Amerika??

[Goggles Pizano]

This blew me away a moment ago.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070529/clinton_economy.html?.v=1


WTF? In my civics class (circa 1978) this was classified as...

com·mu·nism (kŏm'yə-nĭz'əm) Pronunciation Key
n.
A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
Communism
A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.

Exactly how does any clear thinking American think this broad has the interest of this country's future at heart? Socialist welfare system; it's all Bush's fault; the vast right wing conspiracy; get out of jail free cards; rewriting history; now this. I'm at a loss folks. :mad:

[rubberneck]

She gets away with this because half the American public is either too stupid or too distracted to read between the lines. Half of the remaining 50% believes that she is right and openly embrace socialism, and the other half gets written off as members of a vast right wing conspiracy by her henchmen. It really is sad and Obama is no better.

[Ret10Echo]

And the abolition of this state of things is called by the bourgeois, abolition of individuality and freedom! And rightly so. The abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom is undoubtedly aimed at.

By freedom is meant, under the present bourgeois conditions of production, free trade, free selling and buying.

But if selling and buying disappears, free selling and buying disappears also. This talk about free selling and buying, and all the other “brave words” of our bourgeois about freedom in general, have a meaning, if any, only in contrast with restricted selling and buying, with the fettered traders of the Middle Ages, but have no meaning when opposed to the Communistic abolition of buying and selling, of the bourgeois conditions of production, and of the bourgeoisie itself.

You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.

In one word, you reproach us with intending to do away with your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend.


Marx/Engels Selected Works, Volume One, Progress Publishers, Moscow, USSR, 1969

[Rogue]

Anti Hillary.............

[Sdiver]

What is her's and her husband's "Net" value today? Something along the lines of 25 million dollars, plus or minus a few million.

We should start a letter campaign, asking her to "share" what her and Bill have made. I know I could use a nice fat check from her and Billy boy.

Then lets see what she says.




Bitch. :rolleyes:

[Rogue]

Ah....... but the ruling class does not share.....
That's for the rest of us.

[The Reaper]

There is too much private property ownership for the US to go that way. Unless we contuinue expanding the entitlement and nanny state. In 1918 Russia, things were different.

The USSR was not communist, or socialist, in reality, it was an oligarchy, with the power concentrated in the hands of the party elite.

I am beginning to think that is the natural state of things, and we are in, or on the verge of being in an oligarchy here as well.

The same two families could be in the White house for 28 years, 36 if you count Bush Senior when he was VP.

I have no doubt that this American version of royalty was NOT what the founding fathers intended for us.

TR

[x SF med]

All Animals are created equal.
Some animals are more equal than others.
Those animals that are deemed more equal shall have a greater share of goods and a lesser share of work.


And the Pigs lived in the farmhouse, and walked upright, and wore clothes and ate the flesh of the missing lesser animals - while the workers lived in squalor, yet had admiration for their liberators, cum oppressors.

(all paraphrased)


What did George Orwell know? Any reason the International Communist Party tried to keep his books from getting published?

[smp52]

From the article:

Beyond education, Clinton said she would reduce special breaks for corporations, eliminate tax incentives for companies that ship jobs overseas and open up CEO pay to greater public scrutiny.

I thought that CEO pay is upto the share holders of the company (Board of directors, et. al) to decide. If major share holders are unhappy, they are free to dump the stock in the market.

Overseas jobs? In a global world, American companies need foothold all over, just as we open up our country for foreign ownership of assets, American companies should be allowed to do the same. We pressure those countries that don't open themselves up and eventually find inroads. Not only does this benefit Americans with lower cost goods, it keeps American companies competitive, and it influences foreign countries into OUR way of thought.

Best thing to do with business is to ensure their tranparency to the public for publicly traded companies, other than that, let private business and the market sort their own deals out. The more one meddles with the economy, the chances of screwing up increase.

I dislike Mrs. Clinton's views very much.

The same two families could be in the White house for 28 years, 36 if you count Bush Senior when he was VP.

I have no doubt that this American version of royalty was NOT what the founding fathers intended for us.

Sir, I couldn't agree with you more. In some ways, political families running and holding power is a 'back door', IMHO, circumventing the two term limit. Out of 300 million people, you'd figure we'd be able to pick someone else other than a Bush and Clinton. I'm keeping my fingers crossed this go around.

[Ret10Echo]

It seems that the "average" American would rather complain about the result than be involved in the process.
If the same number of people that vote for their favorite on American Idiot would vote for their elected officials there might actually be some accountability.

