Latest political goings on
Study Confirms Tea Party Was Created by Big Tobacco and Billionaire Koch Brothers:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brendan-demelle/study-confirms-tea-party-_b_2663125.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-gore/tea-party-koch-brothers-big-tobacco_b_2689380.html
Figures! Now, are the dittoheads of the country going to keep ignoring this and blaming everything on the poor?
Carter grandson, who blew open the whole “47%” speech:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/14/obama-james-carter_n_2688683.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037 research firm site: http://jecarter4.tumblr.com/
Not sure if I’ve posted this link or one like it before. But this shows the real division of those “47%” who “pay no taxes”:
Who Doesn’t Pay Federal Taxes?
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/federal-taxes-households.cfm
Interesting article on the banks’ control over the money of the economy:
http://truth-out.org/news/item/14728-how-qe-could-save-the-economy-and-why-it-hasnt
Fox News, Rush Limbaugh Have Not Been Good For GOP:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/19/joe-scarborough-fox-news-limbaugh_n_2716783.html
Now, get a load of this one:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/22/rush-limbaugh-ashamed-america_n_2740899.html
My response:
“Why is it OK when a conservative says something like this, but when Michelle said she was for the first time proud of her country, it proved she was an “enemy” or something? Conditional patriotism, while we don’t allow others any reason to ever find fault?”
Added later:
And for her, at least it went from “not proud” to proud. For him, it’s the other way around. Her attitude got better, his got worse. She was probably describing the past, where being a minority meant harsh treatment. He now thinks he’s the persecuted minority (he just last year alone said stuff to this effect a few times), because the nation doesn’t make him and his rooters superior anymore.
Now, he rationalizes his statement (“the liberals have won; we’ve been outnumbered”, again):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/24/rush-limbaugh-left-has-won-ashamed_n_2754946.html
It seemed that even though last fall, all of the “reverse race-card playing” was proving detrimental to the conservative movement, but yet it still persists
Chances are that the white person standing next to you doesn’t own slaves and hasn’t committed any civil rights violations.
STOP BLAMING WHITE PEOPLE (Facebook/TheComicalConservative)
My first thought at a comeback was “Chances are, that the black person standing next to you isn’t blaming white people for anything and doesn’t want anything from you. STOP DISTRACTING US FROM THE REAL PROBLEMS”.
But then, I did not feel like getting into any argument with someone claiming “Oh, I see several black people in the neighborhood, and they’re blaming whites for everything”, which at least one peron posted anyway (and something that cannot be proven or disproven), or them appealing to Jackson and Sharpton or some organization. (Can’t prove or disprove that they don’t represent all of black people).
So instead, I said:
This is a whole lot of generalization. Just like you fault supposed blacks for blaming all whites, people seem to be directing this rhetoric at all blacks.
There are SOME whites who are still racist, and there are SOME blacks who think they’re owed reparations, or are abusing public assistance. What’s the point of continuing to harping on this blaming? (and why do people seem to think “the truth hurts” only others, and yet always benefits themselves?)
It’s just a lot of distraction from the powers that be (both govt. AND corporate) screwing everyone. (And this rhetorical tactic finally began proving harmful to Republican campaign last year). February 20 at 10:49pm
In the course of responding to this (on my new tab), I accidentally wandered over into this adjacent topic:
What is your “Fair share of what someone else has worked for? -Thomas Sowell. (VocalMajorityUSA.com)
Responding to earlier comments:
Re: “Wal Mart worker, is still getting a raise for no increase in productivity” [i.e. if they were to be paid more as the nonconservatives argued], “a signal to the population that you deserve more money regardless of your input“. “If you want a more equitable society, which I want, then the low end members of society must contribute more, they don’t need more currency”, etc.
But aren’t the CEO’s getting raises without increased productivity? People pin it on “the market”, but then that is not really productivity; it’s an abstract “force” that can be manipuated by “might makes right”. I have power; everyone needs me, so I can demand more, while doing the same or possibly less work. i.e. I hire more high paid managers to share my work, and pass the costs down to everyone else —including cutting those 40 hour jobs, so that those who remain ARE in fact doing more; meeting higher demands. MUCH more, often, but with no increase. Again, the jump is from something like 20-30× more decades ago, to hundreds of times more, now [as another commenter had mentioned]. They’re not working THAT much harder than before. Instead, we have one segment of the political debate blaming the poor and working class for just “wanting free stuff”.
