Rant: Where's the Competitive Capitalism, A Redistribution of Common Sense? - Political Forum

That Darn Republican · 10-14-2007, 08:10 PM

I used to listen to my relatives and social voices that made sense to me as I matured into an eyes wide young conservative I recalled when they told me about Pre-WWII era Marxist hypocrite who found excuses to dismiss human life in the pursuit of their causes but made sure their necks were safe by floating across the Atlantic and burrowing themselves into our educational system. Older with 20/20 hindsight I see they were right -- starting as early as the late 1930's they started trickling across the Pond and uniting themselves with America's leftist elements. Within a few years... we started seeing the odoriferous byproduct of communist infection here stateside. The late Senator McCarthy was ahead of his time... if the Committee on unAmerican Activities existed today... Hmmmm, I wonder who would get indicted? Ted Turner... Hillary, Tim Robbins... US auto makers [because they sure aren't putting up much competition? Cable companies funneling illicit images and subversive programming uninterrupted into our homes and we can't control the bundled poison that gets injected intravenous... and because its bundled they get guaranteed advertising revenues. That's why/how that crap stays on the air.

So I started wondering just how far these kooks would go if left to their reprobate devices, and the evidence is staggering. Bill Clinton is lauded by liberals, and leftist pundits. But what did the man get done during his tenure -- not much between running from Whitewater, Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones.. and a few others -- oh, and took a breath just long enough to give compromise national security by letting a Chinese nation with a burst transmitter get away with spying for China, mean while with a mean Jedi Mind trick gets bestowed on itself most favored trade status, we are now reaping copious benefits of a mutual trade relationship with all the lowered expectations that come with it, that and he signed NAFTA into law... in short Clinton screwed us good, by implementing the first stages in operation Amerika. Another salient factor I thought somewhat grimly apropos what the inaugural song Ole' Bill chose to use... the lyrics chiming int he ears of American across the nation -- but a clear signal to nutters across the nation "Don't stop thinking about tomorrow... yesterday's gone, yesterday's gone". Done away are the moral tethers of yesterday... revisionism is on! They knew exactly what they were doing. The first huge mistake -- Bader-Ginsberg.

But even before the Mc Carthy days liberals planned the derailing of our currency by intentionally taking it off a standard that had value and placing it on one with none our dollar. Even though Ike was at the helm -- the consulting voices were all transplanted nutters projecting their Marxist bent on capitalism. How long can a nation kite a check? eventually someone is gonna come calling... but let's be honest, they needs to bankrupt the American middle class, and that won't happen over night. This past DNC burning-man fest was an overt exercise in who could bang the loudest nutter drum. All of them were to the far left, not one wasn't. All of them trying to out do each other showing who had the most Marxist leaning? These people are sick, and Hillary must think people are stupid to just assume even democrats are gonna usher her support because she is the estranged wife-of- Ole' Bill... I think they have miscalculated the social liberality of American liberals. Most just want to indulge a little "harmless" nonconformism... but they don't want to destabilize their government and have open season on every institution that makes a nation strong and last for future generations.

Alas, [however] there are those who are so tired of feeling out of place at Frenchard coffeehouse because the cannot defend American capitalist successes against socialist nutterisms... they just assume doom all of American to their grey-matter morality, and bleak Orwellian outlook on life. Their sterilized, and antiseptic purview of human liberties is all but a social study in selective engagement. They are hypocrites of the highest order. They will dismiss a human life out of social convenience but... let one dollar of their pay be missing [if following the same equivalency to conclusion] they'd have a holy Roman fit. These are they very best of today's debased minds. They are wholly given over to their debauchery and because misery [apparently] loves company want to make sure no stone is unturned in their exacting code of moral erosion.

