Pages

Friday, September 18, 2009

Jimmy's Ear

Calhoun’s Can(n)ons for Sept 18, 09

Former President Jimmy Carter’s recent remarks to NBC’s Brian Williams was a welcome breath of fresh air in what too often has turned into a weird psycho-socio-political, Jung/Freudian chthonic brew that’s been swirling around legislation that’s supposed to be about “health care reform.” As with most things, the health care debate too often isn’t really about health care.

Here’s what it’s really about: fear, money, power, class, hypocrisy, race, status, politics, subtext and “morality,” the usual suspects in a country constantly in denial about its history and its ongoing reality. In short, all the usual suspects that we are taught from an early age NOT to discuss honestly in polite company.

Here’s what Carter observed, “I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barak Obama is based on the fact he is a black man, that he’s African American. . . . I live in the South, and I’ve seen the south come a long way, and I’ve seen the rest of the country that shared the South’s attitude towards minority groups at the time, particularly African Americans. . . . And that racism inclination still exists.”

Here’s one of the signs carried by some “tea party” participants: “I want my country back.”

Here’s the subtext of that Cri de Coeur: Bring back the good old days of the white, Anglo Saxon power structure, the days when uppity minorities knew their place and a poor working class white man could feel he was better than . . . well, somebody.

And here’s the missing reality that nobody wants to honestly discuss in polite company. For at least 20 years, The American Dream World has been slowly turned upside down. The working class has been gutted, well paying manufacturing jobs have moved offshore, to the benefit of the corporate bottom line. America doesn’t make very much any more; it just consumes what others have made. That’s not a sustainable model for any society. Meanwhile, the middle class has been systematically diminished as the nation’s wealth (and tax breaks) were deliberately moved to benefit fewer and fewer groups at the very top. The consolidation of Corporate America, the rise of “Wall Street,” the marriage of corporate and congress has given us an unbalanced wealth distribution not seen since the days of the Robber Barons at the turn of the century. Toss in an economic collapse, add in a racial demographic shift, with “minorities” soon to be the “majority” in a few years, and you have the makings of a revolution.

But what kind of “revolution,” will depend on how honest we can be with one another about what has happened to this country while we were all in a trance shopping at the Mall. That’s why Jimmy’s ear for subtext is so valuable. A son of the South, he, better than most, hears what may be inaudible to many others. He knows the code, the wink-nudge, the unspoken look. He knows too the hidden fears, the dark heart, the history.

And it isn’t just a “southern” history. It’s American. It’s Apple Pie. And it is dangerous.

President Obama, in his address to Congress, set the discussion about “health care” into terms of “morality,” and “character.” What kind of nation are we that we continue to allow millions of our fellow Americans to sicken and die because they can’t afford proper medical care? No other “civilized” country does that. Only in America.

And we do that because we haven’t had an honest national dialogue about the real meaning of the founding documents we pretend to cherish, you know, all that stuff about all men being created equal, or equal justice under law, or equal opportunity or level playing fields or promoting the general welfare, or all of us being Americans and being in the same boat. All nice sentiments, useful for rhetorical flourishes on the Fourth of July, but the reality is this: In America, wealth, power, class and status are what we value, not “equality.” The rich powerful citizen is of value; the poor citizen is not. That’s the American “character” as it is lived in real time.

And it is of supreme irony that so many of the millions of people who have been systematically devalued and dismissed are the very people who voted for politicians and policies that devalued and dismissed them. And so they show up with signs about getting their country back from some illegitimate, black socialist commie Hitlerian usurper, not realizing that the old system they want back was the one that kicked them to the curb in the first place. And the only way they have any hope of hanging onto their piece of the American Pie is to understand that promoting the general welfare is meant to include them. But that will only happen if they insist that those who live on Main Street have as much, if not more, value than a corporate entity known as “Wall Street,” that lifelines have more value than bottom lines, and that the citizen is first in line, not under the stairs hoping for a few patronizing scraps.

Because we ignored that simple idea, we’ve brought ourselves to a crisis in search of solutions. Which means we can recalibrate, we can change directions, we can reassess our values and priorities so that we can change the way we treat one another and change the way America does business. But we can’t do any of those things unless we understand more clearly the meanings of the messages we are sending to one another, messages full of history, text, subtext, myth, reality, all being picked up by Jimmy’s finely-tuned ear.

And in those messages are some critical questions: Exactly what is it that people think they “want back?” Just what do we really value? What are our priorities? Is the country we have we created at this point really the one we want to live in and leave to our children?

If not, then it’s time to start working to form a more perfect union -- One honest brick at a time.

73 comments:

Watershed Mark said...

Unless and until the corruption is removed from Congress there will be no "honest bricks."

TERM LIMITS-STAT.
TORT REFORM-STAT.
Drop artificial state barriers so all 1300 insurance companies can compete-STAT.
Address the fruad in the current government health care system STAT.

Then let the mid term elections play out.

Every bill being discussed doesn't change anything until January 2013, so why the BIG rush?

Watershed Mark said...

Address the FRAUD in the current government health care system= STAT.

Patrick O'Hannigan said...

I'm with Jonah Goldberg on this one: Carter's been staring at tea leaves for too long. Goldberg's line (from a recent column posted at Townhall.com): "Left-wing writers spent the week droning on about how it's now racist to say "I want my country back." These amnesiacs are blissfully unaware that "taking back" America was the rallying cry of the Democratic Party for eight years under George W. Bush. Anti-white racists all?"

Shark Inlet said...

Um ... Ann.

Don't you realize that you're essentially saying that the poor and undereducated folks who are opposing health care reform are those same folks who cling to guns and religion because they have felt devalued and disrespected by the power elites, the wealthy, the educated and the cultural elite.

You, like Obama, would be right.

You seem to be backing up the "What's the matter with Kansas?" theory which is only right at a first approximation. A more detailed analysis of Politics of the early 2000s, see Andrew Gelmans (Poly Sci and Statistics at Columbia) book Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State ... especially if you're a poly-sci and/or data junkie.

annerallen said...

"the old system they want back was the one that kicked them to the curb in the first place." Exactly.

Another reform we need--more important than term limits--is open primaries. That means moderates of both parties have a chance of getting nominated, instead of people who play to the "base" of extremist irrational zealots.

You're so right about Jimmy Carter. I cheered when I heard him on NBC. This is one subject where I disagree with Obama: the "teabaggers" are ALL about racism. How many black folks did you see at that rally? And how many watch Faux News? The Republican party has been taken over by the KKK. Real conservatives have no party. Wm F. Buckley, we miss you!

Shark Inlet said...

Patrick,

How do you feel about the Cal Poly crops-house incident? It would seem that even if people are not motivated out of hate, if they willingly choose to use phrases and images which any reasonable person would know are offensive, they are choosing to do two things ... to lessen the impact of their message on those in the middle but at the same time, they'll invigorate those of a like-mind who have a tendency or willingness to engage in rhetoric which would be reasonably viewed as offensive or hateful.

Shark Inlet said...

Term limits? They've worked so well in California, they should be implemented for congress. Mark, you've got to be kidding! Term limits have increased the dysfunction in the legislature and we all know it. Annerallen is right ... gerrymandering and primaries tend to give us legislatures far more extreme than the citizens they represent. (See, again, Gelman's book.)


As to other Mark suggestions (presumably for reforming health care).

Tort reform would be nice, but it certainly isn't the major issue out there.

