 |
| Image from the Washington Note |
STATEMENT REGARDING KEITH OLBERMANN - SUNDAY, NOV. 7
From Phil Griffin, President of MSNBC:
After several days of deliberation and discussion, I have determined that suspending Keith through and including Monday night's program is an appropriate punishment for his violation of our policy. We look forward to having him back on the air Tuesday night.
Source: NBC Universal
Openly communist on a communist network.
ReplyDeleteWhat a shock.
You keep saying that. Are you saying that Olbermann and MSNBC are advocates for the elimination of all private property? Because I watch quite a bit, and I've never heard them advocate that.
ReplyDeleteIf that's not it, why do you call Olbermann or MSNBC communist?
Does MSNBC oppose TARP, Stimulus, Obamacare, nationalization of industries?
ReplyDeleteThose are HUGE generational redistribution of wealth programs; and MSNBC has supported them.
TARP (a program started under Bush) was a success, and has a near total return on investment. The stimulus was not large enough, but has seen far more success than has been acknowledged. "Obamacare" doesn't exist. There was a healthcare reform package passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President, and it is very, very, very far from communism.
ReplyDeleteMedicare for everyone would have been the ideal solution. That IS a socialist program, not a communistic one, but we've had socialism interwoven into our government for several decades.
Kenseyian economics principles always fail.
ReplyDeleteThe people skimming off "the pump" like it though.
TARP successfully enriched many corrupto-crats.
The country was robbed, successfully.
Wealth does not originate from government programs.
Individuals create wealth, when the gov't gets out of their way.
***
So it's two opposing world views: Manna flows from the Central Commitee. Which has proven wrong everywhere, in all times.
And the view espoused by our founders, and which formed the basis for multi-generational prosperity: Wealth is created by individuals.
The collective vs the individual.
Timeless.
.
Sofa is also an advocate of wealth redistribution. Only instead of a system where all might share in the wealth, he prefers a Plutocracy, a system where wealth is concentrated in the hands of just a few.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, I think you're right.
ReplyDeleteThis "America" that Sofa wants to go back to never existed. I'd like him/her to pinpoint an era when the USA embodied his ideal state. In Eisenhower America, the top tax rate was 90%! So, it wasn't the 50s, we know that much anyway.
anaon@11:31 - By "share the wealth" you mean stealing? Is that like "from each according to his ability, and to each according to his need"?
ReplyDeleteHistory demonstrates the foolishness of that.
***
I support people keeping what they earn.
If "keeping" is "redistribution", then there's confusion about what the meaning of "is", is.
Buy a dictionary. And a history book not authored by Marx or Lenin.
James- The ideal state is a marxist dream.
ReplyDeleteYou saying that you see my dreams is... scary. lol
I'll take Inidvidual Liberty for $500, Alex.
.
As usual, Sofa, I'm not really finding your point. So clarify. Do you think all taxes should be abolished, that there be no commons, no "public" anything? Roads, fire houses, police departments, public parks, national parks, public schools, etc.?
ReplyDeleteYes, it would be wonderful to keep a large percent of what we earn. But SOME of what we earn SHOULD go to pay for the things we use everyday, like some of my list above. Do you disagree?
Couple of facts for you Sofa, though I doubt you will consider them facts because they haven't been filtered through the likes of Breitbart, Limbaugh, Fox or Newsmax first.
ReplyDeleteCapital Income division in the US 1979-2003. Top 1 percents income increased from 37.8% to 57.5% and the Bottom 80 percents income decreased from 23.1% to 12.6%
The average amount CEOs' and production workers' pay increase between 1990 and 2005. CEOs 298.2% increase - Production workers 4.3% increase.
It's a damn shame how the average worker is sticking it to the top one percent.
GNOP, it's kinda crazy, isn't it? What happens when the richest of the rich and the poorest of the poor are all that's left? Nobody has a job, nobody can afford anything. Sounds like peasants and Nobles. Yeesh.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if we have a future where China and India are outsorcing jobs to US for the cheap labor costs (after we do away with all regulations, like minimum wage and child labor laws)?
Gotta be careful about speculating too much though. There are enough crazy people around here!
It is crazy. Absolutely mind-boggling that such a large segment of the population can so easily be convinced to support policies that work against their own best interests.
ReplyDeleteMost conservatives fit quite nicely into the "some of the people all the time" category in this old saying. "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
James- The huge division between rich and poor ALWAYS is starkest in socialist, communist, collectivist systems (refer to history, or get out and see the world).