Our dollar at current is on a slow burning, back draft with the Canadian dollar which if most of us can remember was about .60 to .70 cents on the greenback, and Mexico's Peso was hundreds to 1. Now they are within shouting reach of the buck -- all in sync with NAFTA and the soon appearing CAFTA if they get their will. Their hypocrisy is glaring -- they laud healthy lifestyles... but won't lobby the FDA for stronger measures to keep the monopolistic capitalists at bay and let the competitive capitalists play... that is what our systems was devised for. Why, because they can make a few more nuts rich on holistic health kicks, while knowingly bad food is trickling into our stores, unhealthful ingredients are being allowed to be used on their production adversely effecting out health -- all of this will benefit them one way or the other they figure... of they won't elect us now by choice... they will later when their health starts failing and they will have no choice -- we'll have socialism one way or the other.

What a disgusting and nefarious mindset to have contend with submitting to, but I'd like to say it isn't real. That it is just a figment of a healthy imagination. But, I'd be lying to myself and you my readers if it weren't true. What kind of citizen turns their back on their national birthright? The freest of all people the world has every known... just to identify with a mind that can accept their indecent behavior as normalized... see what consensus gets you? I guess the Apostle Paul was right, people will perpetrate all manner of social disorder just to get away with the most basic of human iniquities... pathetic, truly pathetic, and they wonder why people look at them like they have lost their minds. They truly have.

That Darn Republican · 10-14-2007, 11:31 PM

Did you have an actual comment to make... one relevant to the subject, or are you still foaming at the mouth?

MikeT · 10-15-2007, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Darn Republican

Did you have an actual comment to make... one relevant to the subject, or are you still foaming at the mouth?

Are you the author of the original "hit" piece?

Townhall.com - Conserv-A-Rant

If not, you're supposed to also offer your own commentary about the article and site your source.

As to my comment:

I only read a portion. I saw the part where those on the left supposedly worship Bill Clinton and realized that the author of the piece (if it is you) haven't done their research all that well. Like in many cases when extremists talk about those who believe differently, there is often very little fact included in their "rant."

Sort of like the propaganda that comes out of the KKK about minorities, or the Nazi's about Jews, or McCarthy about "Commies."

Hatred of certain other groups often leads to wasting time fighting ghosts of the fear that haunts those who not only have the hatred, but embrace and cultivate that hatred.

Drnaline · 10-15-2007, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeT

Are you the author of the original "hit" piece?

Townhall.com - Conserv-A-Rant

If not, you're supposed to also offer your own commentary about the article and site your source.

As to my comment:

I only read a portion. I saw the part where those on the left supposedly worship Bill Clinton and realized that the author of the piece (if it is you) haven't done their research all that well. Like in many cases when extremists talk about those who believe differently, there is often very little fact included in their "rant."

Sort of like the propaganda that comes out of the KKK about minorities, or the Nazi's about Jews, or McCarthy about "Commies."

Hatred of certain other groups often leads to wasting time fighting ghosts of the fear that haunts those who not only have the hatred, but embrace and cultivate that hatred.

From your own link at the bottom of the article is says: Conserva-rant with That Darn Republican. It looks to me it was his own commentary and source.
And i totally agree with him. Great post you repug you.

MikeT · 10-15-2007, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drnaline

From your own link at the bottom of the article is says: Conserva-rant with That Darn Republican. It looks to me it was his own commentary and source.
And i totally agree with him. Great post you repug you.

Ahh, sorry, I didn't see the blurred out "mice type" at the bottom of the icon. Still, what's the difference between this "hit" piece and that of anything that Moveon.org puts out?

So, then let's take a peek at this item by item:

Quote:

I used to listen to my relatives and social voices that made sense to me as I matured into an eyes wide young conservative I recalled when they told me about Pre-WWII era Marxist hypocrite who found excuses to dismiss human life in the pursuit of their causes but made sure their necks were safe by floating across the Atlantic and burrowing themselves into our educational system.

Phew, quite a run-on sentence that is and almost unintelligible due to bad grammar and lack of punctuation. Let's look at it in sections:

Quote:

"I used to listen to my relatives and social voices that made sense to me..."

So he didn't listen to anyone who didn't make sense to him--whether he knew them or they were just public opininers (as I'm assuming that was what "social voices" referred to, though it's unclear.)

Quote:

"as I matured into an eyes[-]wide[,] young conservative[,] I recalled when they told me about [a?] pre-WWII era Marxist hypocrite[s?] who found excuses to dismiss human life..."

