The People's Cube - Political Satire

I would like to apologize to Red Square for throwing two threads of the party approved tracks. I thank you for “urging” me “to start a new topic on the Blog and continue your useful propaganda and agitation efforts there.”

I will take this opportunity to respond to those who I didn't respond to after the warning was given. I didn't mean to be rude and ignore them but I had to respect Red Square's wishes as it is his site and he was kind enough to allow me, the political enemy, to voice my opinion. I thank you for that.

I also thank Krasnodar for taking the time to make this:


That was the old paradigm.


This is the new paradigm, one that reflects a more advanced and enlightened age.

Now I will respond to some of the comments that followed Red Square's warning regarding what I was posting on the other threads.

Comrade Tooorisky
Comrades,
“NP appears to be suffering from the "Cranial Rectal Insertion" which makes it very difficult to read or master new material.

This is nothing new, just the same old crap.

He has no intention of doing anything, he just wants to gripe.”

Yes, I've seen the “liberalism” is a mental disorder defense and it's not new.

Reading or mastering new material you say? That's the tactic of blaming others for what you are guilty of. Conservatives hate anything “new”.

I have no gripes. I only wish to debate and hopefully open some eyes to the truth.

Red Rooster
“just as I suspected... young student, re-educated at Brooklyn College or some other re-education institute... those in the Brooklyn area might do good to give lectures at said re-education institute... however as we know, the reality of the uber-left letting anyone in who has actually lived in an uber-left society is nil.”

I'm sure Brooklyn College would welcome that. There are many professors, staff, and students who have lived in “uber-left” nations and I suspect will be happy to hear the views of the minority.
I'm not young nor am I a student. Students are who I teach.


Great Stanlin's Ghost
“I hate to get serious here, and I apologize profusely to everyone for doing so, but in real life (you know, outside of the Cube) I've been teaching elementary school long enough to teach some of the children of former students. If you are going to spend your life teaching children, you will want to ignore "paradigms" and most of the other useless B.S. they teach at teacher colleges, and instead start reading E. D. Hirsch and others like him, and investigating a good phonetic language arts program.”

Your years of service are commendable. There is a new way of doing things now though. E.D. Hirsch favored marginalizing anything that didn't fit into the American view. A common myth was that a person's grasp of “proper English” showed a lack of understanding or ability to grasp new material. We have moved on from that old view point. It was natural as I have never come across anyone in the Board Of Education that speaks the “Queen's English”. American English is not a reason to suspect someone is intellectually limited or unable to handle new material.

And you will be happy to know that I proof read in real life (you know, outside of the cube). When posting quickly online I don't.

Commissar_Elliott
“And for this very reason America is in the tank economically. With the government's hands in the economy, they can make something artificially happen (like make housing prices low), but what happens when the payer can't make the payment because the interest rates catch up, now what happens when this happens in mass?”
Bankers have conned people and that was a major cause in America's economic problems. This is only a problem to the people though as many wealthy people have done very well for themselves."

“By this logic, Rush Limbaugh should still be living/doing business in New York! Also by that logic, New York should have the greatest police and fire departments in the country and yet check out these statistics on crime. Now don't misunderstand me, the government's primary job is to protect its people, and the police and fire department are the core of that duty, my point is, if New York has a high tax rate to pay for them, why is its violent crime rate at or above the national average, and don't say "because you can't prevent all violent crimes", because that's a big fat "doy!" I'd go off on a wild guess here, but maybe it's because the tax dollars aren't paying for just the police and fire department. . . Hmm”

If Rush needed to do business in NYC he would. His show however can be done anywhere and as man driven by money he chose to do so where he could hoard more of his money.

I would say that NYC does have the greatest police and fire departments. I know I am not alone on that feeling even here. Are crime rates above average? Depends on how precincts fill out their reports. Crime also occurs when there is a disparity between the rich and impoverished as everyone knows. One mile separates the obscenely rich and the exploited poor in Manhattan. Running a city requires more than a small town and much of America's “wealth” is handled in NYC.

Taxes are also paying for mass transit, public schools, heavily used and vital public roads, and the list goes on.