The whole state barrier issue is not well thought out. Won't have any beneficial impact unless there is a not-for-profit in the industry who is big enough to offer their plan nationwide. So, Mark, what insurance company has costs in line with European health care costs and outcomes comparable and would be able to help us all out. Name that and I'll agree with you ... otherwise such legislation as you suggest will only promote a "race to the bottom".

As for fraud in Medicare, the VA and Medicaid ... it would be interesting to see what those fraud rates are, in comparison to the rate of overcharges by for-profit insurance companies. If, for example, 2% of the cost of Medicare is for fraudulent expenditures, but 18% is the overhead (i.e. profit and salaries for excessive salaries for executive VPs for claim denial and advertising) for private companies ... I would think that we would be a far lot better off with single payer.

TCG said...

Just how "black" is President Obama? Young white mother who grew up in Kansas; raised mostly by his white grandparents intially, then solely by his white grandmother; through the hard work of his white grandmother, attended an almost all white prep school in Hawaii.

I have never thought of him as a Black President, just a president who made a lot of promises during his campaign that he is having trouble keeping. This is the toughest job in the county, but neither he, nor any of his supporters like President Carter, get to blame race on his political difficulties--at least not in my mind. Just how easy did he think this would be?

TCG said...

Correction on above post: "Toughest job in Country (not County".

Shark Inlet said...

TCG,

I know that it is completely different in some ways ... but similar in others. Could Lincoln or Kennedy or LBJ blame race in any way on their political difficulties?

While the vast majority of Americans don't care one way or the other whether Obama is Black or White, Mexican or Muslim, Male or Female, if some do ... and if those who do care ... even subconsciously ... are getting in the way of him accomplishing his agenda more than they would had he been a white guy, it is a racial issue and needs to be called out.

Let's try this as a mathematical exercise. Suppose that 95% of Americans are not racists in any way. Suppose furthermore, that 3% of non-racists (who live close enough ... you know, DC, MD and VA) are willing to go to Glen Beck's 1.7 million strong 9-12 party but that of the racists, the rate of showing up is 6% ... that would suggest that about 10% of those at the rally would have some racial motivation for showing up ... double the level of racism in general (see Bayes rule). While these numbers are probably not accurate, they are illustrative.

Simply put, the level of racism inherent in the tea party protests is higher than the level of racism in society as a whole ... just because of the race of the president.


No, Obama is not trying to use this as an excuse and neither are his supporters ... however, to argue that the level of racism in the tea party movement is no higher than in the general public is mathematically impossible. Carter is right for pointing this out.

TCG said...

By far, the greatest prejudice that is in effect is that of the two major political parties. 30% of those on the left and 30% of those on the right will never honostly evaluate and support the initiatives of a president of the opposite party.

It's that 40% in the middle that actually evaluate issues and think for themselves. Most of them, including me, supported Mr. Obama in the election. Now, many are reconsidering, including me.

Aaron said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aaron said...

I definitely believe race plays a factor in the political debate.

On Wednesday, September 16th, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh declared that the US should return to racially segregating buses in light of an incident -- first reported on DrudgeReport.com -- in which a white student was beaten by black students on a bus.

Says Limbaugh, "I think not only it was racism, it was justifiable racism. I mean, that's the lesson we're being taught here today. Kid shouldn't have been on the bus anyway. We need segregated buses — it was invading space and stuff. This is Obama’s America."

Three days earlier, "Tea Party" leader Mark Williams appeared on a CNN panel on "Anderson Cooper 360." Cooper discussed a blog entry by Williams where he says that Obama is a "Indonesian Muslim turned welfare thug and a racist in chief."

I disagree with Press Secretary Gibbs and RNC chairman Michael Steele on this one. We have a lot of tension, a lot of legitimate concerns, a lot of questions that should be asked, but the problem we're seeing today is a lot of hyperbolic anger that undermines civil discourse.

And by the way, TCG, if you're going to reconsider your support for Barack Obama based on misinformation you read from a conservative mass-mailing, then the Democratic Party does not need your vote of confidence. There's that 40% in the middle that evaluate issues and think for themselves, but I don't even know if you actually think. Tell us how you qualify for that 40%.

Mike said...

Sweet Aaron... you were doing well until you let your immaturity trip you up in those last 2 sentences... too bad, so sad...

TCG said...

Aaron,

Great to exchange comments and opinions with you, young man. Thanks for reading my posts.

Aaron said...

I'd love to hear how you qualify for that 40%, TCG. You've been hating on Barack Obama but you haven't explained why. Are you a racist?

M said...

Ann, you've got to be kidding, right? Jimmy Carter a breath of fresh air? Since he was born and raised in the South, his racism may apply to himself, but certainly not mine. Isn't it well known how much Carter hates Isreal and jews? Why is racism always looked at as white against all others? Never the other way around.
Obama is half white right? So right off the bat Carter is half wrong. To me, racism is only a term that is used as a tool for whatever agenda a person has. I think the racial attitude is far less prevalent than portrayed. I grew up on the streets on the edge of South Central L.A., so I was indoctrinated early in life in growing up with others. My little league number was 24. Who do you suppose that was picked for? Right, Willie Mays. The "say hey" kid. Was I supposed to hate him because he was black and I am white?
Here's a racist question for ya. What race has made the most discoveries and inventions in the world?
Sincerely, M

Aaron said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aaron said...

Let me explain my last sentence about TCG. There's a point I wanted to bring home here.

Socialist, Nazi, Muslim, Anti-Christ, Non-Christian, Hitler, Baby Killer... We've heard a lot of these names thrown about. The people shouting the loudest have expressed their disappointment (a nice way of putting it) with Barack Obama. When a cameraman man and a reporter talked to the 9/12 protesters and asked why they felt Barack Obama's "ObamaCare" was full of "lies and deception," most people couldn't answer. They did not explain themselves.

When some of these protesters explained their reasoning, the "facts" they provided were factually incorrect. About a month ago, TCG, you cited your concerns over H.R. 3200 and -- I don't know if you saw it, but -- I went through the bill and debunked your bullet list of problems you had with it.

I'm concerned that the moderates of the Democratic Party are actually believing in the crazy talk -- and if you really believe the spin, then Barack Obama doesn't need your vote. He can get his vote from people who are uninsured or have been denied coverage for the wrong reasons.

Watershed Mark said...

He can get his vote from people who are uninsured or have been denied coverage for the wrong reasons.

Too bad ACRON is out of the registration biz.

Shark Inlet said...

Anyone who writes "isn't it well known how much Carter hates Israel and jews?" should know that he has just jumped the shark.

Seriously ... to suggest that Carter hates anyone is beyond the pale.

Just because his position on the Israel/Palestine issue isn't exactly what the typical jewish person would want doesn't make him a hater of jews or of the state of Israel.

Is pointing out that the number of deaths of Palestinian women and children is 10 times (or whatever) the number of deaths of Israeli women and children evidence of hatred of Israel or is it just reporting a sad statistic?

Mike said...

Aaron... Here is WHY I firmly believe you to be immature in your thinking and reactive comments...

TCG actually wrote..."It's that 40% in the middle that actually evaluate issues and think for themselves. Most of them, including me, supported Mr. Obama in the election. Now, many are reconsidering, including me."

Aaron then replied..."You've been hating on Barack Obama but you haven't explained why. Are you a racist?"

