disclaim any of the asserting information on any of these three starting links. I kindly ask that you give it your same efforts as you would if it war a McCain/Duke connections in all relevant context.

Corrected link for Prairie Fire for post #18.

William Ayers' forgotten communist manifesto: Prairie Fire

Political partisans and even the media have lost their sense of perspective. The Ashley Todd incident and many of these other outbreaks of misbehavior are being taken far too seriously by everyone. They are not scandalous, they are trivial.

For the last time, when Ayers was out being a "terrorist" Obama was EIGHT YEARS OLD

Tell me something Franco:

Does writing an assigned book report in high school about Boris Yeltsin make me a communist.

Would a man who lived two doors down from John Wayne Gacy, and knew him enough to sit on his porch and share a neighborly cigarette make him a mass murderer of little boys too?

Does my defending Dave Nalle because he made a human mistake make me a right-wing Libertarian?

Does my being gay make everyone who ever agreed with anything I've written on this website a Faggot?

Does the fact that I worked the Campaign for Reelection of Gerald Ford for President and that I wrote an obituary for him here make me Republican?

This fucking guilt through association bullshit with Ayres is getting real old Franco... reeeeeeal old.


Of course now that I've made a valid point everyone'll ignore it.

but I'm used to that

Franco, You are scary.

Dave: Duh! Obama IS staying above the mudslinging. But McCain/Palin are not. THEY are slinging the mud right and left. Gleefully. That is just the point of my opinion piece Character, Assassinated and my comments. No one can control the internet. But Obama and his direct surrogats are above the fray. What some left wingers write about is their own game. McCain and his running mate are DIRECTLY responsible for what comes out of their own mouths. They and their surrogates have been saying the awful things, perpetuating the lies, beating the dead horse of Ayers etc to death and ratcheting up the hate. That is the point.

just like the stuarts in Boston, its like
from Tobe to Joe Sixpack

McCain panders to the Cuban Mafia in Miami/Dade that does in fact support terrorists. They, and the U.S. government, protect Luis Posada Carriles and Orlando Bosch, both of whom were the architects of the in-flight bombing of a Cuban civilian airline flight in 1976 in which all 73 passengers and crew were killed.

I am no supporter of Obam and have no faith that an administration led by him would see to it that those two be brought to justice.

The support of terrorism is a characteristic of both the Republican and Democratic parties.

The support of terrorism is a characteristic of both the Republican and Democratic parties...American right and left...

It's funny that the people claiming Obama listening to racist sermons delivered by Rev Wright for twenty years should not be discussed because it has nothign to do with Obama are the same people that are now claiming it's John McCain's fault that this loon did what she did. You people are just much in need of mental health assistance as Ms. Todd.

The last I knew it was the Obama campaign not the McCain that has been using children in propaganda videos to further their agenda. The internet is awash with people commenting on how much the use of these videos and other Obama campaign tactics share striking similiarities with political agendas from years past that didn't turn out so well and which the world would rather never see happen again.

Mr. Ayers and Ms. Dohrn have written a new book, entitled Race Course Against White Supremacy, now up on Amazon for pre-sale. According to the product description,

White supremacy and its troubling endurance in American life is debated in these personal essays by two veteran political activists. Arguing that white supremacy has been the dominant political system in the United States since its earliest days--and that it is still very much with us--the discussion points to unexamined bigotry in the criminal justice system, election processes, war policy, and education. The book draws upon the authors' own confrontations with authorities during the Vietnam era, reasserts their belief that racism and war are interwoven issues, and offers personal stories about their lives today as parents, teachers, and reformers.

troll,

The 'left' is not a very useful term. During the period between, but including, the civil rights and anti-Vietnam war movements, there were such groups as the Weathermen. However, during the course of the mobilization of millions in the U.S., and the winning of the MAJORITY of the population to oppose the war, the actions of those misguided 'bombers', were roundly rejected, and hence marginalized. They never recovered.

The government played a role in those bombings. They used provocateurs that infiltrated those groups that were prone to using bombastic revolutionary rhetoric.

At all times there are those on the right who have used terrorist violence to further their aims. The KKK is an example where various levels of government (read both Democratic and Republican), were involved from the U.S. Attorney General, to the FBI, to the local cops. They either directly aided and abetted, or ran interference by attacking the defenders of Black rights.

There are those like Pat Buchanan that advocate violence and operate, both outside, and within, the established two parties. The fact that neither of those parties will mobilize the population to resist such attacks, even if they come from outside their parties, is enough to lay the responsibility for this violence at their feet.

Les

There was just a study I heard about that took identical resumes and presented them to restaurants in NYC, supposedly the bastion of liberalness, yes? For jobs as waitresses, waitrers and hosts and hostesses. The interviewees were then called in for interviews and white people got the jobs overwhelmingly.
It is unfortunate but racial prejudice still exists in this country. I wish it were not true. But it is.

I think it IS better than it was. Certainly the fact that Obama has gotten this far illustrates this. But anyone who says that we still don't have a problem with racism in this country is delusional. LOOK at our prison system for just one example. I can't say whether it is the vestiges of slavery. I don't want to talk about victimization. I personally, as a white Jewish woman who has been subject to terrible anti-Semitic remarks and was sexually harassed at several of my jobs as a young woman (before I even knew that I could do anything about it, and actually probably could not do anything about it) never have seen myself as a victim..... but the fact is that we have a long way to go toward true 'equality' in this country.

I don't know if I think Ayers and Dohrn are the best spokespersons, but we still need to talk about racisms and sexism and all the other isms and if we don't, then we are just being ostriches.

agreed Les - there is a long history of government manipulation...of a citizenry which by nurture is prone to violence

There is no doubt that racism and sexism exist in this country and that we must discuss it and deal with it. However that does not mean that we must not an inject an "ism" into every situation we possibly can to excuse one's own personal failings, flaws and trangressions as liberals are inclined to do.

Arch,

"However that does not mean that we must not an inject an "ism" into every situation we possibly can to excuse one's own personal failings, flaws and trangressions as liberals are inclined to do."

It's not person failings, but systemic ones, that seem to increase the inclination of some to scream 'socialism' as the bogyman for all deviations from their Utopian dogma.

Les

I don't know if I think Ayers and Dohrn are the best spokespersons

I don't see how you could even think about a couple of slimes like Ayers and Dohrn to be spokesmen for anything.

Those two should be stripped of their citizenship and kicked out of the country.

#34 "Socialism" may be the wrong word, but what's wrong with pointing out that increasing size doesn't seem to be fixing much of anything? What is WRONG with pointing out systemic failures and refusing to support expanding systems that aren't doing what they were sold as being intended to do?