It isn't flying under the radar it's a matter of nobody looking up to see what is going over....

There was a time when the party selected the candidate to move their agenda forward...now it is the candidate that determines the parties' direction. If you don't have a star in the cast then the show isn't going to get on the road.

[Surf n Turf]

I am beginning to think that is the natural state of things, and we are in, or on the verge of being in an oligarchy here as well.

The same two families could be in the White house for 28 years, 36 if you count Bush Senior when he was VP.

I have no doubt that this American version of royalty was NOT what the founding fathers intended for us.

TR

TR,
I just reviewed the listing of “families” that have been involved in American Politics from the beginning --- it looks as things have not changed, so much as accelerated in the direction of an oligarchy, and I also believe that is NOT what the founders intended, nor would have permitted.
I was unaware of the power of such a small group in directing the fate of our nation – but many of the names are very familiar. Note, these listing DO NOT include “close friends, classmates, etc. that are helped along by association with, or service to, one of the elite cliques.
SnT

It was a reminder that while America has become more egalitarian and Article I of the Constitution explicitly asserts that "no title of nobility should be granted," there is and always has been a political elite in this country that is based on family. The Senate has a Dodd and a Bayh, whose fathers held the seats before them; one Detroit congressional district has been in the Dingell family for seven decades. The governor of Ohio, Robert Taft, is the great-grandson of a president and the grandson and son of senators.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/wsj/?id=85000782

Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey belongs to one of the oldest political dynasties in Congress. His great-great-great-great-grandfather, Frederick Frelinghuysen, was a delegate to the Continental Congress in 1779 and went on to serve in the U.S. Senate from 1793 to 1796.
House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi is the daughter of Thomas D'Alesandro, who served as mayor of Baltimore and later as a congressman. Sens. Jay Rockefeller and Edward Kennedy both belong to large political clans, and former Vice President Al Gore, who lost the presidential race to Bush in 2000, is the son of a U.S. senator.
Among the current crop of candidates seeking the presidency in 2008, Mitt Romney is the son of a Michigan governor and Cabinet secretary who lost a bid for the presidency. And Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the wife of a former president, Bill Clinton.
http://infowars.net/articles/march2007/030307dynasties.htm
Dinner Party Politics: How Dynasties Still Rule America
Hundreds of years ago, all policy was settled at the dinner tables of kings and popes. Marriage alliances were made, treaties agreed upon, and the quality of one's dessert might affect the likelihood of one's going to war.
Today, surprisingly, this has not changed at all, at least not in America . Still, small groups of people in a few key positions determine what the direction of the country is and should be. And still, marriage alliances are made, treaties agreed upon, and war made all in the space of a dinner party.
Political Families: Democratic Royalty
The Adamses . The Tafts. The Roosevelts. The Kennedies and Shrivers. And today, the Bushes. These are only a few of the political families that have been active in the United States. Currently, the Bush-Walker family is on top, with a president, an ex-president, a governor and an ex-governor – all in a single nuclear family of father, mother, and sons. There are dozens of others, cousins and peripheral relatives, with lower-level political offices or appointments.
How does this happen? Well, with relatives come connections. Even though we have rules upon rules barring nepotism, it's still easy for the son of the company president to get a job, and in a democratic election all holds are off.
But there's more to it. In most of these families, you'll also find other ingredients: great wealth, good fortune, attendance at elite universities (whether warranted or not), and movement in the same circles as other wealthy, fortunate, elitist Americans.
In America , we believe everyone has the same opportunity as everyone else. But that's not entirely true; the very wealthy, the very privileged, and the very connected have a better chance than the rest of us. We have created a self-perpetuating political elite. And it's not just in the Bushes. John Kerry married into wealth after being born into Boston aristocracy and acquiring a privileged education, and is now the richest man in the senate. Al Gore was the son of a senator, educated at private schools, St. Albans, and Harvard. Howard Dean was born into the Hamptons social circle, grew up on Park Avenue, and lived in the same world as the Bushes; one of the Dean grandmothers had a Bush grandmother as a bridesmaid.
America likes to see itself as different from the aristocratic, blue-blooded, class-bound, royalty-conscious Brits. Yet 60% of our upper-level politicians were educated at the same handful of schools, have the same background, and are from rich families. Britain does not have the same problem. We are more class-bound today than Great Britain. Dynastic ties from family to family tie the upper classes ever more tightly, and lock out the lower classes. Social circles interlock, and social exclusion is becoming a powerful political tool; while Howard Dean does not want Bush to win any more elections, he'd probably rather elections at least go to someone with his background than an unknown quantity. You can find an appallingly long list on Wikipedia of American political families; these are only a couple of dozens.
http://www.avazo.com/articles/2006-04/en/dynasty-noble-Americans/