...now Aaron, I honestly don't see where you came up with "hating on ...Obama" or why YOU had to ask the insulting question, "Are you a racist?"... No where have I seen where TCG said he hated Obama or that he hates black in general...

YOU Aaron tried that same sort of immature thinking on me a short time back when you made up some nonsense about jews... You are the one who is sounding racist... You pulled the same attitude and comments to stir the sewer obstructionists in the CSD meetings... Maybe some day you'll learn, but probably not until you get out on your own and don't need Dad to drive you around any longer...

You really need to go get a full education and a job so you can gain some life experience, you won't get it from your drugs...

Not2010Yet said...

Egads, Ann, it is SWEET to hear such an unabashed liberal as you. You are why I regularly listen to NPR, it is good to hear unabashed and untainted liberalism, full on straight, no mixer or chaser. This is also why I just bought a discount copy of the Colmes book to read. It's really quite profound, in an educational sense. I always did like the guy hammering Hannity.

As to Carter's remarks, those just set race relations back many years, after 43% of white Americans showed that racism had nothing to do with voting Obama, the 48% voted for McCain would have voted reliably Republican anyway and therefore voted party and ideology and not race, oh and the RNC has a black chief? Ann, WHAT is the purpose of you and Jimmy parroting the tired claim of rascism? Give it up. Nothing to do with race which I've long since gone beyond, like so many others, like the vast majority of this country which a pathetic and I mean P-A-T-H-E-T-I-C disgrace like Carter wants to comdemn in his addled and aging TriLateralist mind. The simple folks protesting out loud because Congress has rammed through every liberal thing Obama wants to force on them and Congress was NOT listening, there hasn't been a single congressional office burned, no violence, and today Disgrace in an Aging Face known as Pelosi says she's "fearful" and cites an SFO double homicide. Disgraceful and disingenuous leap of illogic and insult.

Rascism is so far back, good grief.

Once again, Thank you, Jimmy, the worst (least accomplished, stupidest, most transparent and ignorant) president of this or two previous centuries (that's about all of them I guess).

As M, I grew up on the edge of south central, right out of 94th and Western, lived there and thereabouts for all the growth, all the change, not one but TWO glorious uprisings of "civil unrest" and lived for years as a distinct Anglo minority person. I mix easily in two societies, there and HERE in what incidentally is frankly a bit of a boring and homogeneous place relative to "there".

To elaborate about the disgraceful and inane claim that the tea parties and so forth are based upon race. The uprisings I see did NOT occur when Obama became president, or was about to against a lazy statist moderate such as McCain; so they are not linked to RACE. Period. It is insulting, disgraceful, disingenuous and despicable to say that they ARE linked to race.

No, the tea parties and so forth began when a duly elected President dropped his false centrist election cloak and began a campaign of extreme liberal radicalization of our country, and hypothecation of our dollar and economic system. HIS Congress has just voted unicamerally to kick ALL private lenders out of the student loan program and to raise big giveaways in the, oops I mean GRANTS in the Pell program. (This should please Shark by further flooding his Ivory Tower with liberal-thinking kids).

Get your timing right, Ann, Carter you moron, and all the fine other sweet liberals who try to miscast honest common conservative Americans as rascist or bigots or pawns of that Limbaugh guy, etc.

Really, you guys, (Ann, Shark, etc.) you ought to have so much more persuasive arguments and chronogical linkages against an honest mostly polite political exercise of free speech. True, CNN gets an occasional shot of the nuttiest conservative protester and runs it over and over, AD NAUSEUM, attempting to paint the movement with the worst brush. Go see one yourself, listen to coverage more than just NPR or it's mirroresque analogues, CNN, CBS, NBC, et al, and find another way to beat up an obvious, sensible, populist uprising which opposed a radical presidential platform from a guy who could disgrace, shut down and quell the "birthers" by releasing his actual birth certificate, not some unvetted abstract which is invalid for such purposes as Social Security and Passport applications.

(Just wanted to sneak in a birther plug there, in case you guys couldn't figure out where I am on these issues.) Regards,
Move

Aaron said...

Last Sunday, gun-toting parishioners of the Faithful Word Baptist Church Sunday listened to Pastor Steven Anderson who reiterated his prayer to have Barack Obama die of "natural causes."

One of the parishioners interviewed on a local Tempe station said about Obama: Do Washington a big favor, Obama, and keep your mouth shut or do I have to physically make you shut up?

Let's connect the dots. Here's a pastor who has labeled Obama as a "black man" in previous sermons only to later follow up by wishing for his death. His parishioners are now carrying guns to the church.

The The Southern Poverty Law Center has been looking into this case to see if this church should be classified as a "hate group."

This anecdote isn't a "left-wing conspiracy" aimed to undermine the conservative message of proper governance and taxpayers rights. These things are really happening, folks.

Hate to break it to you, Not2010Yet, but race does play a factor in the heated debates we're seeing today. The evidence is overwhelming -- and Carter (whether or not he's a "moron") stated his opinion based on a set of observations that indicate that a lot of the arguments presented are racially tinged.

On MSNBC's Countdown, it was discussed that Labor Party wingnut Lyndon LaRouche was one of the people behind these iconic racist posters that protesters have been displaying. As it turns out, the posters in question were not manufactured by the LaRouche camp. Rather, the posters were done by volunteers of FreedomWorks, a right-wing, health insurance company-funded grassroots organization headed by headed by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey.

Really, Move, you need to open your eyes here.

Aaron said...

In response to Mike,

I'd like quote House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Ma): "Trying to have a conversation with you would be like arguing with a dining room table."

I don't like arguing with dining room tables.

Shark Inlet said...

Not2010Yet ... it would seem that the crux of your argument here is that Obama somehow changed to be Liberal after being elected when running on a centerist campaign.

I would suggest, instead, that the middle-of-the road American, the true centerist, wants healthcare reform. If you don't believe me, I challenge you to name five people making less than $100k per year who believe that preexisting conditions are reasonable grounds for denying people insurance at the same time that companies can drop you for developing a condition. In short, anyone who currently has insurance but is not employed by a LARGE organization (one too big to drop the whole group due to one cancer case, you know, like the State of CA or GM or some other big group) is subject to being denied coverage within the next year if they develop an illness.


Seriously, when I see offensive slogans and images used at the various anti-healthcare rallies it seems as if either those holding these various signs are racists or totally clueless or simply willing to offend just to make a point. In none of these cases should the sign-holder be let off the hook.

I don't believe that in all cases is there an intent to be offensive ... but even if there is not intent, it can still be offensive and the sign-holder should have someone explain the offense and be given the opportunity to change their behavior.

As an example, consider a flag of the Army of Northern Virginia (the stars-n-bars, what we typically call the confederate flag today). Some would say that it represents heritage and not hatred ... but if that very same person cannot understand why another, a descendant of a slave, for example, might be offended, they need to have it explained.

Heck, the very fact that Nazi symbols are used and Obama is compared to Stalin is offensive, so it would seem that those at such rallies as Glen Beck's 9-12 thing (which it seems he didn't actually bother showing up at) are actually quite willing to be offensive.

The question really is this ... why should it be acceptable to use hateful language and images at all?

I hardly think that defending those calling Obama an ape or saying he is a Muslim (his pastor would be surprised) or that he is a foreigner is a wise choice.

As for news media ... you would seem to be saying that FOX and wsj.com are the only folks we would to pay attention to because once you eliminate NPR and CNN you don't have much left.