What is wrong with refusing to give MORE power to a system that consistently abuses/misuses the power it is given?

Interesting how both Dave's articles are dated October 24th. DO you think anyone here would get TWO freakin POLITICAL articles published on the SAME day but Dave "knothead" Nalle?

I don't think so. Can you hear the sarcasm in my voice? WHy not update the other poor article Dave. I don't believe that the fairness doctrine is in play here. I think that what I call "The self-righteous right wing-nut doctrine" has reared its ugly head.

Heloise

"Mad as hell and not going to take it anymore" was the subhead on an anti-immigration yahoo group. And guess what: the McCain-Kennedy bill was defeated.

"I don't see how you could even think about a couple of slimes like Ayers and Dohrn to be spokesmen for anything."

They are no more slimes than either Oboma or McCain. Ayers and Dohrn may paint a prettified role of their own histories, but nothing stands up to what McCain and his ilk actually did to the people of Vietnam. Both Obama and McCain want the opportunity to do the same to the people of Afghanistan, Pakistan and who knows where else, including here in the United States.

Both the Democrats and Republicans support terrorism when it suits their master's needs.

Schemes for the government to forcibly rob the rich and give their wealth to the poor are socialism.

And even if technically a given scheme isn't "socialism," the word gets people's attention.

"Schemes for the government to forcibly rob the rich and give their wealth to the poor are socialism."

Clavos, this would only be true if it was also true that schemes that tax the poor and subsidise the rich are capitalism.

I don't see any benefit in talking in such ideologically loaded and pragmatically useless terms. Do you?

nothing stands up to what McCain and his ilk actually did to the people of Vietnam.

Yeah, what we did was so horrible that, at their first opportunity, tens of thousands of Viets fled here for more of it. Millions more would have come if they'd had the chance.

Say what you want about how horrible the USA is, Les, but the net migration rates between most communist people's republics and the USA is heavily toward the US, not the other way around.

Cannoshop,

The increasing of the size, and intrusiveness, of the government, has been going on of late, by the very slime that is against any form of 'socialism'. Neither the right, or left, variants of this slime, are socialists.

You have the wrong target. The 'systemic failures' you refer to are just that, failures of the system, the capitalist system.

Les

...take your choice: Clavos' scenario - the government...forcibly rob the rich and give their wealth to the poor or the alternative - 'the poor' takes direct action

Chris - ...schemes that tax the poor workers and subsidise the rich are capitalism.

there ya go

Dave,

such as the false accusations that McCain supporters were shouting "kill him" about Barack Obama at a Pennsylvania rally last week

There is video for that. You can hear a male voice shout "kill him". At the same time McCain's face sort of changes into a frown for a moment.

This is the 27 second video clip.

Here is a video news report on various things shouted at McCain/Palin events. It includes that 27 sec clip from above, where a man shouts "kill him".

I believe the writer meant "a McCain victory may be as likely to touch off rioting as an Obama defeat"

No, Miguel, that would be redundant. They mean the same thing. I meant what I wrote. If Obama wins there's a pretty good chance that there will be rioting, because that is the pattern we see in these cities after major sports victories.

Dave

Dave may be correct concerning the things he has found on the internet. But the McCain/Palin campaign has been making these personal attacks in their stump speeches, in their main line national and regional TV and radio advertising and via direct mail.

They're trying to win an election, Baritone. They have determined that the point at which Obama is most vulnerable is his history of political extremism. It's what worries me about him.

I freely admit that during the primary I was willing to support Obama if it stopped a Hillary Clinton or a Mitt Romney from getting elected. Then, well before the negative campaigning, I began researching Obama's actual beliefs and background and I realized that he was potentially the most dangerous and extreme candidate ever nominated for the presidency by a major party.

What the McCain campaign is doing is to try to bring that same understanding of Obama's background and beliefs to the general population. If you share Obama's beliefs and if you support him, then the accusations against him should not bother you at all. If they do bother you, perhaps you ought to think and learn more about Obama, because most of what he's being accused of is basically true. There's no need to make stuff up.

Dave

Les, re comment #38, assuming for the sake of discussion that you are correct about Vietnam*, Governmental support for "friendly" terrorists, and that Senators McCain and Obama are at least as slimy as Mr. Ayers and Ms. Dohrn, what's a poor voter to do? As far as I know, Jane Fonda is not running for office.

Dan(Miller)

*As I recall, and please correct me if I am wrong, we got into the Vietnam mess big time during the presidencies of JFK and LBJ. We had had a modest presence there since 1950 or so. Senator McCain (a Navy Lt. Cmdr. when he began his first combat tour in 1967) didn't get us in or get us out. As a junior officer, he did his duty, just like most people in uniform. So, I have been advised, did Senator Kerry during his brief 1968 - 1969 tour of duty.

McCain and his fellow pilots became frustrated by micromanagement from Washington, and he would later write that "In all candor, we thought our civilian commanders were complete idiots who didn't have the least notion of what it took to win the war."

"Although many folks in the U.S. blamed the troops who managed to return from Vietnam alive. In my opinion, that was a pernicious thing to do and remains so."

Amen brother.

Dave,

"They're trying to win an election, Baritone"

Oh, excuse me. The end justifies the means. I see. It's okay to lie if the cause is just. I'm glad you cleared that up for me.

Despite your view, most of the "charges" are not even charges. They amount to innuendo, suggestion.
You can be insufferable. It is you, McCain and his people who should worry about your collective sense of morality, ethics and fairness.

Your alarmist stance is totally unwarranted. Obama obviously represents a different means to govern from the left. You hate it. It's apparent that most people don't.

I still won't predict an Obama win, but it's really looking bad your your guy at this juncture.

B

#42 Les, Bailouts are NOT a function of a Capitalist system, they're a function of expanding, intrusive government. Government that works very much to the Bread and Circuses model. Kleptocracy, Les, government for the pure sake of government.

In a capitalist system, Les, Government has no responsibility to prop up the economically non-viable enterprises. THAT is a function of Socialist and Feudalist governments.


Oh, and on a related note:

The only reason Bill Ayers is still alive, is that it's illegal to kill him. The only reason he's still on the loose, is that his daddy could buy a judge.

Interesting how both Dave's articles are dated October 24th. DO you think anyone here would get TWO freakin POLITICAL articles published on the SAME day but Dave "knothead" Nalle?

No one else wrote two articles on the same day, Heloise. And when other people have they've gotten published just as fast.

Now, in the case of these articles I did email editors so they knew they were there and timely, and you can do that too.

I don't think so. Can you hear the sarcasm in my voice? WHy not update the other poor article Dave.

I did, Heloise.