Re: Clinton “inspired” by Reagan:
in an era of conservative backlash; he was trying to pander to them in several ways. Obama is actually accused of the same thing in places!
There was also a lot of the “blacks sold each other into slavery” response. Again, who are they really pleading with? Their own shadow!
Since we’re also hearing a lot of gun law rants, especially regarding Chicago, “having the touchest gun laws, yet having the worst gun violence”:
Chicago Gun Violence Problem Is Not Chicago Problem
More stories;
Perception of Conservatives:
Poll: Republicans ‘Out Of Touch’ And ‘Extreme’
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/26/republican-poll_n_2765432.html
Erick Erickson, RedState Editor: Conservative Media ‘Failing To Advance Ideas And Stories’
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/27/erick-erickson-conservative-media-failing_n_2772781.html
Video commentary on this article.
I like the point he makes at :30 “the guy with more money wins 90% of the time, in Congress”.
Romney Says He Lost Because He Failed to Reach Minorities
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/03/in-first-interview-romney-says-he-lost-because-he-failed-to-reach-minorities-kills-not-to-be-in-washington
More on where all the money is really going:
Lords of Disorder: Billions for Wall Street, Sacrifice for Everyone Else
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/14884-lords-of-disorder-billions-for-wall-street-sacrifice-for-everyone-else
Goldman Sachs Can Party Again
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2013/03/goldman-sachs-can-party-again/
Wall Street firms doled out $20 billion in 2012 bounuses
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/wall-street-firms-doled-20-billion-2012-bounuses-article-1.1273731
Talk of breaking up the banks:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/28/sherrod-brown-banks-david-vitter_n_2782665.html
With all of this, conservatives continue going after the poor, and their supposed “socialist” defenders who don’t want to work, themselves. (Remember, {above} who’s really behind the Tea Party!)
In a Facebook discussion on the image “Teach your kids to learn from the rich – not resent them.”, we see the same old:
“just get up off your ___ and achieve”
“poor people can’t give you a job”
All of the sanctimonious talk fingerwagging against “envying” and “coveting”
One person, responding to someone else:
“grow you pansy a– hippie ,your the problem rtard you probably voted for that turd too huh… DUMBASS !!!
So Obama’s a turd now. I wonder if any of these people have ever called any other president, no matter how liberal, that. (And has any liberal called Bush that?) We’ve now come this close to “s___ stain”, which is probably how most of these people really feel! Of course, that’s a known racial term, and we must keep that out of the discussion. But we can sure come as close as possible.
Again, these “patriots” always believed in a respect for the Commander in Chief; no matter whether they agreed with him or not. For the country they loved voted for him. But we see many of these people (including Rush himself, as we just saw) are now virtually disowning the country for voting for this person.
Again, real “shadow” stuff these people refuse to ever look into.
There were a lot of good responses though:
•”No, I don’t resent the rich. I do, however, resent it when the rich have a different set of rules to play by than the rest of us. I also resent it when bank execs and mortgage company execs can torpedo the whole economy and not only face zero consequences, but are rewarded for their s—-y judgment. Guess y’all forgot about that.”
•”So those of us that work hard just to see our boss say sorry the economy is bad so you can’t have a raise this year meanwhile our company’s revenues are up 20-30 percent and he is pulling into the parking lot with another new Ferrarri are just delusional? Oh and also we can’t get a promotion because there is no room in management because all of our upper management is related to the owner somehow. I guess I just need to work harder huh.”
•”Let’s take the propaganda out of this post. There is no hatred I’m [sic] rich or resentment of the rich. The problem most of us have is the inability of companies making record profits offering a decent raise or salary increase over the years since 1990. The right wing agenda will have you believe that the rest of us want a socialist society. When in reality they’re worried about losing their mind meld over the masses. Citigroup put out an article that got leak to the news which discuss this actual issue. The heading of this article was called plutonomy. It said that Citibank noticed that most of the wealth was held by 1% and that the other 99% as long as we are complacent would not revolt. The article ended with the statement the downside is that the 99% has the voting power.ummmmmmmm think about that.”
•”People don’t resent the rich because they’re rich, but because of the unfair influence they have on our Government, Laws, and Regulations”
•”This is just strange to me. Who hates the rich? What people have a problem with is doing things like buying elections, profit over people, having companies considered “people”. This post just seems willfully ignorant. I think many people who value the American dream detest unfairness. They do not detest “the rich”. Why would they? I know what it is…this post tries to turn real issues into “sour grapes”. I am offended by this.”