I thank you for engaging me on my points.

I would also like to add that I understand the point of this site.

Conservatives hate anything “new”.

As a centrist, I can't honestly confirm or rebuke this, but all I can say is that ironically, modern progressivism is the most ass-backward ideology infesting this country.

Progressives still adhere to a deeply flawed economic model that involves heavy government control, a millennia-long concept handed down from stingy lords to greedy kings and bloodthirsty commissars. After all, taxes were originally conceived by barons and monarches to bilk every shilling of their subjects' hard-earned income. Where are the calls of oppression among progs concerning taxation?

Virtually every major economic crisis can be traced to some misguided government distortions of the market, not capitalist greed as latte Leninists want you to believe. The Panic of 1837? That was thanks to the Specie Circular, which allowed only gold and silver as payment for public lands. This was, of course, the era of westward expansion, so if every pioneer had to pay in gold or silver, a fragile economic bubble would inevitably follow. The Great Depression? The Federal Reserve's overexpansion of the money supply, mon ami, with the subsequent ballooning asset prices culminating in Black Tuesday.

But that's not all! The government actually dealt a triple-whammy upon the economy. The second was the Smoot-Hawley Act, which placed new tariffs on foreign products. Problem is, nearly all other countries placed retaliatory tariffs on American exports, thus grinding international trade to a halt. To add insult to injury, Frankie Roosevelt's New Deal policy extended what was supposed to be a few painful years to a single miserable decade. Excessive taxation was one factor, which the new revenue ending up back to the workers in public projects who paid them in the first place. Another was a whole slew of federal regulations of the private sector, which made entrepreneurship impossible. Even strip clubs were subject to regulations: A federal agent would be present in each and every one, counting how many stripteases the club dishes out in a workweek.

And last but not least, the Great Recession. Lehman Brothers? Wrong. Goldman Sachs? Wrong! An international cabal of Zionist rabbis and Halliburton executives? WRONG!!! The answer is actually three words: Community Reinvestment Act. Passed in 1977, the act was one of those touchy-feely good policies progressives whined for; It forced banks into loaning to low-income families looking to own homes. Sound awesome, right? Absolutely, except property prices began to skyrocket, while banks ended up with a shitload of subprime mortgages. To make the best out of their quandary, banks began to trade derivatives, bundled of subprime mortgages, which only serve to spike the housing bubble. And then... POP!

This is November, 2010, and have the progressives learned to do away with the "old"? Right, with the new half-trillion dollar Federal Reserve stimulus coming up. $3.27 trillion worth of stimulus pork and "tax cuts" to those without income later, and the economy still stagnates and unemployment rate still hovers above our heads. Hopefully, the new Republican House and a barely Democratic Senate will hammer some sense into themselves and start a long, painful, yet invigorating process of restraint and deregulation, something entirely "new" from the "old" that big government progs have tried to sell to us with no avail. Im no conservative, I mind you, but I ask of you: Do you hate the "new"?

Kim Jong-Un wrote: As a centrist, I can't honestly confirm or rebuke this, but all I can say is that ironically, modern progressivism is the most ass-backward ideology infesting this country.

“Modern Progressivism” is another attempt at socialism. Not all “progressives”, liberals, democrats or whatever are looking for that. To lump it all together is equal to someone dismissing all republicans as “neo-cons”, fascists, Zionists, or whatever. All it amounts to is to get people to circle the wagons. When that happens people just blindly defend or support their “team”.

There was a time when people voted democrat if they were workers with a union job and voted republican if they owned their own business. The union workers aren't all communists or socialists. In NYC the firemen and police are union. If they get hurt they are taken care of. Not many will have a problem with that. It is all tax money.

Kim Jong-Un wrote: Progressives still adhere to a deeply flawed economic model that involves heavy government control, a millennia-long concept handed down from stingy lords to greedy kings and bloodthirsty commissars. After all, taxes were originally conceived by barons and monarches to bilk every shilling of their subjects' hard-earned income. Where are the calls of oppression among progs concerning taxation?