I don't believe that the fairness doctrine is in play here. I think that what I call "The self-righteous right wing-nut doctrine" has reared its ugly head.

You're right, there's no 'fairness doctrine' here. We just publish the articles as they come to us.

Dave

Cannonshop,

"Bailouts are NOT a function of a Capitalist system..."

Maybe not a function of 'a Capitalist system', but certainly a function of THE capitalist system.

Les

dave: "Sadly too many people seem to be finding it hard to separate the actions of disgruntled supporters of the candidates from the campaigns and from the candidates themselves. "

i hope you count yourself in that "too many people." and i quote:

dave: "That said, if this story is even partly true - and we've got no evidence to contradict it at this point - it confirms everything I've observed elsewhere about the fanaticism of Obama supporters."

can't even remember what you write.

"No, Miguel, that would be redundant. They mean the same thing. I meant what I wrote. If Obama wins there's a pretty good chance that there will be rioting, because that is the pattern we see in these cities after major sports victories"

I doubt it. The people who support Obama are much more the rioting type than those who oppose him.

DO you think anyone here would get TWO freakin POLITICAL articles published on the SAME day but Dave "knothead" Nalle?

Actually, yes. I have published two articles by the same author in the same day on more than one occasion.

Arch, my point is that sometimes people riot when they're happy as well as when they're sad.

Dave

riots are fun.

Arch, my point is that sometimes people riot when they're happy as well as when they're sad.

And my point was that if you look at recent American history you will see that most of the rioting and civil unrest that has been politically motivated has been committed by those on the left side of the political spectrum.


"DO you think anyone here would get TWO freakin POLITICAL articles published on the SAME day but Dave "knothead" Nalle?"

Which idiot said that?

For the last time, when Ayers was out being a "terrorist" Obama was EIGHT YEARS OLD

Again Sherry,

Should I apologize or show remorse for writing an assigned book report in high school about Boris Yeltsin? Does that make me a communist.

Should a neighbor apologize or show remorse for living two doors down from John Wayne Gacy, and knew him enough to sit on his porch and share a neighborly cigarette? Does that make him a mass murderer of little boys too?

Should I apologize or show remorse for defending Dave Nalle because he made a human mistake and published a news article too soon? Does that make me a right-wing Libertarian too?

Should everyone apologize or show remorse who has ever agreed with anything I've written on this website? Does that make them a Faggot like me?

Should I apologize or show remorse for working for the Campaign to Reelection of Gerald R. Ford for President and writing an obituary for him here? Does that make me Republican?

This fucking guilt through association bullshit with Ayres is getting real old kid...

reeeeeealy old.

If you've ever visited Columbus Ohio after an OSU football victory, you'd know Dave's right on comment #56

Les @ #34:

It's not person failings, but systemic ones, that seem to increase the inclination of some to scream 'socialism' as the bogyman for all deviations from their Utopian dogma.

That's one of the best and most succinct comments on the subject I've seen. Institutionalized racism (and sexism, and ageism, and a bunch of other -isms) is a difficult concept to get one's head around.

Take the inflated percentage of the prison population that is African-American, for example, and the lower likelihood that a white person will end up behind bars than a black person who committed the same crime. You could examine the words and actions of every person involved at every stage of those two hypothetical people's arrest, charging, trial and conviction, and you would probably see very little to convince you that any one person in the justice system was acting out of racial prejudice. You would not be able to pinpoint exactly where in the process the two defendants were being treated unfairly or differently.

And yet the black guy is on his way to the slammer while the white guy is out on probation.

The effects are very subtle, but cumulatively they're obvious.

Right on, Dr. D. But people just don't want to see that. They call it whining and victimhood. When it is just the growing pains of democracy. Like the failures of our form of capitalism. We need to be able to change WITHOUT PANICKING and yelling SOcialism and Communism at every new and thoughtful idea.

Lighten up. Be open to something different. The same old same old is not working.

Why must change be directed towards something negative, towards the reduction of individual rights and the empowering of government to solve problems we ought to be able to solve for ourselves?

I'm all for change, but let's stop a minute and make it change for the better, to empower people to control their own lives and live with greater freedom and more opportunities.

Dave

And you think John McCain wants to do that?
Fat chance. Obama's policies will ultimately do that. Give them a chance. Change does not come all at once. We are only 250 years old and still making LOTS of mistakes. Clearly. Still taking baby steps and goofing up big time. Obama's policies take away NO individual freedoms. They make people more responsible for themselves AND each other.....

Take a deep breath. Relax. As much money as my kids' college funds have lost I refuse to panic. It is what it is. I can't do anything about it at this moment. But I can plan for a better future.

And you think John McCain wants to do that?

Not in a very effective way, but I at least think he won't take us too far in the opposite direction.

Fat chance. Obama's policies will ultimately do that. Give them a chance.

But Obama has expressly advocated policies which will produce the exact opposite results. If Obama makes things better it will only happen because his administration is such a disaster (see Kenn Jacobine's new article) that we have a full on rebellion against it and go the opposite direction.

Dave

When it is just the growing pains of democracy. Like the failures of our form of capitalism. We need to be able to change WITHOUT PANICKING and yelling SOcialism and Communism at every new and thoughtful idea.

Well, soon you will have your chance to test the viability of your ideas.

I'm gonna go get my beach chair and beer cooler, I want a front row seat to watch this experiment in Democracy evolve (the Founders are spinning in their graves!).

I'm not panicking, but I have a feeling the Marshall Islands are going to enjoy a boom in yacht registrations in the coming years.

Jet - What I meant (and maybe didn't say clearly enough) is that Ayers never expressed regret. No I don't think Obama is guilty by association and I said so in my post.

I clearly said I have a problem with Ayers not Obama (or Obama's association with him).

I'm not sure how any the things in your response apply to what I said. I never implied anyone is guilty by association as I strongly disagree with those types of claims myself.

The failures of the Bush Administration and Reaganomics culminating in the near collapse of our economy point up the shortcomings of the unregulated free market. When greed takes over, all bets are off. Rules bedamned. Screw guidelines. It becomes a free for all, every man for himself. Me first!

Free market capitalists can neither be trusted nor counted upon to self-regulate. The ONLY entity that can provide such regulation is the government. Probably far from ideal, but no one else has stepped up to the plate.

You all screwed the pooch. Now the resultant puppies are shitting on the carpet, pissing on your shoes and gnawing on the furniture. Obama's obedience school should be opening its doors come January 20.

B

Obama's obedience school should be opening its doors come January 20.

Sorry, but I'm too old to go back to school, and don't think Obama has anything to teach me that I'm interested in learning. I always have been against government schools, and never spent so much as one day in one as a youngster.