•”You do realize of course that there aren’t many honest rich people don’t you? That leaves mostly greedy criminals for your children to admire. There never were in America. Poor people aren’t making life difficult for you. People who start wars for profit and oil are the problem. A decade of unfunded, unnecessary war in Iraq destroyed the U.S. economy- it wasn’t “welfare moms”.”
•”I don’t hate the rich! Do you ‘secretly’ hate the poor? Be honest!”
One person finally rebuffs all the attacks against his earlier posts; showing the general tone of these debates:
“I posted my opinion about this post. I got called a lazy wet back on welfare and was told I was acting like a ten yr old. I work I was born here and the rest of my family back my great great grandparents. I served in the navy with an honorable discharge. And I don’t have kids wth do [sic] I need welfare for.”
“And where in the pic was obama mentioned. They blame him y [sic]. I guess the first couple of trillion in debt was ok. A couple of unpaid wars were ok. And now that s— is hitting the fan and we have to pay our d[ue]s. Now we are complaining. How long did we think we could live out of our means. Anyways MIT Romney was right 47 percent of us are going to have to be cut off. Just hope ur not in that percent. It was inevitable…”
Later adds:
“What’s this statement about never had a poor man give me a job. I bet U all those billionaires in Wall Street never thought they would ever use this statement. We need a bail out. Taxes payers flip the bill yet they still millions in bonuses. Then they try to sue the government for charging them interest. And they don t want to pay taxes. Hahahahaha never thought we would get bailed out by the poor ppl.”
A much more balanced response:
“Actually, let’s keep overtaxing the poor while not requiring the rich to pay more. Or, better yet, how about rich people pay better wages so poor people don’t exist. Nah…let’s feel sorry for rich people for all the resentment they get because the world is unfair. There are rich people who worked for it, and rich people who freeload off trust funds. There are poor people who work their fingers to the bone, and those who freeload off the government. What should be valued is work ethic…not money. I learn from those who work hard, not those sitting at the top who complain about being persecuted for being rich. Give me a break.”
With all the flaming people do in these heated discussions, nobody answers these kinds of posts. Later posters just go right back to the same old mantras about the worthiness of the rich, and the lazy coveting of the poor, and the evil of Obama and the liberal socialists. They only answer those liberals whose remarks feed this assumption.
I myself added:
“People keep saying ‘all you have to do is get off your butt and achieve’, but who said the people questioning the economic balance are all poor? They’re most likely middle/working class like yourselves. Just like you are complaining just as much as them, but shifting the blame for financial hardship all on taxes (and the poor) instead of the rich. So this could be turned back on you, and if you ‘worked harder’ and ‘achieved’ more like your heroes, then you wouldn’t be hurt by taxes, just like they aren’t.
[The person who made the post, above] made the most balanced point. There are people on both sides abusing the system. But to constantly put all the focus on one side like this is to deflect attention from where the abuse of power is really occurring.”
On the previous topic (“Fair share of what someone else has worked for”), someone added:
why are we talking about the poor? they didn’t cause the financial disaster that led to the deep recession our economy is in, it was the short sighted greed of those on Wall street that brought the global economy to its knees. That is why so many more people need government assistance in the form of unemployment insurance and welfare etc. there will always be people who take advantage of welfare etc., but there are a lot of people who need assistance right now because we are in a RECESSION! And we are upset with them instead of the people who actually caused it.
Someone just posted this link on FB
(http://www.upworthy.com/9-out-of-10-americans-are-completely-wrong-about-this-mind-blowing-fact-2)
I say, wow; very good! And again, amazing how the Conservatives are still parroting the learned responses, “stop envying the rich”, “they earned it, why don’t you just stop being lazy and achieve like they did, etc., and essentially blaming the poor for draining the economy!
But again, a conservative in the YouTube comments responds:
“Because 20 years ago, the economy wasn’t as advantageous as it is now [what?!]. Because 20 years ago, the CEO’s didn’t know what they know now. Who are you to decide how much money anyone ‘needs’ ? Why did the ‘average guy’ decide to have a family when he needs to work his ass off? Maybe he should have waited a couple years longer and been more financially secure before being responsible for other peoples life’s. But we blame the CEO because the “average guy” made a dumb decision.”