True, people will always exploit every opportunity presented to them. Many times people who disagree do so based on the expected exploitation. I don't know how many people really have a problem with a safety net in the event someone honestly falls on bad times. What the opposition is focused on is that there are people who will just sit back and take. Correct? Same goes for the military. People who oppose it (usually) agree you need a strong defense but they obsess over profiteering and innocent deaths. I don't know many republicans who support the downside, they just accept everything comes with a price.

Now the examples you gave of the greedy taxing the poor are the roots of why many support progressive taxation. Few ever see taxing the wealthy as oppressive. Many who dislike it are focused on exploitation, their principles, or the “downside”. The money is used more often then not to “buy” votes. Give people what they want and they won't care how it came to them.

Kim Jong-Un wrote: Virtually every major economic crisis can be traced to some misguided government distortions of the market, not capitalist greed as latte Leninists want you to believe. The Panic of 1837? That was thanks to the Specie Circular, which allowed only gold and silver as payment for public lands. This was, of course, the era of westward expansion, so if every pioneer had to pay in gold or silver, a fragile economic bubble would inevitably follow. The Great Depression? The Federal Reserve's overexpansion of the money supply, mon ami, with the subsequent ballooning asset prices culminating in Black Tuesday.

There is the exception of the “dot com boom”. Many were getting wealthy on nothing more than sheer expectation. Many were instant “on paper” millionaires. Everyone was looking to get a piece and then reality set in. Was it a crisis? No. It was an example of “talking up” the market. What occurred in 2008 was made worse by talking it down.

The model that is heavily promoted isn't the “China Model”. It's what China used as a model, America during WWII. America has the ability to outdo every nation.

Kim Jong-Un wrote: But that's not all! The government actually dealt a triple-whammy upon the economy. The second was the Smoot-Hawley Act, which placed new tariffs on foreign products. Problem is, nearly all other countries placed retaliatory tariffs on American exports, thus grinding international trade to a halt. To add insult to injury, Frankie Roosevelt's New Deal policy extended what was supposed to be a few painful years to a single miserable decade. Excessive taxation was one factor, which the new revenue ending up back to the workers in public projects who paid them in the first place. Another was a whole slew of federal regulations of the private sector, which made entrepreneurship impossible. Even strip clubs were subject to regulations: A federal agent would be present in each and every one, counting how many stripteases the club dishes out in a workweek.

America had the “bail outs”. Originally it was to keep everything from collapsing, then it was expanded to include expanded government and pet projects. One was corporate welfare making the “stimulus” easier for the average person to initially support. Was it all for healthcare? No. Politicians have votes to buy still and they all wanted a piece.

Donald Trump has said a tariff should be placed on Chinese goods. What do you think?

Kim Jong-Un wrote: And last but not least, the Great Recession. Lehman Brothers? Wrong. Goldman Sachs? Wrong! An international cabal of Zionist rabbis and Halliburton executives? WRONG!!! The answer is actually three words: Community Reinvestment Act. Passed in 1977, the act was one of those touchy-feely good policies progressives whined for; It forced banks into loaning to low-income families looking to own homes. Sound awesome, right? Absolutely, except property prices began to skyrocket, while banks ended up with a shitload of subprime mortgages. To make the best out of their quandary, banks began to trade derivatives, bundled of subprime mortgages, which only serve to spike the housing bubble. And then... POP!

I agree with you here. That was just stupid. Real estate markets always crash every 8-12 years due to people defaulting on loans that should have never been issued in the first place. That will continue. It starts with only those with excellent credit job security and earning potential getting mortgages. Then as the economy improves average people get mortgages. Then as the economy explodes and the greedy come for their piece you see high risk loans. They default and half the wealth of the nation drops. Wealthy people see this coming in advance as one need only watch private lenders lay off their agents. The wealthy pull their money out and a collapse happens.

Don't underestimate how much the US has spent on the cold war in total. The returns on that investment are not what they used to be. The debt is still there though.