ReplyDeleteMarket driven Captialism creates a huge middle class which is also quite rich (when compared to collectivist systems). The lower economic classes in market driven systems are thousands of times better off than the peasants in collectivist countries.
Don't focus on the FEAR or ENVY of the 'uberrich'. Focus on how many abject porr each system creates. Focus on how many more successful outcomes capitalism produces when compared to collectivism.
With market driven capitalism, EVERYONE at every economic layer is much better off. The Data consistently shows that collectivism is horrendous for all but a few at the top (see for example what is now happenning in the US as we are driven toward collectivism).
Fear and Envy for those at the top may exist under each system.
.
Regarding "Do you think all taxes should be abolished, that there be no commons, no "public" anything? Roads, fire houses, police departments, public parks, national parks, public schools, etc.?"
ReplyDeleteTaxes are like water: A little is vital, but too much and you drown/die.
We constituted a federal government that did not collect taxes, but rather dervied monies from import duties and from the States. Under this arrangement, states and local government collected the lions share of taxes, and fed.gov had to negatiate with the States for money. The more local the money, the more local people have a voice in how it is spent; locally collected taxes give the people more control. The first 'temporary' federal income tax was 1861 when Mr Lincoln needed to fight a war against some of those states for refusing to bow to fed.gov. There followed a series of other 'temporary' measures that had more and more going directly to fed.gov and bypassing the states. There were many legislative and legal battles for the next 30 years. Finally in 1895 the Supreme Court declared that 'federal income tax' was unconstitutional. So we were back to the original agreement, and fed.gov had to negotiate for money with the States.
Like plague, locusts, and hurricanes, the country occaissionally looses it's way. Collectivists made a big push at the turn of the Century and pushed through 4 Amendments that reduced the power of the people, and the nany state started telling people what to do.
The sixteenth amendment established the power for fed.gov to collect income tax, removing power from the states.
The seventeenth amendment provided for the Direct Election of the United States Senators, removing power from the states.
The eighteenth amendment outlawed the "manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors", the prohibition. This nany state ridiculous notion didn't work for liquor and doesn't work for drugs. 'Natural law' informs us that people control themselves, and not a nanny in DC.
The nineteenth amendment gave women the right to vote in 1913. (The 15th Amendment gave negroes the right to vote in 1870.)
193 was a 'progressive time' and 3 out of the 4 were very bad. But Wilson and a Dem Congress and Senate then did one more very bad thing: They created the Fed in 1913.
America has yet to recover from what the Dem Pres, Congress, and Senate of 1913 did. They moved financial controls from the lower levels of government, into a large central planning commitee we now know as fed.gov.
It was rectal-cranial inversion of the Constitution, and as stupid as prohibition.
.
"It is crazy. Absolutely mind-boggling that such a large segment of the population can so easily be convinced to support policies that work against their own best interests."
ReplyDeleteYes. You are.
.
SOFA: First, please note how far the topic has wandered from my original post yet again.
ReplyDeleteIncome tax is necessary, particularly now, since import duties and tariffs have been successfully watered down or removed (largely by Republicans, but also more conservative Democrats). That in addition to outsourcing our manufacturing to other countries (again, guess who?), we can't take in enough money that way.
Directly voting for Senators takes power away from states? No, it takes power away from State Governors. Currently, conservatives are throwing out appointed judges, and trying to change laws to directly vote for judges where they are appointed. Do you really think this is a mainstream issue ANYWHERE? You might want this issue to break through, but there's no freaking way there are enough people who agree with you to remove this amendment.
The eighteenth amendment was ridiculous. Its repeal should shine the light on how silly marijuana laws are, but nobody seems to see it.
The nineteenth amendment should never have been needed, and since it was, it PROVES the founding fathers were not perfect. Not by a long shot. Same with the 15th.
Don't have an opinion one way or the other on the Fed. It'd be very cool if we could reform every government institution and program. Get rid of all the waste, duplication and corruption. But there is so much to clean up after 2001-2008, when absolutely everything was given to cronies, and turned political, there's an awful lot to do. And there is no politician with the personal popularity who could do it. And the American people are so fickle, they'd NEVER give that politician the time to get it done.
"It'd be very cool if we could reform every government institution and program. Get rid of all the waste, duplication and corruption." -James
ReplyDeleteAs the Lincoln departure from the Constitution is failing spectacularly, we're about to hit Hillary's 'reset button' on Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, LBJ, etc.
Stay tuned.
tic
tic
tic
Awesome video!
http://westernrifleshooters.blogspot.com/2010/11/denninger-bernankes-qe-explained-screw.html
And a good blog. Look around while you're there, and get a refresher on America.
.