Just a bit of rambling ....

Watershed Mark said...

Can anyone comment on MSNBC's coverage of ACORN, Van Johnson or Rev Wright?

Mike said...

Well Aaron, at least you are consistant... dumb as a board, but consistant... you really don't like to have your immaturity exposed... or is it the meth...

Aaron said...

Mike,

I know I keep saying, "I'm done talking to you," but you're interesting only because you're obsessed with my personal life -- you know, all that talk of me on "drugs" and whatnot. For the past couple of months, I've had people driving slowly past my house, parking by the driveway and wandering around my property.

If that's you doing all this monkey business, that's not cool. Accompanied with your remarks here, your comments are a little creepy in a stalking kind of way, so I suggest you refrain from the personal remarks and the trespassing or I will report to the authorities.

You know, even in Los Osos, this kind of animosity can be seen. On a federal level, you have people going beyond disagreement -- and in one case praying for Obama's death -- to make their case and I see it here in LO. It's sad. It really is.

Just a bit of rambling...

Mike said...

Sorry if you are that paranoid Aaron, but I'm not interested in crusing past your house... Have seen you driven around though...

You do have a point, you have made yourself a public figure and you seem to like being on stage... I don't, I'm quite private which is why I choose to be anonomse... As crazy as the extremists in Los Osos appear, I would rather not get into a confrontation... I can more than take care of myself, but I don't want to live on that edge these days... I have been with a couple past Directors when they were sought out and verbally assaulted... I don't care to be that kind of target for the Los Osos crazies... I suspect that most of the moderates in Los Osos feel the same... leave me alone and just build the sewer without all the hysterics and lawsuits of the extremists and their cheerleaders...

Churadogs said...

Mark sez:"Unless and until the corruption is removed from Congress there will be no "honest bricks."

Here's a case where we need to define our terms. Percentage-wise, there isn't a lot of "illegal corruption" in Congress. When it's uncovered, people have a fine old time and the legal system moves in and Congresspeople are led off to jail. However, as to LEGAL moral? ethical? "corruption?" i.e. accepting millions from health care industries, then standing up before your constitutents to talk about killing grandma so as to scare them to keep them from looking seriously at any real reforms that would threaten to reduce the very lucrative profits the very companies who are contibuting to your campaign war chest? There's corrupt and there's corrupt. Same thing with "fraud." How much of the waste and fraud in Medicare, for example, is actually being done by government employees, and how much is being done by private firms who are not caught because Medicare has insufficient funding and resources (and committment?) to focus on and catch and punish the defrauders? There's fraud and then there's fraud. And so forth.

Not2010yet sez:"and quell the "birthers" by releasing his actual birth certificate, not some unvetted abstract which is invalid for such purposes as Social Security and Passport applications."

This always makes me smile. Years and years ago, official documents pertaining to birth, death, etc. had to have some kind of uniquely special something, whether an embossed seal or special indellible purple ink (L.A.) or some other weird thing that was indended to thwart fraud. Then back in the early 80's, when my Mom died, I trotted down to the San Diego office of whatever to get OFFICIAL death certificates and was handed this flat, non-imbossed thing. When I asked about it, right there in the official Death Office Place, I was told that the county changed it's procedures a few years back and that WAS now their OFFICIAL death certificate. When I expressed concern that I wasn't sure the insurance company would accept this since it sure didn't look "official," the nice lady looked at me like I had lost my marbles. Counties and states and whoever is in charge of such things are legally able to change their official forms any time they want to. And the new forms are completely legal and official. them?

aaron sez:"Rather, the posters were done by volunteers of FreedomWorks, a right-wing, health insurance company-funded grassroots organization headed by headed by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey."

There's the heart of the matter and one of the points I was making. We can't have an honest conversation about anything when the very words we use have been corrupted or so poorly defined or totally manipulated and re-formulated so purple means green, and/or when so many of the speakers are phony front men and women with hidden agendas AND we are constantly being maniuplated by the likes of Frank Luntz, (brilliant but evil) and/or so many of us are simply uniformed or refuse to believe even simple verifiable facts.

Toss in fear, when the lizard brain kicks in and the rational brain shuts off and you're in dangerous waters.

Health care is not rocket science. But before we can even discuss the issues, we need to make sure the issues are honest ones, with clearly defined and understood terms, and factually verifiable information. You can't have that discussion if the person sitting across from you is intentionally manipulating both you and the information and the discussion to ensure that he wins and you lose. That's not a discussion that will lead to a mutually satisfying solution. That's a front loaded con game with you as the sucker.

When Single Payer was REMOVED from the table even before the health care reform discussion got started, I knew we were in a front-loaded con game, with the American people as suckers.

Not2010Yet said...

Good morning, all you wise adult thoughtful commentators and Gentlemen, and, oh yes, good morning to you ALSO, AARON.

Shark, you render your thoughts with considerable elegance. Aaron renders his with youthful and charming inelegance.


Exactly where would you claim there is a difference between NPR touting the socialist line and CNN leaving off details, waffling, hiding, slanting, shading and otherwise filtering ALL conservative light out with a 100 density optical filter so that ONLY the liberal light shines on any story?

And, exactly WHERE would you find difference in the parallel coverage of the other major media? Come on, it's FINE that liberal media does it, I don't want to shut them down with "localization" or "fairness doctrine" jackboots, let them cast things as they see fit and they DO, but recognize it for what it is, please. Nothing wrong with Beck and his over-the-top flag waving as long as we call it what it is (exactly that) and nothing wrong with CNN and NBC MSNBC and all that slanting, as long as we call it what it is, dishonest liberal journalism.

Watching as much media coverage as I do, believing as I do that I grasp the issues and differences of opinion likely to appear in any group, having friends, neighbors, past tenants and others living in and out of most liberal programs (don't have a single friend in ACORN though, I admit) it is just so crystal clear to me that the media is slanted. Gads if I'm wrong on this one, I'm standing on my head, non compos mentis and 5150 all at once. I give myself more credit than that.

Back to the signs, some of them are over the top i.e. offensive to many, but given that these people legitimately don't see their voices and feelings reflected in the radical swings of the Obama government, this week's Congressional vote to COMPLETELY NATIONALIZE the student loan program (just one clear cut example, argue that one with me, I dare yuh) I'd say their rage is nicely and respectfully contained when shown on signs. Other groups overturn cars, set them on fire, and do violence to our Constitution so I'm giving the shocked conservatives a pass on MOST of the emotion in the signs. As to outright signs promoting violence against the President or his minions, I've not seen as many as you claim but of course NONE of those are appropriate but then, none of them are credible threats and I see them as no different from a Democratic congress booing Pres. "W" in disrespectful exhuberance over Medicare, I see them as no different from a complete full on television show "that's my Bush" panning and ripping a university-educated free-commerce businessman who held the office of President, I see them as no different from a sign saying 1-2-3-4, "we don't want your "F-ing war". ALL of these are perhaps stronger than you or I would like to see from the Ivory Tower (in your case) or from my hiding-in-an-oak-tree-in-camo-fatigues emplacement. Given that the liberally-controlled Congress has IGNORED the conservative center and RACED to do the bidding of the Utopian Socialist at 1600 Penna Ave., WHAT would you have them do to express their outrage at some guy who unlike any previous President I can find has HIDDEN his own personal birth certificate (not an abstract substitute)who is RACING us towards his views with 24 hours to read 1000 page bills cranked out by massive amounts of liberal apologists? Huh? What? Gads I think given the outpouring of feeling over what's happening, what the conservatives see happening to the country which is so antithetical to their beliefs, I think the overall scope of the signs is tame, reasonable, justifiable and really ADMIRABLE to see people for once rise up instead of letting things run wild.
Oh, did you notice the liberal Congress listening for the first time in ages? I'm actually a little proud of the success of our system in the mainstream getting the attention of the elitist boobs in control of Congress. Really proud.