Kim Jong-Un wrote: This is November, 2010, and have the progressives learned to do away with the "old"? Right, with the new half-trillion dollar Federal Reserve stimulus coming up. $3.27 trillion worth of stimulus pork and "tax cuts" to those without income later, and the economy still stagnates and unemployment rate still hovers above our heads. Hopefully, the new Republican House and a barely Democratic Senate will hammer some sense into themselves and start a long, painful, yet invigorating process of restraint and deregulation, something entirely "new" from the "old" that big government progs have tried to sell to us with no avail. Im no conservative, I mind you, but I ask of you: Do you hate the "new"?

How do I feel about it personally? The only thing that seems “new” is healthcare and an obsessively polarized public. Both sides now seem more interested in proving their principles are the superior ones that they continuously hamper one another's strengths. I like the healthcare part. Is it great? No. But just like many may never need the fire department or the police it's there in the event that you do.

What will always hurt your position in the court of public opinion is that the teachers union (in NYC at least) has in it's own interests at heart. And a monopoly on shaping the views of the educated. Self interest as a motivation for people's actions is something people here will agree about.

Thanks for breaking character and explaining your views. I sincerely enjoy hearing what most here in NYC don't say.

Have you ever been to a V.A. hospital, NP ?


Every member of Congress has elected to go with their own special healthcare plan instead of the one that they have offered to us. By the looks of the organizational chart ( which is for real....not a joke ), what possible misgivings could they possibly have towards government-run healthcare ? I have heard so many times that the American public "deserves " this " free" trillion dollar system.....which brings me back to the V.A. Why is it an automatic assumption by many liberals that a government-run ANYTHING is best for the needs of the public ?I submit to you that government is far from being the best entity to promote efficiency, quality and innovation in most areas of public life.

Regards

Appologies to Krasnodar for having to quote you and respond to you here. It seems to be the only place I can do so without upsetting someone.

Krasnodar wrote:To NP : No....nothing to do with that. And there are probably a few Americans who have studied military history. On a personal level, I can vouch both for myself and at least two others who know a T-34 isn't Luke Skywalker's landspeeder.

Note: I grew up in California, where public schools frowned upon teaching us anything useful about WW2....perhaps the powers that be considered that doing so would reinforce negative behaviors, such as fighting for any reason....even survival. So call me rebellious for going behind their backs and researching the matter for myself.

Those were the glory days ...... with instructors from Berkeley who were far more interested ushering in the age of Aquarius. Very progressive, as in the late 60's, man.

I have no experience with the teacher's union over there. Is it hippie? Here it's a combination of suburban "liberal guilt", academics demanding respect and real communists mixed in with people doing their jobs.

WWII is the curriculum controlled event in history here. Monroe Doctrine? Taught and made sure to be done so in a manner that displays "American imperialism". Then you get WWII.
No mention of treaties, actual military concerns, or the progression to today's current conflicts. NONE.

The narrative summed up is:

-Fascism rises (comparisons implied to modern national events).
-American works towards one goal (focus on current American potential to repeat it).
-Last total victory for the US.
-Japan nuked after said victory

That's it. Teacher's have discretion to push their political agenda and the text books are all supporting it.

My personal opinion as to why is that everyone wants to be respected and paid. Pushing socialist ideals places the seeds to have people respect teachers on the level of police and firemen. And we have a nice contract.

I will concede (in my opinion) that we reward those that give us the best contracts by ensuring that political party has the first time voters.

I have my political opinions but I don't teach them. I'm more concerned about making sure the kids learn what I was hired to teach them.

I don't understand how government is taught without pouring over the constitution. That should be understood completely. History requires treaties to be taught. I don't understand why it isn't. The democrats were the ones did this. Republicans then were isolationists.

Kids aren't permitted to "hit back" here either. They must tell a teacher. They will most likely grow up to be those that call the police or sue when faced with a challenge or fight.

Pardon my ignorance, but what is "the age of Aquarius"? I've heard it mentioned but I know nothing about it. Is it a hippie ideal?

What inspired you to learn these things on your own?