I've always maintained Clavos that the two most intelligent things anyone can utter are...

1. I don't know
2. I was wrong

We remain arogant only through ignorance
We learn only from our mistakes

You're right, jet.

Free market capitalists can neither be trusted nor counted upon to self-regulate. The ONLY entity that can provide such regulation is the government. Probably far from ideal, but no one else has stepped up to the plate.

Who would disagree withthis? I didn't disagree BEFORE the current debacle. But regulating and having the government essentially take over industries are two radically different things. I'm all for sensible regulation - that's the government's job. Micromanaging businesses and setting policies for how they should operate on a day to day basis is not the proper role of government.

Dave

Clav,

Maybe you can get an "old fart" exemption. I've already applied for mine.;)

B

Sherry,

Give it a rest. Bill Ayers is not running for president. He's a grumpy old fart rotting away in a university somewhere in Chicago.

You have every right to be bothered by his lack of remorse, but why be bothered by it in a discussion about Barack Obama... if the two men's 'association' really doesn't trouble you?

I'm a bit bothered by Scott Peterson's lack of remorse, for that matter, but I'm not going to agonize about it here.

Re #69, Baritone, excellent.

That's right, Clav. Just sit and soak the selfishly rich, and get whatever you can out of them.

Love, Pollyanna.

#63 -- Dr Dreadful

So Doc, because you say......you would probably see very little to convince you that any one person in the justice system was acting out of racial prejudice, and yet the black guy is on his way to the slammer while the white guy is out on probation.

The effects are very subtle, but cumulatively they're obvious.

Are you saying it is cumulative based purely on racism and nothing else? That is how your words apear to me. If this is what you are truly saying, then please confirm it for me.

Or offer up whatever other contributing factors you think my also play and decidedly active role in the heavier black incarceration rate.

Dave, IF the government had done its job properly, we might not be quite in this mess. But the free market capitalists would not have it. So, let's get this fixed and then see what happens. Right now, unfortunately, we have to fix this godawful mess the Republicans (and government in general) got us in to) and our little experiment in free markets without regulation got us into. WHAT are Americans so afraid of in a new vision? Yikes. Fear of fear itself????? THAT is what the Repubs are doing by these awful robo calls and hate mongering.

Are you saying it is cumulative based purely on racism and nothing else?

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. That would be as absurd as the claim that there is no institutionalized racism.

On a micro scale, I don't see how you would verify it other than to take a white individual and a black individual charged with the same crime and who have a comparable criminal history, economic status, social background, education, personality type and so forth, put them both through the criminal justice system and see what happens.

On a macro scale, the numbers speak for themselves - and the additional factors you asked for, and which I mentioned, are part of the institutionalized racism I'm talking about.

Institutions, remember, are impersonal, and you've got to remember that there isn't necessarily going to be any conscious malice involved. That's what makes the notion so hard for some people to get their heads around.

#23 -- Lisa Solod Warren

Franco, You are scary.

Be vewwy quiet and you can hear the footsteps.

#63 -- Lisa Solod Warren

"Like the failures of our form of capitalism. We need to be able to change WITHOUT PANICKING and yelling SOcialism and Communism at every new and thoughtful idea."

If the thought or the idea to be suggested to be implemented is communistic/socialistic, then you should not have to worry and neither should anyone else, because then we know what they are and then everyone can say ya or na.

The problem with your statement is it says neither and identifies nothing with relationship to those 2 "isms" except panic. The only "ism" you made an attempt to clarify is capitalism in it's failures and yet you yourself fail to make any specific reference to them. It is not a balanced argument of any of the isms.

Maybe you would like to be more specific instead of "feel good" casting your fate to the winds of change with one of the most shallowest statements I have seen in a long time when you say........Lighten up. Be open to something different. The same old same old is not working.

The utter shallowness of your assertion is what is truly scary.

Fixing what is not working in capitalism is where or minds and energies should be focused to make it better for all, not scrapping it ror or injecting it with other "isms". Finding and agreeing on these problems has to be done first, then we can move forward, and it is going to have to involve the businesses community to do it.

Everyone talks about the big corporations being evil. Many are for many reasons and those reasons are not all the same. We need to specify what needs to be rained in and what needs to be let out.

But what critics of captitalism fail to take into account makes there aruments shallow from the get go. That is, 95% of business in American are small business and they employ over 80% of Americans. And just one of those American employees or any group of them can decide to come together and start a business of their own, the law is there to do just that. So this concept of slave labor by capitalism is bullshit.

Fact: Most people do not want the responsibilities and risks that is demanded in starting and running a small business. Long after the employees are gone and having dinner, beer or wine, being with the family, friends or going to night school, what ever, the owner of the business they work for is still at work finishing his 14 hour day. Who is the real slave?

And don't try and tell me I don't know what I'm taking about. I am running two businesses right now, One in Los Angeles I started 11 years, and the other I started up in Chile 7 years ago which is an affiliate of the Los Angeles company.

Capitalism is both (1) a proven systems for bettering ones life and the lives of those involved in it. (2) the greatest tax revenue sources over any other system ever devised.

For you to say.......Lighten up. Be open to something different. The same old same old is not working.......reveals such an absences of the basics that it is the thing that is truly scary.

"Right on, Dr. D. But people just don't want to see that. They call it whining and victimhood. When it is just the growing pains of democracy.

Bullshit!

People of color from all over the world are clamoring to get into it in the US and most of them are the poor from around the world. If you can't make it here, your can't make it anywhere, and that goes for every color of us.

But I want to know way all the poor of color that have come to the US ever since the 70's (Latinos and Asians) have all made out better at bettering their lives and the black Americans already here got passed up by them. (And these new immigrants didn't even speak English when they get here).

Those are some hard facts that if not positively addressed are only going to continue. If the blacks need the extra help over other people of color, what is the reason for that? And don't call me racist because I am not, I have worked in the black and Asians comminutes of South Central and other parts Los Angeles and I am immersed in Latin society here in Chile as well, and mostly with the poor. So I am asking an honest question about blacks in America.

Franco as Elmer Fudd? Is that your Halloween costume? Priceless.

#79 -- Dr Dreadful

On a macro scale, the numbers speak for themselves - and the additional factors you asked for, and which I mentioned, are part of the institutionalized racism I'm talking about.

OK, with respeck to all other factors you mentioned, you're saying we don't know what part, or percentage of incarceration of blacks is solely based on racism. Do I understand you correctly?

Dave, IF the government had done its job properly, we might not be quite in this mess. But the free market capitalists would not have it.

The 'free market capitalists' aren't the ones who got us where we are. They weren't invited to the table when big business and government began screwing things up.