Watershed Mark said...

Ann wrote:
When Single Payer was REMOVED from the table even before the health care reform discussion got started, I knew we were in a front-loaded con game, with the American people as suckers.

Democrats disagreeing with Democrats or are they, as Not2010Yet opines, beginning to listen to their constituents?
Ann, are you suggesting that Democrats are accepting insurance money?

The fact that immature citizens who didn't read and comprehend 3200 would be forced to buy into a program may change the way they think about what government will be doing for (read to) them should that bill in its current form or something like it get passed and signed by the POTUS who raised his hand to defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Not2010Yet wrote:
Given that the liberally-controlled Congress has IGNORED the conservative center and RACED to do the bidding of the Utopian Socialist at 1600 Penna Ave., WHAT would you have them do to express their outrage at some guy who unlike any previous President I can find has HIDDEN his own personal birth certificate (not an abstract substitute)who is RACING us towards his views with 24 hours to read 1000 page bills cranked out by massive amounts of liberal apologists? Huh? What?

You have stated this issue BEAUTIFULLY. I could not agree more.

I must compliment Ann for not shutting down the discussion.
It takes a real American to so generously provide land allow dissent in an exchange of ideas that may be in sharp contrast to her own.

Watershed Mark said...

It takes a real American to so generously provide land to allow dissent in an exchange of ideas that may be in sharp contrast to her own.

BRAVO Ann!

Aaron said...

Mike,

For the record, I have a car and I drive it. Also, I don't do any drugs: no illegal substances, no prescription medication, no alcohol.

Not2010Yet, if my opinions are inelegant, what does that make yours? Enough with the elitism. Let's talk about the issues.

Not2010Yet reminds me of Orly Taitz, the "birther" lawyer who insists that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. On August 4th, Taitz appeared on MSNBC, calling interviewer David Shuster a "brownshirt." Just yesterday, Taitz appeared on MSNBC to call the media -- also naming CNN -- "dishonest liberal journalism." MSNBC morning host Dylan Ratigan looked at her, slackjawed and he asked, "Can you show me where we [MSNBC] were dishonest." She couldn't answer. Then she asked, like Not2010Yet, why the president has "hidden" his own personal birth certificate?

He's shown it.

As far as media bias goes, CNN really hasn't "waffled" in their coverage, "filtering conservative light." CNN has covered the 9/12 tea party marches, has questioned Barack Obama's policies most notably by CNN's Candy Crowley, Anderson Cooper's "Keeping Them Honest" and Campbell Brown's show.

CNN has stood by conservative TV host Lou Dobbs over his comments on hispanics and the "birther" claims he's made. Associated Press referred to Dobbs as a "publicity nightmare" for CNN yet he appears every night, scoffing at the left for trying to "silence" him. For a channel -- you claimed -- that shines only a liberal light on any story, they're not doing a good job at that. Oh, I'll throw you a bone. There's always Rick Sanchez, but even he has been critical of Obama at times.

On MSNBC, it's true that they have a 4:1 ratio of left-leaning to conservative representation with Joe Scarborough being the only conservative on the MSNBC lineup. However, I've done a lot of fact-checking to conclude one thing: even though they have a liberal slant, Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow have been surprisingly accurate on most of their coverage with Maddow edging out Olbermann in accuracy. Keith often refers to statistics posted on the DailyKos web site, a liberal blog that sometimes has unverified statistics.

Some people say truth has a liberal bias.

Aaron said...

If your claims represent the gasp you have of the issues and differences of opinion, you're contradicting yourself.

The Obama administration has not made any "radical swings." Big bank bailout? That was taxpayer funds being pumped into the unregulated markets and companies who were responsible for producing the recession. Czars? Nixon started appointing "czars" (the term itself being nothing more than a media shorthand standing in for long government titles and/or complex portfolios) first and Reagan, a man who felt government was being too intrusive, appointed more "czars." In recent years, Bush appointed 47 czars compared to Obama, who has around 35-36.

To the progressive liberal's chagrin, Obama has tried to include bipartisanship in every measure he's set forth. As an example, one month ago, he praised Sen. Chuck Grassley's (R-Iowa) efforts for serving as one of the chief Republican negotiators of the bill. On the same day as Obama's praise of Republicans for stepping forward to provide constructive feedback, Grassley spoke at a conservative rally and radicalized the debate with incendiary rhetoric, saying that the Democratic health care agenda might empower the government to "pull the plug on grandma." He was, of course, talking about the claim of "death panels," which was circulated by Sarah Palin. The claim turned out to be patently false.

Recently, the Daily Show mocked Obama's "adorable" approach to bipartisanship, not knowing that Republicans in the House would essentially boycott the bill and urge the president to "start from scratch," even though the Republicans have been soundly against most types of productive reform like single-payer, co-ops and the public option. Interestingly enough, most of the vocal Republican dissent has been funded by health insurance PACs.

The conservatives are being heard, but they're not being productive nor have they helped to curve the level of intense animosity that has been found in the debate so far.

M said...

Not2010Yet, i'm pretty sure I don't agree with you on your sewer stance, but on this topic I want to thank you for your putting into words what I am thinking.
Funny, nobody ever mentions Michael Savage. Did you know he is still banned from Britain. Murderers and dictators are not on the list but he is. For a radio talk show. There is talk of banning a show like his. Are liberal voices going to be banned as well? Whenever I turn on Air America there it is. Their still bashing Bush. Bashing Republicans. I agree that Bush was probably the worst president in awhile, but in a recent study, Democrat Senators and House Representatives outnumbered Republicans by a large margin in personal wealth. With my well known cynicyism, i'm not so sure our best interest is on their agenda. Government power apparently is addicting and they can't seem to get enough of it.
Sincerely, M

Watershed Mark said...

Not2010Yey:
After reading again your comments regarding "coverage" I can say with conviction that if there were more like you in America, America wouldn't be in such tough shape...

Watershed Mark said...

Can anyone comment on CNN's coverage of ACORN, Van Johnson or Rev Wright?

How about Air America, NPR, ABC, NBC, CBS?

As for the POTUS words- His actions have spoken much more clearly than anything he has said so far.

Someone made the comment that: For a guy who wanted to change Washington the DNC has recently run a commercial comparing George Bush's Czars to Barrack Obama's Czars.

Does the "everyone is doing it" excuse actually work for someone who claimed he would change?

Watershed Mark said...

Does it actually work for the POTUS?

Watershed Mark said...

The Obama administration has not made any "radical swings."

General Motors promising a money back Guaranteed using borrowed funds backed by future taxpayer receipts.

If that isn't a radical swing, color me 5150.

Does anyone think we will see a money back guarantee from the "proposed" borrowed money run government health option?

BTW those who don't currently buy/pay for their own insurance by choice will not have that option should 3200 pass.

Watershed Mark said...

Does the "everyone is doing it" excuse actually work for someone who claimed he would change?
Is it actually working for the POTUS?

Aaron said...