Krasnodar wrote:Have you ever been to a V.A. hospital, NP ?

obama_chart.jpg

Every member of Congress has elected to go with their own special healthcare plan instead of the one that they have offered to us. By the looks of the organizational chart ( which is for real....not a joke ), what possible misgivings could they possibly have towards government-run healthcare ? I have heard so many times that the American public "deserves " this " free" trillion dollar system.....which brings me back to the V.A. Why is it an automatic assumption by many liberals that a government-run ANYTHING is best for the needs of the public ?I submit to you that government is far from being the best entity to promote efficiency, quality and innovation in most areas of public life.

Regards

Oh yes! There is VA in Brooklyn near the Verrazano bridge. Is it helpful to my position on healthcare? NO. But then I would say that it's all the veterans have. It also employs people. It's not the worst though. There are hospitals that I would rather not go to and would choose the VA here over. I don't know how to compare or contrast it with other VA hospitals.

National health care as it is currently set up isn't great. It's better than nothing. My criticisms of it would be that it's selective. The unions here are exempt. It's also filled with nonsense that comes with buying support and votes beyond that of normal expectations in government programs.

I don't oppose revising it to make it more efficient. I do oppose not having a safety net in place for all. What could be done to improve it?

What would be the alternative? Would tax money used to provide veterans with private health care be acceptable?

I'm not qualified to give an appropriate response to your question.

It is my opinion, however, that the solutions to many of our problems can only originate from those who function with a sound moral imperative.

Krasnodar wrote:I'm not qualified to give an appropriate response to your question.

It is my opinion, however, that the solutions to many of our problems can only originate from those who function with a sound moral imperative.

Agreed. In the case of health care the problem is both sides are doing that for the most part.

I would say that having it in case you find yourself without it is moral. Opponents would focus on the waste that will go to people exploiting it at someone's expense (theft). Both are moral.

Problem is that with so many just choosing sides the politicians have no reason to be moral. Just appeal to the mob of the district.

I have to find a larger version of that chart. I couldn't read it all but I want to. Thanks for that.

As a centrist, I have a solution: Replace Medicare and Medicaid with a universal public option health plan, run by voluntary taxation. Judging by all the drivel that latte Leninists and millionaire Hollywood progs push in support of univeral healthcare, I'm optimistic that they have the guilt and the money to voluntarily provide the budget for this new health plan, while the rest of us can keep our hard-earned income.

Also, cut taxes and red tape the private insurance industry, the most heavily regulated market in this country. Despite all the hype you would hear from your precious leftist media concerning preexisting conditions, prohibiting them is illogical and ridiculous. A vast majority of preexisting conditions, like alcoholism, drug abuse, and STDs, are through the actions of those who buy the insurance. Besides, if insurance companies are really trying to bilk premiums through preexisting conditions, they're probably trying the recoup the losses due to excessive taxation and government-sponsered lawsuits.

Thirdly, solving the obesity epidemic, the main root of skyrocketing premiums, does not require any new government regulations or wasteful "eat right" propaganda campaigns. The reason for high obesity rates in this country is simply due to the New Deal-era subsidies of grains, meat, and milk and their subsequent pork barrel supplements. Subsidized corn is so cheap that food companies wound up dump cheap high-fructose corn syrup instead of a dash of cane sugar made pricier by government tariffs. Just cut useless and harmful subsidies to grains, meat, and milk, and prices will naturally adjust near those of fruits and vegetables.

The voluntary taxation would just be for health care? Or do you mean it as how any new pet project should be funded? If that's the case that's perfectly fair. It would save a lot of time if people knew on a personal level they were contractually bound to pay for it. Fine by me.

I agree about lawsuits. What doctors have to pay for insurance is passed right on to us. What I am not sure about is how much are the insurance companies paying in taxes now.

The obesity problem is a non-issue to me. Unless it's a real problem with their thyroid or whatever that's on the person. The subsidies for corn? I've heard from farmers on that who favored it and I know the points against it (that's another major political point that finds it's way into the classrooms here in NYC). I simply don't know enough and have no experience whatsoever with farming. Can other crops be substituted?

New Paradigm wrote:The voluntary taxation would just be for health care? Or do you mean it as how any new pet project should be funded? If that's the case that's perfectly fair. It would save a lot of time if people knew on a personal level they were contractually bound to pay for it. Fine by me.

