It's time to face facts.

The US system has gradually grown into corporation rule with strong elements of fascism and control state mechanisms, and it will be very difficult to change that fact except with a massive and violent overhaul which most people would not be willing to do, because it would in all likelihood not improve their standards of living, only their political and personal freedom.

Vote all you like but as long as the only candidates who can compete for top dog by necessity are either multi-billionaires or lapdogs for the same, how do you expect the country to develop in the future?

Most people are more worried about safety and food than they are about freedom. I see more of the same, and then more of the same. Until another fascistoid control state takes over. China. Yippee.. Not.

I think the area I highlighted is most relevant. The people have been co-opted willingly into pro-fascist and pro-corporatist policies and remedies because they fear they will lose their wealth and/or leisure. If the Dow runs to 20,000 next year, all will be forgiven.

It's time to face facts.

The US system has gradually grown into corporation rule with strong elements of fascism and control state mechanisms, and it will be very difficult to change that fact except with a massive and violent overhaul which most people would not be willing to do, because it would in all likelihood not improve their standards of living, only their political and personal freedom.

Vote all you like but as long as the only candidates who can compete for top dog by necessity are either multi-billionaires or lapdogs for the same, how do you expect the country to develop in the future?

Most people are more worried about safety and food than they are about freedom. I see more of the same, and then more of the same. Until another fascistoid control state takes over. China. Yippee.. Not.

I think the area I highlighted is most relevant. The people have been co-opted willingly into pro-fascist and pro-corporatist policies and remedies because they fear they will lose their wealth and/or leisure. If the Dow runs to 20,000 next year, all will be forgiven.

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. This exact sentiment has been expressed to me by several people who have wealth here. They wish merely to "stay under the radar" and hope the effects won't inconvenience them too much.

"Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose." Janis Joplin

When enough of the masses have nothing left to lose watch out!

It's time to face facts.

The US system has gradually grown into corporation rule with strong elements of fascism and control state mechanisms, and it will be very difficult to change that fact except with a massive and violent overhaul which most people would not be willing to do, because it would in all likelihood not improve their standards of living, only their political and personal freedom.

Vote all you like but as long as the only candidates who can compete for top dog by necessity are either multi-billionaires or lapdogs for the same, how do you expect the country to develop in the future?

Most people are more worried about safety and food than they are about freedom. I see more of the same, and then more of the same. Until another fascistoid control state takes over. China. Yippee.. Not.

I think the area I highlighted is most relevant. The people have been co-opted willingly into pro-fascist and pro-corporatist policies and remedies because they fear they will lose their wealth and/or leisure. If the Dow runs to 20,000 next year, all will be forgiven.

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. This exact sentiment has been expressed to me by several people who have wealth here. They wish merely to "stay under the radar" and hope the effects won't inconvenience them too much.

"Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose." Janis Joplin

When enough of the masses have nothing left to lose watch out!

"When you ain't got nothing, you got nothing to lose" Dylan

One very large reason nobody is calling out the individuals responsible for the crash is we would have to indict people from every administration back to and including Jimmy Carter's failed presidency.

Anybody ever heard of the Community Reinvestment Act?

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and sub-prime mortgages?

Congressional oversight of those two bodies?

The problem doesn't lie on Wall Street, it is in Washington, DC, and thrives in the halls of Congress.

One very large reason nobody is calling out the individuals responsible for the crash is we would have to indict people from every administration back to and including Jimmy Carter's failed presidency.

Anybody ever heard of the Community Reinvestment Act?

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and sub-prime mortgages?

Congressional oversight of those two bodies?

The problem doesn't lie on Wall Street, it is in Washington, DC, and thrives in the halls of Congress.

I think most people would agree with most of that chuckd. Most would probably dispute that Wall Street and corporate lobbyists don't contribute to the problem however. I generally give those groups a pass however as people really ought to know by now that they are lying cheating scum and always have been. That said, I'm gaining a new respect for the nation's judiciary:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/post-a93607-.html

Say, you're not THE chuckd of Public Enemy fame are you?

World-wide, almost: national politicians are injected with the overspending virus. Americans never intend for our great-grandchildren's great-grandchildren to begin to pay off World War 1, depression, ww2, cold war, etc....or bank buyouts.

Obama? Better than Bush any day.

Here's to the new boss; same as the old boss.