Lots going on here, not at all sure what is meant, but I'm getting:

The older he became, the more conservative he became, he remembered hearing tales about Marxist hypocrites who found excuses to "dismiss" human life. Now, as that stands, there's really very little information here. How did they dismiss human life? Did they advocate abortion? Is this a forced-birth argument? And if so--how does that become hypocritical to Marxist ideology? Or, in referencing WWII is he referring to a Marxist position on WWII that didn't value the lives of human beings? And if that's true, then how is that hypocritical to Marxist ideology?

Next:

[/quote]"in the pursuit of their [Marxist] causes but made sure their necks were safe by floating across the Atlantic and burrowing themselves into our educational system."[/quote]

So "Marxists" fled the coming war and once they reached U.S. shores, they decided to go to school and get an education?

So far, I'm not following what is hypocritical or 'unsavory' about this scenario. Let's take a look at what comes next:

Quote:

"Older with 20/20 hindsight I see they were right -- starting as early as the late 1930's they started trickling across the Pond and uniting themselves with America's leftist elements."

Leftist elements--meaning Marxists found their ideology more atune to those great liberals of the 1930's like Roosevelt who worked so dilligently and successfully to combat the effects of the Great Depression? Or Herbert Croly who's work was the basis for much of what Roosevelt did? Or maybe he's referring to classical liberalism which is all about self-governance, personal responsibility, smaller government, and individual rights.

[quote]"Within a few years... we started seeing the odiferous byproduct of communist infection here stateside."[quote]

What were these byproducts? Or are we simply to take his word for it that this was beginning of a "communist infection"? Is this in reference to Roosevelt's "New Deal?" And if so, what was so communist about this--and what exactly is the arguments against what Roosevelt did to bolster up a country during the Great Depression? What alternative method does the author suppose would have been better?

Quote:

"The late Senator McCarthy was ahead of his time... if the Committee on unAmerican Activities existed today... Hmmmm, I wonder who would get indicted? Ted Turner... Hillary, Tim Robbins... US auto makers [because they sure aren't putting up much competition? Cable companies funneling illicit images and subversive programming uninterrupted into our homes and we can't control the bundled poison that gets injected intravenous... and because its bundled they get guaranteed advertising revenues. That's why/how that crap stays on the air.

Censorship is preferable now to free speech? Are we to replace "Marxism" with "Fascism" now?

And exactly who would decide what was unAmerican or not? The GOP? What about unAmerican activities such as shady lending practices (the Savings&Loan crisis under Reagan, the mortgage crisis today) or the Patriot Act that subverts constitutional rights? Or perhaps Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or Rupert Murdoch lobbying Congress to allow him to lie to the American people?

Quote:

So I started wondering just how far these kooks would go if left to their reprobate devices, and the evidence is staggering.

Kooks and reprobate devices--what an interesting term to label those with differing perspectives. It's not like they're going into men's rooms and offering homosexual favors, are they? It seems like this piece is more glitz than substance. What exactly is the evidence that those who are left of center use "reprobate devices"?

Quote:

Bill Clinton is lauded by liberals, and leftist pundits.

And many economists, including Greenspan, and many centrists, and many educated commentators as well--not just those on the left. There's also no unanimous worshipping by the left of Clinton. He got a lot of flak from the left for TANF and DOMA, as well as myriad other programs (including the original draft of the Patriot Act) that made Clinton a lot less "liberal" than the Republicans seem to recall.

Quote:

But what did the man get done during his tenure -- not much between running from Whitewater, Monica Lewinski, Paula Jones.. and a few others -- oh, and took a breath just long enough to give compromise national security by letting a Chinese nation with a burst transmitter get away with spying for China, mean while with a mean Jedi Mind trick gets bestowed on itself most favored trade status, we are now reaping copious benefits of a mutual trade relationship with all the lowered expectations that come with it, that and he signed NAFTA into law... in short Clinton screwed us good, by implementing the first stages in operation Amerika.

