j_b

well, all your interventions on this topic indicate that you don't have any issues with the hate speech on cable and radio. You don't have to hold hate-mongering speech in these pages to make you an accomplice of what's going on in the media. What you have coming is even greater political irrelevance, if that is possible.

I can't say that I am surprised. Then, we'd have a situation like occurred in California after the Northridge earthquake when the pay out was greater than the sum of all earthquake premiums ever collected, and insurance companies refused to issue further quake insurance. The state had to step in and create an insurance pool to provide coverage for homeowners. Ergo, we'd be right where we started. Also note that despite the state stepping in, premiums are still so high that only about 15% of homeowners carry quake insurance in California.

[video:youtube]AMPAd8goZXs

Revealing political corruption and expressing vehement disagreement with policy is now hate speech? Stop wiping your ass with the first amendment, ya little B-ham commie prick. If you think that denying it will prevent your paying the political price for your lies and hate-mongering, you have something coming because we won't take it lying down. As a matter of fact, now that you have been exposed and it has made the national news some conservatives feel they have to take their distances from the hate-mongers with a pulpit: [video:youtube]5woLGnwN2I4

The guy who wrote the following column just published an interview of Edmonds in American Conservative. Read the 7th paragraph for a run down of what she told congress: Listening to Sibel Edmonds

Well, I am glad you enjoyed my posts, but I am serious that hate-mongering in national media has to stop and those responsible have to be held accountable for what they set in motion.

The documentary "kill the messenger" is a good place to start but in the last month allegations of incredible consequences have been made. [video:google]6063340745569143497

yeah right, it has proved so useful in the past to ignore the hate-mongering of regressives (ask the Germans about it).

is there an example of an economic downturn anywhere when regressives on bully pulpits haven't cultivated divisiveness through hate speech?

Always trust the wingnuts to entertain the peanut gallery while the house burns.

Whoops: Anti-ACORN Bill Ropes In Defense Contractors, Others Charged With Fraud by Ryan Grim Going after ACORN may be like shooting fish in a barrel lately -- but jumpy lawmakers used a bazooka to do it last week and may have blown up some of their longtime allies in the process. The congressional legislation intended to defund ACORN, passed with broad bipartisan support, is written so broadly that it applies to "any organization" that has been charged with breaking federal or state election laws, lobbying disclosure laws, campaign finance laws or filing fraudulent paperwork with any federal or state agency. It also applies to any of the employees, contractors or other folks affiliated with a group charged with any of those things. In other words, the bill could plausibly defund the entire military-industrial complex. Whoops. Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) picked up on the legislative overreach and asked the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) to sift through its database to find which contractors might be caught in the ACORN net. Lockheed Martin and Northrop Gumman both popped up quickly, with 20 fraud cases between them, and the longer list is a Who's Who of weapons manufacturers and defense contractors. http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/09/23-0

At least he has the courage to use his real name. you can't be serious. As if using one's real name was a reasonable option with right wing thugs baiting on a regular basis in a public forum. We won't even discuss the use of the web by prospective employers, etc ... In this political climate, the hanging of a federal worker with FED written on his chest is random? I don't think so.

Per usual David Cay Johnston nails it: GOP Favors Public Option for Property, Not People Atop the front page of the New York Times today is a color photo of Georgia homes flooded up to their rafters, an image that illustrates how when it comes to insurance our Congress applies two standards, separate and unequal, one for property and a lesser one for people. Unlike people without health insurance, homeowners have access to public option flood insurance. Even those who fail to take personal responsibility to buy insurance to protect their property can get benefits, thanks in good part to politicians who are leading opponents of public option healthcare. [..] Congress is so generous in its subsidies for property that the public option for flood insurance even covers property built in flood prone areas. And you can literally buy insurance on the day of a flood in some cases, and 1 day before in others. Along the Gulf Coast, on the barrier islands on the Atlantic, in below-water expanses behind river levees and in desert communities plagued by flash floods, our federal government is there using tax dollars to help take care of damaged property. But people? Providing a public option so people can buy health insurance through the federal government is "socialism," according to Senator John Kyl, the Republican senator from Arizona, a desert state where flash floods are as permanent a feature of reality as sickness and injury. Will someone ask Kyl why he favors what he calls socialist policies for property, but not people? [..] We have elevated property above human lives. That members of Congress who frequently proclaim their religious faith and cite the Bible as their guide would put property above people suggests they need to actually read the texts they claim guide them. Neither Jesus nor the Old Testament prophets ever put property first. They did however denounce those who did, labeling their deeds with a simple word: evil. Two standards, separate and unequal, for the health of property and the health of people, are un-American. This bias in favor of property over people should be ended with all deliberate speed by raising the standard for people to that of property. A public option would be one small step in that direction. 
 Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-cay-johnston/gop-favors-public-option_b_296703.html