I, along with Flying, are not interested in scapegoats. Neither of us, though, is willing any longer to accept blind faith in someone's words. Hitler had as much charisma and was possessed of great oratory skills as well. We are not so willing to be fooled by appearances and smooth talk. We are looking at Obama's actions, and lack of, and assessing them, rather than judging them, for what they are.

Are you comparing Obama to Hitler?

I, along with Flying, are not interested in scapegoats. Neither of us, though, is willing any longer to accept blind faith in someone's words. Hitler had as much charisma and was possessed of great oratory skills as well. We are not so willing to be fooled by appearances and smooth talk. We are looking at Obama's actions, and lack of, and assessing them, rather than judging them, for what they are.

Are you comparing Obama to Hitler?

Yes . . . and then again most obviously no. The comparison extends only to make the point of fact that both have the oratory gift of enamoring the masses. History has since revealed Hitler as to his what his true hidden agenda was. He needed the support of the German people to stand behind him, as do all leaders who seek to implement any agenda they may have, good or bad. He was able to captivate the Germans while at the same time the rest of the world easily saw through the facade.

We do not as yet understand Obama's agenda. He speaks of change, transparency for instance, yet his actions belie his words. The list of broken campaign promises grows lengthier with each passing month. His "green shoots" and claims of a recovery are the work of artful marketing and bought out media support, for the raw economic statistics almost across the board speak in unison of a worsening economy. For the skeptical it begs the question as to what his true motivations are. But he has succeeded in mystifying the crowds and garnering their most devoted support (which, according to the polls is sliding down). He has apparently captivated numbers of people abroad as well.

Lest it is not yet quite understood the issues at stake here are not trifling. Many in America do not have the luxury of time to wait Obama out to see if he is indeed a man of noble intentions. Certainly not those who have already lost their jobs and homes. 3.5 million more Americans are now on the dole since Obama has come into office and the monthly figures continue to be astronomical. In nine months I have witnessed a charismatic speaker but have yet to behold a charismatic leader.

In any case, let's not get too imaginative here regarding the comparison, Endure.

Sometimes I just help but like the man.

President Barack Obama's candid thoughts about Kanye West are provoking a debate over standards of journalism in the Twitter age.

ABC News says it was wrong for its employees to tweet that Obama had called West a "jackass" for the rapper's treatment of country singer Taylor Swift. The network said some of its employees had overheard a conversation between the president and CNBC's John Harwood and didn't realize it was considered off the record.

The network apologized to the White House and CNBC.

Harwood had sat down with the president to tape an interview following his appearance on Wall Street on Monday. Although they are competitors, CNBC and ABC share a fiber optic line to save money, and this enabled some ABC employees to listen in on the interview as it was being taped for later use.

Their attention was drawn to chatter about West, who was widely criticized for interrupting Swift as she accepted an award at Sunday's MTV Video Music Awards to say that Beyonce deserved it.

During what sounds like informal banter before the interview begins, Obama is asked whether his daughters were annoyed by West's hijacking of Swift's acceptance statement, according to an audio copy that was posted on TMZ.com.

"I thought that was really inappropriate," Obama says. "What are you butting in (for)? ... The young lady seems like a perfectly nice person. She's getting her award. What's he doing up there?"

A questioner chimes in, "Why would he do it?"

"He's a jackass," Obama replies, which is met with laughter from several people.

The president seems to quickly realize he may have gone too far, and jovially appeals to those assembled that the remark be kept private. "Come on guys," he says. "Cut the president some slack. I've got a lot of other stuff on my plate."

E-mails shot around among ABC employees about Obama's comments, said Jeffrey Schneider, ABC News spokesman. Before anything was reported on ABC's air or Web site, at least three network employees took to Twitter to spread the news.

One was Terry Moran, a former White House correspondent. He logged on to Twitter and typed: "Pres. Obama just called Kanye West a 'jackass' for his outburst at VMAs when Taylor Swift won. Now THAT'S presidential."

When ABC News authorities found out about it, they had the tweets deleted after about an hour, Schneider said. Moran declined a request to comment.

But the news was out.

Harwood said there was no explicit agreement with the president that those comments were off the record. But he said it is broadcast tradition that such pre-interview chatter is considered off the record until the formal interview begins. Harwood is holding to that: He would not discuss what the president said before their interview and has no plans to do so on CNBC.

He said he was aware that it was likely someone outside of CNBC was listening to his conversation with the president.