M,

Michael Savage was banned in Britain, not here. Britain does not adhere to our constitution. As far as radio shows here being banned, none of the most notable shows have been banned or scaled back in syndication. While Air America is on the air, so is Rush Limbaugh even though he's constantly polluting the airwaves with misinformation along with making racially tinged statements.

Bill O'Reilly, Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck have their radio shows and they're still going strong as they bring in millions of listeners daily. You make it sound like conservative radio shows are becoming an endangered species yet you're able to bring up one left-wing radio station.

Regarding coverage, CNN covered the expose done by Veritas Visuals since Sep. 14, showing ACORN employees giving tax advice on prostitution, child prostitution, and human trafficking. Ironically, CNN being a "liberal bias" network, did not talk about O'Keefe and Giles (the makers of the mini-documentary) being thrown out and reported to the police for their conduct.

NPR, ABC, NBC and CBS have covered the comments made by Van Johnson as well as his resignation. The Rev. Wright scandal was covered extensively by the mainstream media. Such evidence is available by doing a simple keyword search on YouTube.

But look at the focus of the scrutiny?

The ACORN employees in the videos? Black.

Rev. Jeremiah Wright? Black.

Van Johnson? Black.

Barack Obama? The first African-American President of the United States.

The GOP has focused on black people as being the problem found in the Democratic Party and the "socialist" movement.

On a related tangent, Local Republican leader Gail McPherson has made racially charged comments to African-American employees when she worked in Riverside. She has also had some choice words about President Barack Obama, which I will not repeat here.

In conclusion, I agree with Jimmy Carter. I believe that many Republicans -- locally and across the country -- are, in fact, racists. Republicans and conservatives -- who have the best intentions when they're talking about policy issues -- are speaking to an audience who have racism deeply embedded in their social subconsciousness.

Watershed Mark said...

Not all the ACORN employees captured in the videos were black.

There just isn't a racist behind every tree.

It is interesting just how much the race card gets "played" out.

Watershed Mark said...

It is interesting just how much the race card gets "played" out and by whom.

Watershed Mark said...

Ironically, CNN being a "liberal bias" network, did not talk about O'Keefe and Giles (the makers of the mini-documentary) being thrown out and reported to the police for their conduct.

Why not?
Who did?

Watershed Mark said...

NPR, ABC, NBC and CBS have covered the comments made by Van Johnson as well as his resignation. The Rev. Wright scandal was covered extensively by the mainstream media. Such evidence is available by doing a simple keyword search on YouTube.

Why no ACRON coverage?

If the crimes being uncovered were perpetrated by a conservative based organization wouldn't it be covered in "liberal" media?

Watershed Mark said...

Why no ACORN coverage in liberal media?

M said...

Aaron, it sounds like your inviting a revolution. Actually it sounds like you are promoting one. Most revolutions only seem to work out for the betterment of a few. Those few in power.
Have you seen or heard a word of Michael Savages plight on CNN, MSNB, FOX, or any other media outlets? Of course not. They're still talking about Michael Jacksons death.
As a white anglo-saxon male I take great offense to rev wright. If he is so vocal about white domination, where are the black leaders today? Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? Two names was all I could come up with. Oh yea, Obama. Course he's half white as well. Race is not the issue. Who is going to have to pay for it all is. Those of us that go to work 40 hrs. a week find it a little bit hard to take when we are going to take care of those that dont wish to work. Why is that so hard to comprehend?
Sincerely, M

Aaron said...

M,

I'm not trying to start anything.

Unfortunately, race is an issue. Of course it's an issue.

You said, "Those of us that go to work 40 hrs. a week find it a little bit hard to take when we are going to take care of those that dont wish to work." That statement is illogical.

Those who don't wish to work won't be able to even afford the plan. The public option isn't exactly free. It's constructed to be cheaper than private insurance, but it's definitely not a "hall pass" for those who don't want to work or for those who are illegal immigrants.

The logic behind your statement is flawed due to the following premise:

Why should taxpayers pay for roads when some people don't drive?

Why should taxpayers pay for public schools when some students drop out?

Why should taxpayers pay for a war when the majority of Americans don't support it?

Do you see where I'm going with this? We utilize these services funded by the taxpayers without a second thought because it has been a way of life. In our country, we've set forth laws that seek a public benefit of convenience and wellness. Ironically, our health (the first priority of wellness) is now at the mercy of a mostly unregulated health insurance industry that can approve or disapprove coverage at will.

Here's a statistic for you. Harvard Medical School researchers found in an analysis released on Thursday that nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year -- one each 12 minutes -- because they either lack health insurance or they don't get good coverage. What about them? Are all of those 45,000 people not working? Are all of these 45,000 not worthy of your taxpayer dollars, the very same taxpayer dollars that go toward public works and initiatives?

Just some food for thought.

Watershed Mark said...

Mr. Rodgers

Watershed Mark said...

It's constructed to be cheaper than private insurance, but it's definitely not a "hall pass" for those who don't want to work or for those who are illegal immigrants.

Please tell us you didn't "hear" this on NPR..
Show us the chapter and verse that supports this statment or retract it.

40,000+ die each year in traffic accidents on roads paid for by road use taxes collected at the pump.
In Arizona $0.54 is collected for State and Federal Tax on each gallon of road fuel.

Watershed Mark said...

Fuel Tax

Diesel Fuel tax today is $0.54 a gallon.

Watershed Mark said...

Here's another challenge to the statement:"It's constructed to be cheaper than private insurance"

Whose insurance?

Aaron said...

Mark, do your own homework.

Watershed Mark said...

I'll take that as your retraction.

It isn't clear if you are referring to 3200 or any of the other proposed bills.
Perhaps we will hear something from the POTUS tomorrow about when he will actually put something about health care in writing.

The POTUS failure to lead has resulted in much confusion as evidenced by statements like:

It's constructed to be cheaper than private insurance, but it's definitely not a "hall pass" for those who don't want to work or for those who are illegal immigrants.

Aaron said...

Failure to lead? Is that all you have?

Get lost. Don't insult my intelligence.

Not2010Yet said...

Aaron, you have so much that needs covering, it’s difficult but I’ll try. You’ve made one good point and goofed others. You are quite right that Dobbs is on CNN; the guy has some fairness to him AND you are quite right, it’s not like CNN to allow his kind of balance to get into their mix. They and you deserve some points on this one.

You let yourself down when you say Obama has shown his actual personal birth certificate. He has ordered his papers sealed. The officials of Hawaii have said they’ve “seen it and it’s valid but it’s his private affair” and have issued AN ABSTRACT, if you happen to know or can look up what one of those is. It is a modern computer generated document, far from a paper certificate such as mine, hand signed by the uncle physician who delivered me, complete with getting my street of parent’s residence off by two letters, a real white lettering on black old fashioned wet process vettable photocopy of the water damaged original. My birth certificate would stand up to scrutiny by the National Archives, not that anybody would find it worth the effort. Obama has NOT displayed his, how can you get this point so wrong? If he had, it would be EVERYWHERE and "birthers" would have egg on their faces, and an interesting issue would be open and shut forever ON THE SPOT.

CNN’s coverage of the marches flashed heavily on the least-centrist signs, didn’t pan large groups so you could freeze frame and make your own survey or judgments of the general tone of them, had to watch FOX for that………

You say “the Obama admin. hasn’t made any radical swings”. On this point you and I have nothing to discuss, because you are in denial about the truth. Take a page from the publishing heritage of the planet, and get some reality going for yourself. See my next post please about your opinion of the "cause of the recession".