Again with the run-on sentence here--much of which shows an astounding lack of information about what happened during the 90's and what exactly Clinton managed to accomplish, despite stonewalling from the GOP. Clinton was the first president to enact anti-terrorism laws while facing crticism for his "obsession" with Bin Laden from the GOP.

But I digress, this isn't about defending Clinton, it's about showing that while the song might be catchy, there's little substance to this rant.

Quote:

Another salient factor I thought somewhat grimly appropo what the innuagural song Ole' Bill chose to use... the lyrics chiming int he ears of American across the nation -- but a clear signal to nutters across the nation "Don't stop thinking about tomorrow... yesterday's gone, yesterday's gone". Done away are the moral tethers of yesterday... revisionism is on! They knew exactly what they were doing. The first huge mistake -- Bader-Ginsberg.

From jumping to inaugural lyrics to Bader-Ginsberg, there's not much substance here either. I suggest reviewing the "rants" that Keith Olbermann often shares on his show. While the author may not like the message, there's at least logic and substance to those "rants"--no matter how arguable they may be.

Quote:

But even before the Mc Carthy days liberals planned the derailing of our currency by intentuially takign it off a standard that had value and placing it on one with none our dollar.

"Placing it on one with none our dollar" makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. What is that supposed to mean?

And in case you haven't noticed, there are plenty of wealthy liberals who are experts at making a dollar. It would seem that you're suggesting here that liberals some how want to live in poverty themselves, as well as forcing everyone else to live in poverty. A very strange assertion--and one again that is not backed up by names and evidence.

It's sort of like if I claimed the GOP was responsible for the droughts across our country simply because they tend to take an anti-environmentalist stance. That would be a fallacy and a wild stretch of imagination, let alone illogical.

More to come...

MikeT · 10-15-2007, 12:27 PM

And the rest:

Quote:

Even though Ike was at the helm -- the consulting voices were all transplanted nutters projecting their marxist bent on capitalism. How long can a nation kite a check? eventually someone is gonna come calling... but let's be honest, they needs to bankrupt the American middle class, and that won't happen over night.

Now the author's gone over the deep end of logic here. There has been no president in recent history that has done more to destroy the middle class than Bush Jr. Typically, the left is pro-union--one of the historical hallmarks of a thriving middle class. It wasn't the left that tried to destroy the middle class--it was the union-busters. The anti-union crowd is mostly conservative/neocon supporters who believe in supply-side economics and/or trickle-down theories that have been proven throughout history and across many nations to fail miserably.

There is no "honesty" here--simply a lack of information that is glaringly evident through the lack of sources, evidence, and facts that should have been used to make this "rant" more believable.

Quote:

This past DNC burning-man fest was an overt exercise in who could bang the loudest nutter drum. All of them were to the far left, not one wasn't. All of them trying to out do each other showing who had the most marxist leaning?

Huh? Is he now referring to the DNC debates? I'm not sure, as it's unclear, but there is one aspect that this author has completely forgotten: The DNC and the DLC are not liberal.

Quote:

These people are sick, and Hillary must think people are stupid to just assume even democrats are gonna usher her support because she is the estranged wife-of- Ole' Bill...

When did Hilary and Bill get separated? This rant is going all over the place, pandering to emotionalism and using hate to divide Americans. Again, Hilary isn't a liberal and even if she were, her marital status is only as important to voters as say, Guiliani's marital history.

Quote:

I think they have miscalculated the social liberality of American liberals. Most just want to indulge a little "harmless" nonconformism... but they don't want to destabilize their government and have open season on every institution that makes a nation strong and last for future generations.

Liberalism isn't about "nonconforming", it's about an ideology that puts the common good of all and individual constitutional rights above a market fundamentalist's ideology and/or the belief that government is to serve the people, not that the people serve the government.

What "open season against institutions that makes a nation strong and last for future generations" is this author talking about? What is the liberal "agenda" to destroy which institutions that this author is concerned will destroy our country?

Quote:

Alas, [however] there are those who are so tired of feeling out of place at Frenchard coffeehouse because the cannot defend American capitalist successes against socialist nutterisms... they just assume doom all of American to their grey-matter morality, and bleak Orwellian outlook on life.