"It's one of those things that's unfortunate," he said. "But I think it's an honest mistake."

There was no immediate response to requests for comment from White House spokesmen.

Twitter, a technology that's a natural tool for reporters who love to tell people what they know whenever they know it, has raced ahead in usage before many news organizations have developed policies to govern its use, said Richard Wald, a former ABC News executive and professor at Columbia University.

"You need to reinforce the sense that you have to verify before you publish," Wald said. "The policies may be very comprehensive, but they may not be adequate to the technology that news organizations have."

The incident is reminiscent of past "open-mic" incidents involving politicians. President Ronald Reagan, while waiting to make a speech in 1984, joked that he had outlawed the Soviet Union and that "the bombing begins in five minutes." During the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush turned to running mate Dick Cheney to point out a reporter from The New York Times and used an obscenity to describe him.

"If you're sitting there with a microphone on, you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy," said Kelly McBride, an expert in journalism ethics for the Poynter Institute. "If you're a governor or president, you know that."

She also questioned whether news organizations should be agreeing to go off the record with the president.

Judging by the things written by other Twitter users since West's action, Obama wasn't in the minority, she said.

"The president calling Kanye West a 'jackass' is perfect information for a tweet," she said. "In fact, that's the ideal format. You can do it in 140 characters. There's not much else to say."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090915/ap_on_..._tv_obama_tweet

One very large reason nobody is calling out the individuals responsible for the crash is we would have to indict people from every administration back to and including Jimmy Carter's failed presidency.

Anybody ever heard of the Community Reinvestment Act?

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and sub-prime mortgages?

Congressional oversight of those two bodies?

The problem doesn't lie on Wall Street, it is in Washington, DC, and thrives in the halls of Congress.

I think most people would agree with most of that chuckd. Most would probably dispute that Wall Street and corporate lobbyists don't contribute to the problem however. I generally give those groups a pass however as people really ought to know by now that they are lying cheating scum and always have been. That said, I'm gaining a new respect for the nation's judiciary:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/post-a93607-.html

Say, you're not THE chuckd of Public Enemy fame are you?

The court decision is an interesting read. I don't think I have ever seen Oscar Wilde quoted before, though.

The vast majority of non-Americans (and most Americans) have never heard of the CRA. Sadly, we never learn from our mistakes and will probably take no action to stop this abomination on our country.

No, I am not THE chuckd, although many people would say I am a Public Enemy.

I, along with Flying, are not interested in scapegoats. Neither of us, though, is willing any longer to accept blind faith in someone's words. Hitler had as much charisma and was possessed of great oratory skills as well. We are not so willing to be fooled by appearances and smooth talk. We are looking at Obama's actions, and lack of, and assessing them, rather than judging them, for what they are.

Are you comparing Obama to Hitler?

Yes . . . and then again most obviously no. The comparison extends only to make the point of fact that both have the oratory gift of enamoring the masses. History has since revealed Hitler as to his what his true hidden agenda was. He needed the support of the German people to stand behind him, as do all leaders who seek to implement any agenda they may have, good or bad. He was able to captivate the Germans while at the same time the rest of the world easily saw through the facade.

We do not as yet understand Obama's agenda. He speaks of change, transparency for instance, yet his actions belie his words. The list of broken campaign promises grows lengthier with each passing month. His "green shoots" and claims of a recovery are the work of artful marketing and bought out media support, for the raw economic statistics almost across the board speak in unison of a worsening economy. For the skeptical it begs the question as to what his true motivations are. But he has succeeded in mystifying the crowds and garnering their most devoted support (which, according to the polls is sliding down). He has apparently captivated numbers of people abroad as well.

Lest it is not yet quite understood the issues at stake here are not trifling. Many in America do not have the luxury of time to wait Obama out to see if he is indeed a man of noble intentions. Certainly not those who have already lost their jobs and homes. 3.5 million more Americans are now on the dole since Obama has come into office and the monthly figures continue to be astronomical. In nine months I have witnessed a charismatic speaker but have yet to behold a charismatic leader.

In any case, let's not get too imaginative here regarding the comparison, Endure.

It must be said:

Godwin's law.

Tip has shown the exception to the rule of Godwin's law. Perhaps Godwin's law should be ammended to say, "....unless the comparison is valid....".