Don’t usually like to use Wikipedia ---- but the list of Families was very interesting ----
During its history, the United States has seen many families who have repeatedly produced notable politicians from their ranks, and these historic U.S. political families have had a significant impact on politics in the United States.
Many of these families have moved to national prominence from a state or regional power base. The Kennedys, for example, are particularly associated with Massachusetts; the Long family is identified with Louisiana, the Lees with Virginia, the Roosevelts with New York, the Daleys with Illinois, the Muhlenbergs with Pennsylvania, and the Tafts with Ohio. Other political families are less connected with a specific state; the Bush family began in Ohio and Connecticut, but is now more closely identified with Texas, and a member of the family was the governor of Florida. Kennedy family member Maria Shriver's husband Arnold Schwarzenegger is now governor of California.
LISTING OF AMERICAN FAMILIES IN POLITICS --Here are some of the more notable families visible on a national level:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._political_families

[JGarcia]

Can I go back to ignorant bliss?

All of this reality these days can sure hit a guy where it hurts. I've got an acquaintance, a former Deuce guy (so he was already suspect) that many of our peers wrote off years ago as a conspiracy nut. That may well be the case, but more often than not, at least in these recent days, he is the one saying "I told you so." If our country, our people, etc., are truly going the way my vociferous friend says they are, I really do not look forward to the uncertainty that this brings, whatever the outcome, the struggle is one that no sane person would relish.

This illegal immigration problem, with the Gov'ts refusal to stop the flow, and the willingness among elites to provide legal footing and amnesty to millions of criminals, makes US citizenship a free for all. I constantly have to ask myself if I am being paranoid. Some have suggested that whatever legislation the gov't. passes into law as a solution for illegal immigration, will have a National Identity card within it. I think that's a good thing, but the way things go these days, I have to ask myself if this ID is really a bad thing (as I am told) and further that it is just the tip of the iceberg, and that the dissolution of states rights and an omnipotent Federal Gov is the goal. I don't want this conspiracy stuff to start making sense.

[Texian]

My new avatar says it all.

[Detonics]

Mrs. Clinton may be the impetus for change that we've lacked.

Her open embrace of Socialism should preclude anyone from having "buyer's remorse" after the election.

We're just about to the point that all the money we take in is for service on debt.

We face dire future threats from China, Russia and Radical Islam.

Our current leader is a staunch advocate of measures which will, if enacted eliminate the two party system within the next decade or so after granting amnesty to the 20 million + illegals and allowing them to bring their families also. This, effectively doubling the prime constituency of the Democratic Party, which will prostitute itself, even less ashamedly in order to secure the 80-100 million new member votes.

Our current leadership may not last out it’s term if there were ever a real investigation regarding the dispositions of funds sent overseas or should headlines ever lead with “Investigation into Afghanistan’s record crops………..”

Our current method of government has degenerated into either a plutocracy or oligarchy, depending on how you split the hair.

I believe that in order to regain control of our Nation as being governed "For The People and By the People" as a sovereign nation, at some point it will be necessary to "hit the reset button" and make some changes.

I’m wondering if we’ll reach that point with President Hillary Rodham-Clinton.

- I sincerely hope I don't have to gather my rucksack or just be "disappeared" over this post. I have some serious reservations over the course, direction and fate of our nation and if a drastic course correction need be made I'd rather help now than have my kids face it.

[lksteve]

Mrs. Clinton may be the impetus for change that we've lacked.um...no...that would be like wrecking the car because the brakes squeaks...

[Detonics]

um...no...that would be like wrecking the car because the brakes squeaks...


First off, I'll apologize for posting when I was in a dark mood. Was just a bit frazzled with the Hilldabeast's statements re: time to move away from personal reliance as well as the "leadership" stance on the immigration issue. Sorry.

Since you're in a metaphoric mood....... I agree every 4 or 8 years we can patch that squeak. Unfortunately, what we're facing may be a sharp turn to the Left, into oncoming traffic. This will cause a massive tie up on the best "road" (our Nation) to freedom the world has yet known and set us way behind on our path to development as a species. I agree we don't want to "overcorrect" but I'm afraid that squeak may be a sign of something needing a major overhaul.

-Have a great weekend!