So, let's get this fixed and then see what happens. Right now, unfortunately, we have to fix this godawful mess the Republicans (and government in general) got us in to)

Well, mostly the democrats, actually. If you recall the facts of ths situation, a vocal minority of republicans has been opposing the way things were going all along.

and our little experiment in free markets without regulation got us into. WHAT are Americans so afraid of in a new vision? Yikes. Fear of fear itself????? THAT is what the Repubs are doing by these awful robo calls and hate mongering.

The left has been hate mongering against Bush for almost 8 years and Republicans have had to put up with it. And the hatemongering has been more vile than anything McCain and Palin have said.

Dave

I don't know what you're trying to lead me into saying, Franco, but of course we can't based on the DoJ stats alone. It would be interesting to see if anyone has analyzed the figures statistically, so as to take into account somehow those other factors. I'll do some research on that if I have time. Maybe you could too.

Dave, Bush took a country that was running reasonably well, took goodwill after 9-11, took a war that was probnably winnable in Afghanistan, took away rights after rights, screwed up in Iraq, and you don't expect people to be angry? Gimme a break. That's democracy. To protest a government that has done wrong and evil things. Hatemongering my ass. Bush has had 8 years to mess things up and he has done an excellent job of it. We are not happy, and the country wishes to do something about it. SO they are. At least we haven't staged a coup.

#50 Cannonshop

#42 Les, Bailouts are NOT a function of a Capitalist system,

Of course they are. Capitalism simply is based on all power being in the hands of the owners of capital. Everything is permitted.

Perhaps you, like many self-styled capitalists, believe in some sort of prettified 'capitalism' in which there are inhibiting rules and some semblance of fair play. Perhaps some notion of 'entrepeneurship'. A real capitalist crushes entrepeneurship whenever he sees it rear it's ugly head.

Capitalism simply says that all power rests with the owners of capital, like property, machinery, slaves, etc.

Don't confuse your foggy dreamy notions with capitalism.

Bush haters? This is an argument that NRO and their obedient echoes, like Dave, have been pushing for several years now. I think the idea is to convince people that opposition to Bush is based on pure unreasoning hatred of Bush rather than on any rational response to his policies and deeds. After all, if it's just unreasoning hatred then opposition can be belittled and disregarded.

Sometimes Bush opposition is belittled as "Bush Derangement Syndrome", as if it were a psychological malady.

Clavos,

I've been thinking of writing a response to Franco's #81 which I think is quite reasonable on the whole. One of the things that came up in my thinking was the issue of trickledown economics.

I used to make a considerable amount of money. Way back in '87 I had a salary of $75K, enough to afford a nice house in a good neighborhood of a fairly wealthy community. $266K (1987) house which I put 50% down.

The reason I address this to you is because during the years I had a pretty good income I considered buying a nice boat. I did a lot of research and looking and found a used one worth looking at floating on Bras d Or Lake on Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia. I flew to Halifax, rented a car and drove to where the boat was moored. It was a 44' wooden Heisler motor/yacht/cruiser. It was quite nice and actually put money down for a deposit.

The broker offered to introduce me to the owner of the boatyard that built it. The boatyard was Clarence R. Heisler and Son Limited, located on Gifford Island in Mahone Bay, Nova Scotia. At the appointed time and date a boat was sent to pick me up on the mainland and get me to the boatbuilding site on Gifford Island. There I was greeted by Cecil Heisler, the president and third generation of the boatbuilding family.

I got a tour of the manufacturing facility of the yard. I did not see a whole lot of high tech. I'm sure there was some, but it was emphasized by Cecil that it was mostly craftsmanship that went into the production of the boats. He said these were no cookie cutter cousins of Tupperware. The boats there were now upward of a million bucks. He pointed out that 'my' boat was custom built for a very wealthy customer.

At the same time I was there, there were two young couples on the deck of a Heisler sail craft anchored just off shore from the boatyard. I was informed they were German and that they, and a crew, now on the mainland, had sailed from Europe for some refitting. No details or cost were mentioned.

It now occurs to me that those million plus buck purchases are largely going to a pre-capitalist mode of production. Probably even the electronics are not the usual Raymarine ® mass produced items, and if they are, are a relatively small part of that million plus. Functionally, the purchaser is not getting much more than those cookie cutter cousins of Tupperware.

But where does that money go? Of course some has to go to the local economy. Some, and a not insignificant portion, go to purchasing products from developing world economies.

I'll go more into this if I get around to a more comprehensive response to Franco's #81.

Les

Franco, Obama doesn't want to squelch small businesses. My father owned one, I understand how great they can be and how they can support a family, so neither do I. But what has happened in this country is that BIG Business had made it nearly impossible for small businesses to thrive..... the small businesses are the ones that are suffering right now and NO ONE is offering them any bailouts, are they? Is the government doing anything to help them? Why isn't some of the 700 billion plus going to stop the closing of wonderful small businesses all over American that you see every night on the news?

And Les, I am deeply impressed by the fact that you could even consider buying a boat like the one which you described on that salary. DO tell more.:)

I had a boat in the 1980s. Thankfully I was able to get rid of it before it sailed me into the poor house. I do miss it sometimes.

As for Bush Derangement Syndrome, the problem is that it's not directed at his policies, it's directed at him personally. And it started well before things went bad in Iraq and Afghanistan. It started virtually from the moment he was elected.

It originates not in anything Bush did, but in revenge from those who feel that Clinton was maltreated by Republicans in the Congress who have been out for revenge since the impeachment and as the Republican president Bush became their target through no fault of his own. Admittedly he provided them with ammunition, but the hate was there first.

Dave

RE #87

bliffle,

That is the most eloquent description of capitalism I have yet seen.

Socialism? No, bailouts are typical: Government intervention has lots of precedent, and free markets will return

When we bail-out the wealthiest in our nation there is no great outcry of "socialism". "Socialism" for the rich has never met with any real resistance from capitalists. They have always turned a blind eye to...no, make that have always supported and justified "socialism" for the wealthy (via corporate incentives and reductions of capital gains taxes). They have always decried social programs or decreasing the burden on the drowning middle class and god forbid those "non-productive" lowlifes that slave for minimum wage.

Lowering taxes on the middle class and poor--THAT is "socialism".

...McCain at one time opposed the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. "I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle-class Americans," he said in 2001.

Now he wants to make those tax cuts permanent - and even expand them. But even more ironic, McCain calls Obama a socialist a week after Republican President George W. Bush has taken perhaps as much as $1 trillion in American taxpayer money and partially nationalized most major American banks. Meanwhile, Sarah Palin calls Obama a socialist while being governor of a state that expropriates huge chunks of private oil company profits and then regularly doles out generous sums to every citizen of Alaska. "My friends" (to steal a phrase) that's a lot like socialism....I love the total contradictions and muddled logic of those who denounce "socialism" for the working/middle classes but embrace it when it comes to huge government bailouts for really rich people and companies.