Frankly, the nastiness and negativity of the whole thing makes me wash my hands of not only the issues but the debate in total. Nobody is really willing to listen to anyone else, they are too busy scoring points and trying to prove how evil the other guy is, its all a total waste of time. Enjoy your little "debate" guys cause the truth is, nobody here is willing to listen to anyone else's point of view, just push their own.

And that is my cynical rant for the day. Don't worry, I won't sully your conversation any longer.

55555555555!!! I'm happy to see you have lifted your self-imposed ban from this discussion, sbk. I'm tempted to create "Tippaporn's Law," which states "Whereas, any threaded on-line discussion in which the discussion does not lean favourably towards a particular participant's views, and said participant publicly exits via condemnations of said discussion's views and direction, that particular participant will lurk in the shadows of said discussion and will ultimately be unable to resist re-entering."

Quite seriously, sbk, I'm happy to see you back. Your views are just as important as anyone else's. If everyone in the world had identical perspectives on any and every conceivable topic then discussions would not exist. We could all then simply get together and bore ourselves in eternal agreement.

It must be said:

Godwin's law.

For those who don't wish to Google:

From Wikipedia:

Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is a humorous observation made by Mike Godwin in 1990 which has become an Internet adage. It states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."[2][3]

Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a deterrent against the use of arguments in the widespread reductio ad Hitlerum form. The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that the likelihood of such a reference or comparison arising increases as the discussion progresses. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued,[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.

I've never heard of Godwin's "Law" before . . . interesting. I'll refrain from commenting too much on this side issue other than to say I would amend the boldened "humourous observation" to include "of human tendencies." And to question, since when do simple observations of human tendencies get tagged as "law?"

Those of you who are interested may also reference the Straw Man argument.

Tip has shown the exception to the rule of Godwin's law. Perhaps Godwin's law should be ammended to say, "....unless the comparison is valid....".

The "law" does make note that a comparison may be appropriate. Again, let's all keep in mind that the comparison is only used insofar as to make the point of fact that both Hitler and Obama are gifted orators who used/use their gift to promote their agendas. It most definitely ends there. I am now overjoyed that any further misunderstandings have been terminated.

Almost forgot to stay on-topic . . .

And, yes, folks, I believe Obama is an-empty-suit-who-serves-the-interests-of-the-moneyed-folks-of-the-United-States-of-America-and-he-doesn't-fool-me-in-the-least-with-all-of-his-Chicago-style-political-rhetoric-aimed-at-placating-the-masses-to-buy-himself-time-in-order-to-promote-his-agenda-which-does-not-serve-the-people.

for those who don't wish to google, it was linked

And no, I don't think that was a commentary. Just you made me laugh. I had a long discussion with a friend about forums and godwin's law, opened thaivisa and there you were.

I always thought the Straw Man Phallus was to do with a scarecrow having a wank.... implying a participant in a debate is clutching at straws,

I always thought the Straw Man Phallus was to do with a scarecrow having a wank.... implying a participant in a debate is clutching at straws,

Straw Man cannot be a wa_ker.

Wa_kers know what they are doing.

Nader on Obama: "A Frightened Man" -- "Very Disappointing"

His early months in office have been "very disappointing."

Obama is "a frightened man," who won't take on corporate power.

Obama is "conflict averse" - and a "harmony ideology type," who's being taken advantage of by the sharks in Congress, of both parties.

He's "Bush-Cheney redux" when it comes to military and foreign policy, "albeit with better speeches" to the Muslim world. Given Obama's handling of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Nader wonders in amazement: "And they gave him the [Nobel] Peace Prize?"

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/artic...QQQ,%5EIXIC,XLF

And Obama? At least he acknowledged that stupidity exists. After all, he mentioned it in his comments about the police action in Cambridge, so we guess he knows it when he sees it. Obama must be a smart guy - everyone says so. What are we missing?

How can one think that more government control of health care can fix a system whose faults flow from the increasing government involvement since the Nixon years?

How can anyone believe the creation of another convoluted government-enabled speculative scheme--the trading of carbon credits--will not descend into a morass of political cronyism and corruption?

How can more government control of education, where costs have gone up while quality goes down, be something any smart person would wish for?

All simple questions, and Obama seems confident of the answers. But then we remember that a glib sureness is often the cover for an unthoughtful mind.

Perhaps Obama is the Democratic leader because he's an Idiot Savant, brilliant at spinning wondrously tall tales about the utopian future, but with an untempered intelligence not connected to reality.