Of course: White supremacists to rally in Illinois town over bus attack BELLEVILLE, Ill — Two rallies are planned Saturday in response to a recent attack on school bus -- one linked to several white supremacy groups and a counter protest hosted by a reverend. Those calling the attack on a white student by two black students a hate crime are planning a protest for 11 a.m. Saturday at the St. Clair County Courthouse in Belleville. In response, the Rev. John Curry, of Conqueror's Christian Center in Belleville, is organizing a silent peace rally across the street from the rally. Those participating expect to hold signs that say "We love you" and "no more us and them."

[video:youtube]AzDwXr9szxw

You can ignore what you have been told and repeat the same illogical non-sense 1000 times but it won't make it any more true than the first time. I don't know if you are actually racist but even some not racist conservatives do use racism to fuel hatred and promote division. I believe I remember some posts of yours that reeked of islamophobia, and you certainly delved into xenophobia to demonize these nations that didn't swallow your lies about Iraq. You went out of your way to deny the academic studies that demonstrate the surplus mortality that resulted from you Iraq policies, etc ...

Not only is it dumb but PP isn't too concerned when racism and xenophobia are used to occult ~1 million additional Iraqi death since the 2003 invasion.

Awww, "the recession is over", surely ... if only the unions could accept further pay cuts everything would be grand.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about (or you believe your own propaganda) because Allende was as far from being an authoritarian as can be whereas Hayek did favor a bloody fascist dictatorship installed at gunpoint over democratic rule. Your long listing of irrelevant analogies doesn't change any of it and further points out your lack of understanding that process determines the outcome much more surely than any professed allegiance to "freedom" or whatever. Your comment placed in context amounts to an apology for any human right abuse, and shows that despite all of your rhetoric about choice, you are as blind as any ideologue can be. of course, never mind the widespread practice of murdering and torturing political opponents for a least 15 years (which could have lasted much longer as the 40 year reign of Franco shows). Dictators with diverse ideologies have no use for constitutional guarantees. Stalin and Pol Pot also promised a radiant future.

a republican form of government is a generic term that implies civic purpose in public affairs (i.e. with the greater good in mind), which is not contradictory with direct democracy. The initiative process isn't necessary flawed; the main flaws are in campaign financing and corporate media reporting.

also note that it presents the distinct advantage of fostering divisions among wage earners, which explains that union busting and race baiting have historically been among the tools of conservatives. Modern right wing propaganda on Fixed News provides an excellent illustration of these facts.

robber barons have always used the existence of an underclass willing to work for next to nothing (usually recent immigrants and ethnic minorities) to undermine organized labor. It is therefore not surprising that racism also played a role in part of the labor movement in segregated America, but your assertion regarding the racist origins of unions is ridiculous.

Yes, I agree, actually existing capitalism is a failure even on most of its own terms. To be honest, my comments are directed at unfettered capitalism such as that advocated by libertarians rather than capitalism per se (whatever that is).

‘Efficiency’ doesn’t boil down to economic efficiency and it is time dependent. Maximizing productivity and short-term gain through destruction of social and environmental capital isn’t even economically efficient in the mid to long term. Human progress has little to do with limiting choices and killing innovation because they aren’t marketable.

Less services is due to a budget deficit caused by fewer tax-dollars collected: thanks to phasing in of regressive taxation that disproportionately nickled and dimed the bottom 90% of the income bracket and the phasing out of progressive taxation, i.e. the "drowning the government in a bathtub" part. Keeping the real cost of labor flat by adjusting for the rise in cost of living has little to do with fewer services being provided. Somewhere, somehow, the total cost of doing business has to be reflected in taxation and fair remuneration. Until that happens, extracting more from wage earners to pay for the transfer of wealth toward the top will do nothing toward providing adequate services.