Capitalism requires a financially strong middle-class. The capitalists seem to have forgotten this. Middle-class has no more money? No problem, give them more credit!

We are a very stupid people..led around by the nose with words we don't even understand.

"Capitalism simply is based on all power being in the hands of the owners of capital. Everything is permitted....Don't confuse your foggy dreamy notions with capitalism." (bliffle)


Quote from here.

I think as a peace offering, we should all send Bush a box of pretzels as a parting gift.

Les,

Please do continue at your convenience, I'm eager to see where your narrative will go.

Meanwhile, here's a 1947 45 ft. Tri-cabin Heisler for sale here in FL.

Not trying to sell it to you, it would be unseemly for a Marxist-Leninist Workers Party organizer to own such a frivolous toy, but since you have the good taste to know what a Heisler is, I thought you'd enjoy seeing this one.

I sell high-end Clorox bottles for the most part; increasingly, we (my partner and I) are finding very well-heeled clients, ironically enough, in the former Soviet republics. In the past two years, we have shipped yachts to Croatia, Slovenia, and of course, Russia. Market demand for boats priced above $1M is strong in those countries, though yachts above $2-3M are selling well everywhere, including the USA.

Looking forward to the rest of our discussion, Les!

Lisa,

"I am deeply impressed by the fact that you could even consider buying a boat like the one which you described on that salary."

I was not considering buying one of those million dollar wooden sailboats. I could afford the $60K or so that the used motor yacht was going for. Note that I put 50% down on a $266K house. I was flush with over $100K profit from the sale of my previous home. I was fortunate enough to get that eight years earlier with my new employer paying the 20% down as an enticement to accept me coming to work for him. That employer also offered generous profit sharing bonuses. I had some serious cash.

Part of the reason for my #89, besides making an economic point, was to remind some who think they're experts on capitalism (wasn't referring to you Clavos), that I actually worked many years in industry, often at fairly high levels, and did have to make executive decisions. My understanding is not just theoretical; I've been there.

Les

John McCain: "I am not George Bush." I can understand why people think I'm not different than President Bush. The fact is that I have agreed with President Bush most of the time. The fact is I am different.

Cindy, when the things which he disagrees with Bush on are the major, controversial issues then a few disagreements can mean the world of difference, as you really should be smart enough to know, even if you choose to take the partisan position instead.

And Les, working as a cog in the vast machine of an industrial bureaucracy is nice, but it really doesn't give you a balanced, grounds-eye view of capitalism. For that you need to work for or own one of the small companies which make up the bulk of our employers and revenue generators and see first hand how business works. In the kind of job you had you're too isolated from the day to day life or death decisions of the small capitalist.

Dave

Les said he had to make executive decisions Dave. I think we can take his word that those decisions provided him with direct experience.

dave,

You mean major controversial issues like the Bush tax cuts?

Dave,

"In the kind of job you had you're too isolated from the day to day life or death decisions of the small capitalist."

In the case of the small capitalist, up to $150 million per year, I was very close to the top, and did participate in daily decisions of the companies. There are rarely daily life and death decisions to be made. However, I was involved in the removal, at my instigation, of a president from his office. At another company I had a marketing argument with the president. He won the argument but when I proved to be correct, he was shown the door. At yet another company it was my recommendation that the company fold operations that convinced management to do just that.

At bigger companies, which include Digital Equipment Corporation and General Electric, I was instrumental in convincing these companies to start multi-million dollar projects or to cancel them. I have also been instrumental in some significant reorganizations (read I insisted that what was could not continue). I have come head to head with big corporation management and got THEM to back down from their stupidities.

I have never been afraid of being fired, and have been a few times, The higher up I've been the less tolerance I've had for incompetence, which I found aplenty. I usually find allies because my frankness has often found resonance, not only with those at my level or below, but sometimes with upper management.

One time when I was just the engineer that designed a project, and all the sign-offs were relegated to management above me, and the decided to ship, I, outside any formal authority, called for a halt in shipment, because production test software was not fully tested. I got a lot of dirty looks, but the rest of the management got called on the carpet, big time.

Presidents of small companies, up to the $150 million gross sales, knowing I was a communist, confided in me with their concerns about their business and the state of the market and where things were going.

I still keep in touch with the president that I got removed from his position and another whose last act as my boss, fired me. Both have given the best of recommendations for later employment.

Les

Dave attempts evasion again:

"As for Bush Derangement Syndrome, the problem is that it's not directed at his policies, it's directed at him personally. And it started well before things went bad in Iraq and Afghanistan. It started virtually from the moment he was elected."

Virtually? What does THAT mean?

The expression "Bush Derangement Syndrome" was created by the right (NRO, I believe) and was intended to belittle ANYONE who took issue with Bush policies.

bliffle,

Dave is at least partially correct. Bush is not to blame for much of what he gets blamed for. Primarily, he is just carrying on from where Clinton left off. Much of the hysteria about Bush is just that, hysteria. It's not just Bush, it's bipartisan.

Dave is wrong however by saying things went bad in Iraq and leaving it at that. The U.S. has made much progress (from its point of view) in Iraq.

Les

Jeez Dr Dreadful I was just clarifying a misunderstanding. But I'm happy to give the discussion a rest.

Obama really sucks and will ruin the U.S. I am depressed about the state of the country and it is going to get worse I fear.

Dave,

Just for you, I have taken the pains to quote John McCain words, instead of paraphrasing him.

John McCain, June 2005, on Meet the Press:

"The fact is that I'm different. But, the fact is that I have agreed with President Bush far more than I've disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I have been totally in agreement and support of President Bush [my partisan emphasis].So, I strongly disagree with any assertion that I've been more at odds with the President of the United States more than I've been in agreement with him. [March 5, 2008] Well, I am very honored and humbled to have the opportunity to receive the endorsement of the President of the United States....I intend to have as much campaigning events and as much as in sort of keeping with the President's heavy schedule...[like while he's not on vacation, my partisan comment].

McCain will say or do anything to get elected. Period. If having Bush on his campaign agenda would help, he'd do it. If railing against Bush would help, he'd do it. If choosing an ignorant incompetent VP would help, he'd do it.

Buck,

Never fear, you are obviously rich. It never gets really bad for you. Not by McCain and not by Obama.

McCain will say or do anything to get elected. Period.