As for us, we know we are as dumb as clams. That's why we have to work so hard to figure things out. We wish we were as smart as Obama, or the people who revere him, or the broadcasters on the evening news. They're so lucky, being smart enough to know just what to say and do without much effort.

http://www.thenothingstore.com/hundreds.php

This is a topic I am most definitely going to avoid.

What's that big sigh of relief I hear?

She sure was cute back then. There's a telling-a-book-by-it's-cover fable in her story somewhere.

Let me get this straight......we're trying to pass a health care plan written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it but exempts themselves from it, to be signed by a president that also hasn't read it and who smokes, with funding administered by a treasury chief who didn't pay his taxes, all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that's broke.

So what in the world could possibly go wrong????

(from an e-mail)

16,500 more IRS agents needed to enforce Obamacare

By: J.P. Freire

Associate Commentary Editor

03/18/10 4:32 PM EDT

New tax mandates and penalties included in Obamacare will cause the greatest expansion of the Internal Revenue Service since World War II, according to a release from Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas.

A new analysis by the Joint Economic Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee minority staff estimates up to 16,500 new IRS personnel will be needed to collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the ‘reconciliation’ bill being taken up by the U.S. House of Representatives this weekend. ...

Scores of new federal mandates and fifteen different tax increases totaling $400 billion are imposed under the Democratic House bill. In addition to more complicated tax returns, families and small businesses will be forced to reveal further tax information to the IRS, provide proof of ‘government approved’ health care and submit detailed sales information to comply with new excise taxes.

Americans for Tax Reform has a good breakdown of the bill by the numbers.

Isn't it reassuring that at a time of recession, government will do what's necessary to ensure its growth?

congress is out of control! vote in term limits and make them use the same coverage the bill requires.

Illinois already has term limits. The first term in office, the second term in jail. We can only hope this extends to the current White House resident.

I really feel there are some serious Constitutional questions that need to be addressed with this health care take over.

For instance, how can Congress mandate the people MUST purchase something they do not want? What's to keep Congress from now saying every American must purchase a Government Motors (GM) car or the new 16,500 IRS agents will be on them like white on rice?

The Constitution states Congress has the authority to regulate commerce between the states. How is an insurance policy deemed to be commerce between states when you cannot purchase a policy outside your state?

I am also curious how this affects all us retirees living overseas. Since Medicare and Medicade do not cover us outside the US, does the health care bill require us to purchase coverage? If so does the government now pay for it, since most of us live below the $88,000 annual income figure?

Anything that collects taxes for 10 years and pays benefits for only 6 of those years has got to be a good deal. Right???

I am not happy today.

http://cspan.org/Watch/C-SPAN.aspx

This live coverage is quite good....If your internet allows

I've been watching live coverage on CNN International in LOS.

One thing that mystifies me is the Democrat's claim that 18,000 people per year are dying due to lack of insurance coverage. Yet the benefits don't start for four years so, it seems, they are willing to condemn 72,000 citizens to death in order to bring this legislation in at a cost of ONLY $940 Billion?

Strange thinking, indeed.

Yet the benefits don't start for four years

Yes but you can bet the payments/taxes we are expected to pay will start shortly

That's one way they kept the budget deficit figures down. They collect taxes for ten years and pay benefits for only six. The taxes will start immediately as far as I know.

One thing you should never do is watch sausage or legislation being made.

16,500 more IRS agents needed to enforce Obamacare

By: J.P. Freire

Associate Commentary Editor

03/18/10 4:32 PM EDT

New tax mandates and penalties included in Obamacare will cause the greatest expansion of the Internal Revenue Service since World War II, according to a release from Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas.

A new analysis by the Joint Economic Committee and the House Ways & Means Committee minority staff estimates up to 16,500 new IRS personnel will be needed to collect, examine and audit new tax information mandated on families and small businesses in the 'reconciliation' bill being taken up by the U.S. House of Representatives this weekend. ...

Scores of new federal mandates and fifteen different tax increases totaling $400 billion are imposed under the Democratic House bill. In addition to more complicated tax returns, families and small businesses will be forced to reveal further tax information to the IRS, provide proof of 'government approved' health care and submit detailed sales information to comply with new excise taxes.

Americans for Tax Reform has a good breakdown of the bill by the numbers.

Isn't it reassuring that at a time of recession, government will do what's necessary to ensure its growth?

So, in a time of recession and high unemployment, they have just created 16,500 new jobs. Isn't that a good thing?