Not2010

Not2010Yet said...

The “unregulated markets and companies” caused the recession. You say? Aaron, sit down, it’s unrevised History 101 time. Open your note tablet and pay attention, class is in session. The recession was caused by the collapse of residential housing. The collapse of residential housing was caused by a doomed, near-Ponzi overheated market forced by Democratic administrations and Attorney’s General who threatened lenders if they did not write MORE LOANS particularly in areas the liberals deemed “red-lined” or minority occupied and discriminated against. Lenders responded as any business under significant Federal threat of destruction with offering no-document and no-qualify loans, sub-prime loans, etc. Fannie Mae will buy it, they were told. The head of Fannie Mae made tens of millions while destroying the institution. It was therefore the Federal threat which brought about loans to anybody alive enough to hold a pencil. I knew and employed some of those who took such loans, knew their finances at their confidence, and gave them advice to NOT over-extend. Most of them could not resist the siren call of undocumented mortgages and simply craved a nicer house, a house out of the “hood” and in the Inland Empire where homes were big and drive-bys were less common. Who could blame them? The tragedy was MOST of them ALREADY had (to lose) little houses already going, mortgages they were MAKING, having their own slice of the USA pie albeit not in the "greatest neighborhoods" crime-wise. They over-reached or bought a second home they could NEVER manage based upon conventional loan economics, and were caught and devastated. One I still talk to is back to RENTING. Bank of America didn’t invent such loans, they were ORDERED to do so. Why? I’ll bet you’ve NEVER been under Federal threat or order, "sonny boy" (intentional diminutive but honest shot at your young and limited life experience). I HAVE been, you do what the Feds tell you, in fear, even though you did nothing wrong. Right or wrong has no meaning when the Federal Hammer or Sword of Damocles is poised right over your jugular. You comply, pay the fine if any, and shake your head at the dishonesty or wrongness you perceive of it all. I was slightly late on some seemingly inconsequential Federal paperwork (not taxes nor involving a dime) that’s all. The threat of fines is unbelievable, six figure written proposed fines against a tiny small business man by a foreign-born federal bureaucrat who never made a payroll in his life. I got mine tossed nearly all out after an exhausting and soul-busting long fight, at HUGE cost to myself and my blood pressure and sleep. The lenders wanted to avoid such an attack and fight. That’s the source of the recession, not “companies”. Don't tell me lenders enjoyed or boosted some of this, I realize they did, but the GENESIS and the PROMOTION of the overheat was 101% Democratic Party and elected officials' pressure.

Geez, Aaron, write this lesson on a chalk board over and over like Bart Simpson until you get at least THIS CRITICAL PART of USA financial history burned into your brain. You can keep ALL the other liberal stuff with my blessings, so long as you get THIS ONE right, it’s been world-changing and it was at the personal hand of Janet Reno and William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and their liberal well-meaning ilk of buddies. Capice? Regards, Happy HHD's. Not2010Yet

Churadogs said...

Not2010yet sez:"it is just so crystal clear to me that the media is slanted."

Most media is corporate, in the hands of very few major corporations. That's why I laugh when I hear people say "liberal" media.

and, "I'm actually a little proud of the success of our system in the mainstream getting the attention of the elitist boobs in control of Congress. Really proud."

Did the congress become filled with elitist boobs only after the last election, or were the previously Republican controlled congress also filled with elitist boobs? Just trying to figure out if you consider elitest boobism to be Democratic? or are all congresses afflicted with it. If so, were you out there railing against the previous congress or only this one?

M sez:"Government power apparently is addicting and they can't seem to get enough of it."

Actually, this has to do with corporate money and plotical campaigns. Congresspeople know on what side their bread is buttered. Unless and until we get real campaign reform and elected officials who are unencumbered by having to raise millions of dollars every day, The People won't have any real representation, except for a few crumbs tossed to them after Corporate America takes the lions share. It's all about the golden rule.

Also, about "liberal" left-wing media. What TV news shows or daily papers or national news magazines have a "labor" segment or page. Times has a whole business section every day, but nothing on labor, on working folks, on issues directly affecitng the workpalce & etc. Zip. Zero. Wonder why?

M sez:"Those of us that go to work 40 hrs. a week find it a little bit hard to take when we are going to take care of those that dont wish to work."

Hmmm, code words for "Welfare Queens Driving Cadillacs And Having 15 Babies." perhaps, hmmmm???

and in your final rant, you forgot to tell us what the top Wall St. firms were doing while Fannie May was selling questionable loans to unqualified people. Don't think the top Wall St. firms are being run by Democrats.

Watershed Mark said...

McCain's Early Recognition of Fannie/Freddie Crisis

Barney Frank in 2005: What Housing Bubble?

Barney Frank: Plenty of rich people that we can tax

Maxine Waters (D) Slip of the Tongue Reveals True Intentions

Barney Franks theme song

Barney Frank - "Banking Queen" w/ caption

The Day OBAMA CARE Died

Watershed Mark said...

The Obama administration has not made any "radical swings."

It's constructed to be cheaper than private insurance, but it's definitely not a "hall pass" for those who don't want to work or for those who are illegal immigrants.

Get lost. Don't insult my intelligence.

Every village has at least one…

Watershed Mark said...

Dear Ann,

These days a label does not represent the true quality of the garment. Not buying something simply because it has wool, silk, cotton, polyester or a blend of any of these limits the experience available to the shopper/buyer.

Everyone who will be paying for the collection and treatment of wastewater in LO/BP should be concerned why wasn't vacuum collection wasn't actually studied? When people put their bias aside and ask “why” of those who will vote to take on the responsibility for construction of and who will get paid for the project management their financial interests will be protected. The currently incomplete government "process" isn't in the best financial interest of the people who will pay for it. Asking "why" the only other alternative collection system was not studied in a $7MM study of alternatives isn't only prudent, for many it means continued financial viability, in a coming economic mess.

SLOCO, Paavo and Bruce haven't answered the question "why vacuum collection wasn't studied?" and the lack of any response is very telling.

AS Bruce Gibson is the Council Chair and LO/BP’s Representative he has a fiduciary duty to correct the incomplete study to include vacuum collection and other more efficient treatment processes, yet he has ignored that duty thus far. He may have a conflict of interest issue should he fail to make good and deliver a “complete” REVIEW of ALTERNATIVES Report. I know not where he is receiving his legal advice but I hope “the people” aren’t paying for that too.

Back to my fiber analogy above: A single tread is easily broken whereas many threads taken together forms strong rope cable which cannot be broken.
The Golden Gate Bridge is one example where cable is used instead of chain. A chain is only as strong as the weakest link.

As catastrophic financial changes are now occurring and as they unfold, we had better begin to work together. We are all Americans first and foremost.

Watershed Mark said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Watershed Mark said...

A single thread is easily broken whereas many threads taken together form strong rope or cable which cannot be broken.

Not2010Yet said...

Chura says: Most media is corporate, in the hands of very few major corporations. That's why I laugh when I hear people say "liberal" media. My response: Chura this may be true however the corporate heads appear to select rampant liberalism despite tanking and pathetic ratings, a la MSNBC. You are correct to note corporate ownership and one would NOT expect them to pursue low ratings (and therefore low advertising rates and profits) however the complete liberal bias and concomitant financial results are nevertheless there for us all to see.