C'mon, Cindy. So has every other pol (of any nationality) since the dawn of time, including The Messiah (my partisan title, coined by Louis Farrakhan, a prominent American leader)

Clav,

So, lay out the evidence. we are relying on that generalization we know to be true. But, it means so much more with examples.

Cindy,

You had the temerity to ask for EVIDENCE from the Carl Hiaasen Villain?

Maybe he can tell you about the Double Whammy before he tells you to jump in the lake and Skin Dive.

And maybe he'll tell you you're a Basket Case and continue whining like Sick Puppy.

But he won't post anything that even remotely could be termed EVIDENCE. He don't need no stinkin' evidence.

Until I visited this site and the Miami Herald site I thought Hiaasen wrote fiction.

Since then he has risen mightily in my estimation as a skilled documentalist.

Funny too.

OK Cindy,

You don't have to believe that all pols are liars if you don't want to; I'm not about to spend the rest of my life researching lies told by every pol who ever lived.

My Dad taught me many years ago to watch for their lips to start moving in order to know when they're lying. As in most things, the old guy was right.

But, If you DON'T believe that lying is their stock in trade, I have some very nice land in western Broward county to sell you, for when you move down here.

I was just discussing the replacement of a solar light ($85 at Home Despot [no spelling error] 3 months ago) with my repair person. This was going to save me money on electricity. Gee, a light that goes on for max 60 seconds twice a day for three months $85. Now it doesn't work. Not that this is unfamiliar to anyone reading this.

The person who repairs my things that need repairs assured me that he is having a lot of problems with the new PVC Chinese pipes (which he installed for me 6 months ago. They're thinner, much too thin to tighten adequately. They keep leaking. Nothing he does helps, but temporarily.

I have a tape player circa 1980 Radio Shack...it still works but is kinda cruddy looking. It is still my best choice after new replacements from Radio Shack over the last 15 years. All of which failed within months. I don't buy from Radio Shack anymore.

I now need to figure into my budget a new coffee pot every 5-6 months, new pipes, new cost saving solar lights, new tape players, etc. etc.

Thank god my vacuum cleaner, TV, etc are still old enough to work. I can't wait until I get to replace them every 5-6 months.

None of my pets died from the Chinese fuck up with pet food. I still have my kidneys cuz I didn't eat the other Chinese crap that was laden with dangerous (BUT CHEAP!) additives. My baby isn't at risk from Chinese cost savings, cuz I don't have a baby. The Chinese are showing us what we look like with limited regulation.

When people no longer have money to spend--the tenet of Capitalism that says those who make the best product will get the business the rest will fail--doesn't exist. Capitalism now means the hell with quality. People will buy what is cheap. They can't afford to buy anything else.

I am moving toward a smaller (wholly owned, good fortune that is mine) home with less reliance on electricity, etc. Hopefully, there are someone other than the Chinese who make solar "cost saving" lights.

That reminds me of my activist days. When companies whose pacifiers failed U.S. approval because they were dangerous simply exported them where those sorts of laws didn't exist.

Do they still do that? Or is that the job of the Chinese now?

OK Cindy, You don't have to believe that all pols are liars if you don't want to; I'm not about to spend the rest of my life researching lies told by every pol who ever lived.

Why, of course I believe you Clav! Who doesn't know all pols are liars? I just asked for evidence (not of every one that ever lived) but in this single case where you are implying that what I said for McCain goes for Obama. So, show me how Obama lies "just like" McCain does. No need to search back in ancient history.

moon,

I read one Carl Hiaasen novel, Skinny Dip, it was about 6 months ago. Any recommendations?

Cindy,

I really wanted to see the Carl Hiaasen Swamprat post HIS English translation of one of Cicero's Orations against Cataline as EVIDENCE.

That's be the day (My favorite John Wayne line).

Meanwhile, it's time for dessert.

Cindy,

I will be happy to show you when Obama lied. On 3/31/08 Obama was asked if he was a member of the CFR, he claimed that he did not know if he was a member. That in itself is an outright lie, of course he knows that he is a member, as it is the most powerful prestigious political group in the country. The he went on cutely to say how their is no secret handshake for their members. Not only do you have to be vetted, and invited to join this globalist group, the dues are 500 bucks per year.

Skinny Dip, if I remember correctly, did have a sleazy character with a boat who tried to kill his wife by pushing her overboard.
[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor]

I have not read them all. The first one I read in Spanish translation--which was still funny enough that I went looking for others at the Seattle Goodwill on one of my trips north. It was called Lucky You.

It's my experience that the earlier Hiaasens are funnier, as in the most recent ones he seems to have pretensions or aspirations or conjugations or obfuscations in regard to becoming a "better" (more serious) writer. My personal favorite, for sheer laughs, is Native Tongue.

But all of them are populated by folks like [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor] the really genetically damaged types like the folks who post on the Miami Herald site.

According to Hiaasen, the generic name for them is crackers.

Pablo,

I am talking about lies as far as his platform, you know what he represents to his voting public are his stances on issues.

I am not talking about Ron Paul supporter crackpot conspiracy claims.

If that isn't what you are claiming then stop making allegations (what they even mean I have no clue). and present some evidence. Crackpot conspiracy sites don't count as evidence.

Cindy - I am "obviously rich"? That is so not worth responding to, I'm not sure why I am bothering.

Obama IS a liar and will say ANYthing to get elected. He is a charismatic speaker with a likable persona. He is a democrat during the worst possible time (public opinion-wise) to be a republican. The anti-republican sentiment has reached fever pitch and much of it is completely unfounded. Obama will be a FINANCIAL DISASTER for the United States. That will adverse effect you and everyone else, rich or not.

Down with socialism!

Thanks Buck,

Your reply allows me to rest my case without actually responding to your comments.

Cindy,

I presented you evidence dear, however your a bit slow on the uptake. The CFR is not a conspiracy, but in fact a group, you can access their website here sweetie. cfr.org

You just go on using your derogatory terminology, as if I care, I don't. I responded to a question, and answered it. Obama is a liar. Case closed.

Oh and Cindy,

If you would like several more examples of Obama being a liar here are two prime examples.

He said that he would not take financing from corporations. He does

He said that he would vote against the illegal wiretapping of American citizens, he voted for it.

You just go ahead and live in your little dream world Cindy. That Obama is the answer, and that your vote counts. He is not, and your vote means diddlysquat. You live in the matrix honey, and you have no say, nor do I who is the next President.

If I am a crackpot, you dear, are a delusional, naive, uninformed, silly example of someone who thinks that they are politically informed.

Sorry Pablo hunny bunch, the CFR fails to note all their horrid evil deeds on the front page of their site, smoochy kins...

Obama, he lied about being a boy scout? So far as I know your comment is the equivalent snuggle uggums.