What liberal is against capitalist successes? What socialist "nutterisms" do liberals supposedly support? Again, this is nothing more than emotionalism and pandering to the divide that's harming our country.

Quote:

Their sterilized, and antiseptic purview of human liberties is all but a social study in selective engagement. They are hypocrites of the highest order. They will dismiss a human life out of social convenience but... let one dollar of their pay be missing [if following the same eqiovilency to conclusion] they'd have a holy Roman fit. These are they very best of today's debased minds. They are wholly given over to their debauchery and because misery [apparently] loves company want to make sure no stone is unturned in their exacting code of moral erosion.

Wow, talk about a "hate fest" without any supporting evidence at all. I understand rants are mostly opinion, but worthy rants are often based on facts that at least make some sort of appearance. Replace every instance of "liberal" in this message with the word "black" or "hispanic" and the reception to this rant would be very different. Speaks volumes for how little substance really went into this.

Quote:

Our dollar is at current on a slow burning, back draft with the c Canadian dollar which if most of us can remember was about .60 to .70 cents on the greenback, and Mexico's Peso was hundreds to 1. Now they are within shouting reach of the buck -- all in sync with NAFTA and the soon appearing CAFTA if they get their will.

Talk about revisionism! We've had nearly a decade of Republican controlled government and our current situation is to be blamed on everyone but who was actually running our country for the last seven years? Either the author believes the GOP is so incompetent that they couldn't alter the course that Clinton set for this country, or he believes that the GOP was powerless against the minority Dems over the last seven years. Either way, the author has to believe the Republicans sailing the ship were either incompetent or powerless in order to blame the above on liberals.

Quote:

Their hypocrisy is glaring -- they laud healthy lifestyles... but won't lobby the FDA for stronger measures. Why? Because they can make a few more nuts rich on holistic health kicks, while knowingly bad food is trickling into our stores, unhealthful ingredients are being allowed to be used on their production -- all of this will benefit them one way or the other they figure... of they won't elect us now by choice... they will later when their health starts failing and they will have no choice -- we'll have socialism one way or the other.

Another run-on sentence. Where is the author's proof that there are no liberals who are lobbying the FDA for stronger measures? Again, the ignorance here is glaring. Perhaps more research should be done before the author publishes such rants. A simple look at what Kennedy and Dodd are doing in regards to the FDA would put to rest any thoughts that "liberals" aren't interested in stronger measures.

This might help:
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Quote:

What a disgusting and nefarious mindset... but I'd like to say it isn't real. That it is just a figment of a healthy imagination. But, I'd be lying to myself and you my readers if it weren't true.

I think the former statement is more true than the latter.

Quote:

What kind of citizen turns their back on their national birthright? The freest of all people the world has every known... just to identify with a mind that can accept their indecent behavior as normalized...

Indecent behavior? The GOP is not as 'pure' as the author would have us believe. The millions of liberal Christians (myself included) would whole-heartedly disagree with the characterization that are agenda is to give up our freedoms and liberties in order to embrace "indecent behavior" as "normal."

Quote:

see what consensus gets you? I guess the Apostle Paul was right, people will perpetrate all manner of social disorder just to get away with the most basic of human iniquities... pathetic, truly pathetic, and they wonder why people look at them like they have lost their minds. They truly have.

How so? There is no proof, no evidence to back up any of these claims--in fact, the evidence and proof do much to debunk much of this rant as merely a concoction of a hate-filled imagination.

As to the pertinence of this rant under the header of "economics"--I'm just not finding any. Sorry, but this was one poorly written and unsourced rant that does nothing but leave a bad taste in the minds of the better informed.

That Darn Republican · 10-15-2007, 08:46 PM

Yes, Mike T I am -- some of blogs have those references when I am at a computer, when on PDA it is always convenient. Your sarcasm is duly noted.

That Darn Republican · 10-15-2007, 08:51 PM

However... the points are still valid. Wehter you like my PDA grammar or not, I wrote that piece quite a while ago, not making excuse -- just saying.