Chura asks: "Did the congress become filled with elitist boobs only after the last election, or were the previously Republican controlled congress also filled with elitist boobs? Just trying to figure out if you consider elitest boobism to be Democratic? or are all congresses afflicted with it. If so, were you out there railing against the previous congress or only this one?" Not2010 responds: largely yep, elitist boob-ism happens to be the purview of the Democratic party but I must acknowledge the presence of plenty of Republican participation, such as McCain, Snow, particularly Specter, etc. In the latter cases, some Republicans play right smack dab into the hands of Democrats who are unabashed liberals instead of wishy washy disgraceful pawn Republicans-In-Name-Only or RINOs.


Chura notes: Also, about "liberal" left-wing media. What TV news shows or daily papers or national news magazines have a "labor" segment or page. Times has a whole business section every day, but nothing on labor, on working folks, on issues directly affecitng the workpalce & etc. Zip. Zero. Wonder why? Not2010 responds: Open the Sunday TV listings in TVGUIDE.com, highlight everybody's news shows except FOX and Meet The Press when Russert ran it. Hit control-C to copy. Open a blank page in Word. Hit control V to paste. click PRINT and you have your answer as to who's shows are labor or union slanted. Go to top menu bar, click on BOLD, go to top line and type your own heading "TV shows with a labor bias, only they don't use the label LABOR PAGE as Chura suggests". click the diskette "save" icon, and you're set. (No offense meant here, Chura, I realize you're not a dummy and are a keyboard wizard, I'm just making an attempt at a clever response, and I acknowledge that my cleverness has a major degree of variability in it's achievement level).



Chura remarks: "and in your final rant, you forgot to tell us what the top Wall St. firms were doing while Fannie May was selling questionable loans to unqualified people. Don't think the top Wall St. firms are being run by Democrats." Not 2010 responds: oh they played along, this is true and I acknowledged that above in paragraph 1 line 47 or so (gads I can be verbose) when I asked the young man from the Rock to NOT tell me lenders enjoyed or boosted some of this." However, I again state that the genesis of bad loans, and the impetus propulsion or promotion under threat of legal force and devastation of these overheating proximate-cause bad loans came right smack DAB out of the hands of the Democratic party and it's elected, appointed, hired and promoted minions and policies therefrom.

I believe that when the history of all this is written, and through all the revisionist and slanted historical tripe that will come and has already come, the fault will be allocated properly on the well-meant but disastrous attempts to shove around and change a free market real estate private and pseudo-government financing system by armed Democrats. Armed with the clubs and jackboots of federal lawyers and thugs.

6:28 AM, September 20, 2009

Aaron said...

Not2010Yet,

I'm not sitting down. You just proved to me that you have no clue what you're talking so YOU sit down and listen to what everyone else is saying.

Aaron said...

You know who actually ordered the banks like Bank of America to offer no-document and no-qualify loans, sub-prime loans? The Bush administration. In a speech he made in 2007, Bush told people, "Go out there and buy your homes." Bush enabled the banks to offer these risky loans. Only later in his term did he even consider cracking down on a few GSEs that caused this mess.

Democratic administrations? Which ones are you referring to? Clinton? I'd like to see where Clinton left the floodgates open on these loans. I thought, for a moment, you were referring to Democrats like Barney Frank (D-Mass), who has pushed through legislation that has benefited Fannie Mae in the past. It's true, he was a recipient of more than $40,000 in campaign donations from Fannie since 1989 -- and he even fought the Bush administration's reform of Fannie Mae in 2008. True, there have been Democrats who have turned the other cheek, but before the Democrats took over the House and the Senate, the Republicans did not push through a single bill to assess and remedy the impending mortgage loan crisis. Even when they had the power to bust a filibuster, they let the Laissez-Faire market run free.

So what has happened during the eight years of President Bush, really? What has happened -- during those eight years -- when the Democratic leadership was in the minority? The Democratic leadership is wholly responsible for this mess? Really?

Boy, I can never get tired of that "sonny boy" talk. "You don't have enough life experience," yadda yadda yadda. You know, for eight years, there have been people, older people with more life experience than me, waving their finger and lecturing the people about why the free market should prosper and how the American people would benefit from it via the trickle-down effect. Turns out, they were half-right. Big business -- especially those buying up all the toxic loans/assets -- did profit while middle-class took a nosedive into the recession. Even though some have more life experience than me, they have proven to be wrong -- and quite frankly, wrong for America.

Keep your tin foil hat, Not2010Yet.

Churadogs said...

Not yet sez:"It is a modern computer generated document, far from a paper certificate such as mine, hand signed by the uncle physician who delivered me, complete with getting my street of parent’s residence off by two letters, a real white lettering on black old fashioned wet process vettable photocopy of the water damaged original. My birth certificate would stand up to scrutiny by the National Archives, not that anybody would find it worth the effort."

A question here: Suppose, Not Yet, that your files are damaged by a fire or flood or termites eat your paper and ink birth certificate, so you write to your home county and request another copy and they send you a new! Improved! electronic form and you say, No, no, I want an exact duplicate of my old paper and ink certificate, complete with embossed stamp and maybe purple ink, and they say, sorry, we transferred all those old paper files to electronic data files and dumped the paper as it was moldy and rotting and taking up too much space, this electronic form we sent you IS your official birth certificate now, would that mean you would no longer be a citizen? Or maybe that would mean that you were never born, since you can't prove it ever happend, there now being no ink and paper certificate?

As for your contention that Democrats are responsible for our present mess, Aaron's right. We've had Demo & Repug pigs at the trough, but Repubs have been in charge for 20 + years and have, true to their philosophy and their self interests (all those K Street Lobbyists at work there) loosened the "rules" to let the "free market" rule, forgetting that every game needs rules (and Rule Policemen rather than Wink-nudge Cardboard Cutouts put in place to fool the rubes coming in to play) if it wishes to avoid turning into a mooks game -- which this one did, which made a lot of the folks running the scam very happy and left the rest of us stuck with the bill.

Mike said...

Gad Ann... I am surprised you still live in the USA with all the corruption you see around every corner... except I guess you don't see that there are probably as many Democrat con artists working just to be re-elected as there are Republicans... You really seem to want a totalitarian form of goverment... of your personal view of what is correct...

I am amazed you can stand to live in the USA under our imperfect government... You seem to be for anything the Demo's feed you and spit on everything that sounds Republican... Have you ever even been in other countries...???

Churadogs said...

Mike, you clearly didn't read what I had written about Demo & Repub pigs at the trough. Plus you didn't answer my question regarding your paper, ink, misspelled street address Birth Certificate.

Mike said...

I actually have the aged original with the embossed seal... Haven't needed a copy though...but maybe I am more organized than most... Still have the original SS card from when I was 12 and throwing the Telegram Tribune in SLO Town...

I don't understand the nonsense surrounding the actual Birth Certificate for Obama unless one was trying very hard to say he's not a US Citizen...

Churadogs said...

Mike, you didn't answer the question: As an Obama "birther," if you lost your paper/embossed seal birth certificate and had to get issued a copy that was formatted differently, wouldn't you have to question whether you were a US citizen? I mean, your copy wouldn't have a seal and everything, would it.Which would mean you couldn't prove you were a U.S. citizen. Awww, too bad. There goes your Medicare and we'd have to make sure if you ever needed an emergency room, you'd be turned away as an illegal alien.