You know, we wouldn't have all this paranoia and name calling and hate if them damn stupid Democrat poopie heads would just quit lying and vote for Palin-McCain like they know they should.

He said that he would not take financing from corporations. He does

You'll need to fill me in on this one, cutey patootey.

He said that he would vote against the illegal wiretapping of American citizens, he voted for it.

Yes, I think I called him a horse's ass shortly thereafter, luvvy dumpling.

Okay, you've made your point. I guess he will say or do anything. Just like McCain. Just not as often, sugar cookie.

Al!

Watch your language :-)

#91 -- Dave Nalle

I had a boat in the 1980s. Thankfully I was able to get rid of it before it sailed me into the poor house. I do miss it sometimes.

I know what you mean and that is why I never bought one. I used to build them after I got out of high school working at Islander Yachts in Coasta Mesa, CA. Worked on the 32' and 36' installing all the deck fittings, teak hatches windows, cleats, lights, and whole bit. Used to use a product called Dolphinite to seal everything with when installing. Do they still use that Clavos?

The cheapest way to access a yacth if to reat one. We would rent them from owners who we did boat repair work for. The best adventure was to sail to Catalina once a year. Three couples for three days and split the cost.

Each couple was responsalbe to buy all the food for all three meals for one day for everyone and cook and serve it to the other two couples for that whole day. This way you did all the work and served the others for one day, and for two days you got waited on and served.

Each couple wanted to show off and out do the others in what they prepared and served. It was a blast. Great food, live music, booz, snorkeling in 30 ft of crystal clear pacific ocean, and sailing out to different coves and taking the diggy to shore and hike in hills.

The cost of renting the 42' yacht for three days and having it only cost you 33% after splitting three ways, and the food, and great company, it made the biggest bang for the buck imaginable. Never have found anything that beat it, and it could still be done today.

And the best part of all was you get to hand the boat back over to its owner who is responable for its upkeep and mantance and he pays you for all maintance work you do for him.

You just have to love the free market!!!

Here you go Cindy [Edited]:

"There's no question that industry loves Barack. As of March 31, UBS, the second largest bank in Europe, has given over $165,000 to his campaign. The Exelon corporation, which is the nation's largest nuclear plant operator, has donated almost $160,000. The investment Goliath, Goldman Sachs, has also fattened the pockets of Barack Inc. with over $143,000. Citigroup has given well over $50,000 with Morgan Stanley close behind at $40,000. Wall Street has Obama's back."

Obama Darling of Wall Street

See you later tonight [Edited]. :)

Oh and Cindy?

You said:
"the CFR fails to note all their horrid evil deeds on the front page of their site, smoochy kins...

You might try Tragedy and Hope written by Professor Carrol Quigley, (Bill Clinton's self professed political mentor), of whom he mentioned in his acceptance speech at the Democratic convention.

[Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor], in it he lays it all out about the CFR. My hunch is however that your a bit too closed minded to ever pick up a book that challenges your naive assumptions about US politics. But I offer it anyways [Personal attack deleted by Comments Editor].

bye now Cindy :)

Clavos,

I am not trying to dent your yacht sales in my post #127. We need those fat cats and big egos to buy them or my gig doesn't work. :-)

Back in the 70's when I was building them in Coasta Mesa, CA, it as not a stuck up town like it is now. You would find people building yachts in the back yards all over town. I mean yachts. 30' and 40'ers.

Today too many plastic yuppies and botox bimbos complain about that kind of individualistly spirited yard construction. I never saw it as eye soar though, to me it was rather a charm of the city as most people did. Those days are gone.

I rent a boat from time to time when I'm up in Maine during the summer. It's not cheap, but it's a lot more convenient than trying to deal with a boat over the winter up there.

Nice to see Pablo going off about the CFR yet again. Next it will be the Bilderbergers and some of the other apparatus of the imaginary secret world government - perhaps the gnomes of Zurich who tend Barbarossa's immortal body where it lies hidden beneath the Zugspitz.

Dave

I like your style, Cindy (#126).

The big one for me is his having vowed to use public money at the beginning and then breaking that promise. It was a clever tactic, but fundamentally dishonest

I freely admit that during the primary I was willing to support Obama if it stopped a Hillary Clinton or a Mitt Romney from getting elected. Then, well before the negative campaigning, I began researching Obama's actual beliefs and background and I realized that he was potentially the most dangerous and extreme candidate ever nominated for the presidency by a major party.

What the McCain campaign is doing is to try to bring that same understanding of Obama's background and beliefs to the general population. If you share Obama's beliefs and if you support him, then the accusations against him should not bother you at all. If they do bother you, perhaps you ought to think and learn more about Obama, because most of what he's being accused of is basically true. There's no need to make stuff up.

Dave

Name one extremist position you think Obama holds which should be repugnant to all Americans and demonstrate by factual argument how you know he holds that opinion.

If you can do this I will cast the absentee ballot in my hands for John McCain.

Just so that you and I understand each other Cindy [edited]. I know you are not cognizant of your and my non-relationship. I will take the time out just this one time so that you will understand my attitude towards you comes from.

In point of fact, I treat everyone that I relate to whether it be in person or in the virtual world with respect. I do not patronize, condescend, ignore, or in other way treat other human beings without deference, until such time as they show me no respect. If you were to archive in google our very infrequent encounters on here, you will find that you cast the first stone [edited]. I can guarantee you that I will cast the last one.

The same goes for you Nalle, and Clavy. There are a few others on here as well, that have also been quite rude to me, prior to me returning the favor.

People such as Nalle, and Cindy remind me of how people have ALWAYS treated other people who are in ignorance and fear.

I do not advocate racism, misogyny or totalitarianism.

What people such as yourself Cindy [edited] do, as well as Nalle (even though you may be politically opposed) is make fun of a concept that you do not understand, and you have also not researched it.

You may have noticed Cindy, (although I doubt you have, and am quite sure you will counter with you never read me anyways) that I an be a very agreeable fellow, even if I disagree with a person fundamentally. I can also be a prick honey, particularly when a person chooses to denigrate rather than debate.

I was actually taught, and I still practice it. If you have nothing nice to say, then why bother to say it?

Google the shit yourself [edited], you will find that you cast the first stone. The same is true of you Nalle, and your bosom buddy.

I still welcome civil debate, and am more than willing to stop with the petty shenanagins. Take a good hard look around you folks. The world is falling apart at the seams.

This is my lame attempt at a truce, I won't offer it again, and will respond to derision with same.

pablo

So... those tax cuts for the GOP that are supposed to "trickle" down to the rest of us actually go towards yaught purchases or rentals.

How did I know that?

B