Then, in response to a response:
“You know how I know they know more ? Because they are CEO’s and you’re not. If you were half as smart as you think you were, you’d be a CEO somewhere. Since you’re not, it should tell you that you are not as smart as you think. To be a CEO, you need more than a degree with a good resume. You need proof of your decisions being profitable. If you don’t have any examples of that, then you’ll never be a CEO. So yes, MOST (there are exceptions, of course) CEO’s are smarter than the average worker.”
Again, it’s the same thing as in the FB groups, the conservatives come with these flaming responses based on generalizations, and ultimately, that the rich are just smarter.
How is the economy “more advantageous” now, and how are their decisions that much smarter when their own institutions are failing and having to be bailed out? And also, everyone not rich and struggling in this economy simply made bad decisions? (And if it’s really all about “earning” vs dumb decisions, then that WOULD be “fair”!) They really seem to believe that none of this involves manipulation of power. It’s all the rich are all good, and everyone else is just dumb.
It again ignores “timing, talent temperament”. That we do not have anything we did not somehow “receive“.
He later pitched “investing”, which “can be done from your computer in four clicks now”. (I guess that’s supposed to be how the economy is more “advantageous” now?) If it were that simple, and all one had to do was invest, and then they too would become rich; then more people would discover it, and it would catch on. But again, everyone is probably too stupid and lazy just to make those four clicks!
That is a gamble (somwhat like lottery), but I guess, such a person would say “well, you either win, or you lose, and that’s life”. But we’re right back to the question of the incredible income gap the video discusses, in addition to the manipulation of power, which was totally sidestepped.
This highlights the slavemaster mentality of a lot of people in the political debate. Those who win were just smarter, and even more “ethical” as far as “work” and “diligence”. So there’s no limit on what they “deserve”. Everyone else is dumb and lazy. So there’s no limit on the hardship they deserve; perhaps even to be slaves. You add in race, then just look at the figures of who tends to have most of the power, and who’s notably at the bottom most often, and plagued with crime. (We still get arguments like this). You can bring in the ol’ “bell curve” as well!
People may not be thinking consciously in terms of race, but rather whatever means they have to power. Now, it’s finance. Before, race was a bit easier to work with, because it was a more clear mark of who was superior, regardless of an individual person’s success. You already had a head start because of your physical inheritance, and materal inheritance was an additional jumpstart, based on your family’s “blessed” state, So it was a double justification.
The benefit now, is that race can on the surface be excised from the discussion, as “Everyone has a chance”. But time will tell who takes all these “opportunities”; and “the cream will rise to the top”, and that will prove who belongs where in society. “The facts don’t lie” would be the mantra (as it is for those currenly using this tactic).
Add God into it, and the gambles and efforts of the economic world are not really chance, but “His sovereign will”, playing out through “means” of “providence” (leading to the paradox of “sovereignty” vs “human responsibility”; that God decreed everything, yet man is still credited for his “efforts”, or judged for his lack thereof).
“Timing, talent, temperament” involved in success, would be seen as God’s declarative will.
So of course, these liberals who try to make things more fair are really doing a great evil, and among theistic conservatives, opposing God. (To nontheistic conservatives, it’s likely opposing nature).
The point is, I see a pattern behind this belief system (especially since the more religious in this debate always argue about “returning to the values of our forefathers”, and even though many non-religious are on the top, benefitting from this, God ultimately doesn’t matter to the system; only its common objective). It always leads back to some form of mass control over people, justified by blaming the controlled. They may argue over whether it is through “government” or “private” enterprise, or whether it is through racial, or ethical superiority, but it’s all about control, and justifying it.
Now, get a load of this one:
The debate is to whether this is really racist, with excuses such as “it was drawn by a South American”. (That means little; as there’s a lot of racism in South America).
People try to argue that one or two of the people look Hispanic. But Hispanic is a minority usually grouped together with blacks. In the inner city; at least here in the northeast, the cultures have long pretty much merged.
People are really grasping for straws in justifying this stuff, now that it’s finally being called out!
Regardless of even the race, the other issue, which has superseded race in many ways (and actually, was really the underlying cause of the race issue in the beginning, as pointed out in my New Jim Crow review), is class. And this is a case of the banks yet again, blaming the non-rich, whom they trapped with their loan schemes, for being “greedy”. The racial portayal is simply a second bird killed with the one stone! It’s all the same attitude, and deflection from their own greed and corruption.
There has really been a stepping up of this rhetoric, in the aftermath of the elections!