For a prog, you sure have a laissez-faire policy on taxation. And yes, I believe that no pet projects should ever be funded through the extorted income of the American people. In fact, only the military and the police should receive mandatory taxation, since protecting the rights of citizens is what a government is only supposed to do. And for crying out loud, jail time for tax evasion? I see the waste of even more tax money on holding up individuals who don't pay taxes as counterintuitive. The right penalty is to just deny the tax cheat the right to vote or hold political office until he pays his fair share of the 10% flat property tax.

To be honest, though, if individuals learn to live as responsible citizens of a truly free society, not even tax money for military and police would have to be mandatory.

P.S.: Are you a NYC public schoolteacher or something?

Kim Jong-Un wrote:
For a prog, you sure have a laissez-faire policy on taxation. And yes, I believe that no pet projects should ever be funded through the extorted income of the American people. In fact, only the military and the police should receive mandatory taxation, since protecting the rights of citizens is what a government is only supposed to do. And for crying out loud, jail time for tax evasion? I see the waste of even more tax money on holding up individuals who don't pay taxes as counterintuitive. The right penalty is to just deny the tax cheat the right to vote or hold political office until he pays his fair share of the 10% flat property tax.

To be honest, though, if individuals learn to live as responsible citizens of a truly free society, not even tax money for military and police would have to be mandatory.

P.S.: Are you a NYC public schoolteacher or something?

I don't know that I have that attitude but I have to be practical about it and what you stated was a great and fair compromise. For instance, I don't want NASA cut. I love that so if you ask me would I want to kick in for it I will say yes and do it. I don't know that I can persuade anyone else.

I don't think anyone making a career off of welfare should be allowed to vote. The exceptions being those who who are that position due to service to society or couldn't find a niche due to some (real) disability.

I see what you mean in the last line but I disagree, not the notion of it but I am a cynical person now. By nature I was born an optimist but I learned the next emergency is right around the corner so I believe in mandatory taxation to meet that need. It would have to take a few generations maybe. I don't know really, I have too much bias about it.

I agree, prison for tax evasion on an individual level is sick. My political bias comes out when I say that huge money makers who are doing it is another story. The reason being is (I'm sure you know what's coming here) they benefit more than anyone off of the essentials, like the military. The rich here in NYC benefit off the cops more than average people. Where to draw the line exactly I don't know. I don't care if someone made millions through work, cleverness etc, I mean the nine digit club. If they send the work overseas then hit them on the import.

Yes, teacher's union. Feel free to rip on it, I can't defend it. I can say only that I do what it's my best interests.

The "prog" thing I don't really understand. I do sort of but not completely. To me it's like there are fascists that are voting republican and hiding behind that. But my first thought is a republican is someone who is either self-employed or makes money from ownership. A democrat is someone who works for someone else. There are communists and lazy people using "liberalism" as a cover but not all.

New Paradigm wrote:Crime also occurs when there is a disparity between the rich and impoverished as everyone knows. One mile separates the obscenely rich and the exploited poor in Manhattan. Running a city requires more than a small town and much of America's “wealth” is handled in NYC.

Good Lenin in hell! Here we've spent over 50 years Demoralizing this decadent shithole they call Amerika and still comrades claim crime is a product of wealth disparity and not moral disparity, we are doing a damn fine job with these proles comrades! That's right comrade, take their damn kapitalist pig money, take it all, that'll solve the damn crime problem, the poverty problem, the everything problem, throwing money at criminals, poverty, and anything else has always had that effect!

They never ask for more, they never ACT UP again to get more. Why just the other day one of my little chicks threw a hissy, squawking all up and down the street for all the neighbors to see... you know what I did? Gave the little feller more rubles! In fact, every time the little feller screams I give 'em more rubles! Solves the problem every time.

I have no idea where come from comrade, but it ain't from my side of the tracks, I'll tell you that. You see on my side of the tracks we call that shit pimping, and only hoes fall for it.

And now as fine progressives, in the spirit of Woodrow Wilson, we have beat the living corpuscles of pride and dignity from those disenfrachised minorities, and downtrodden poor, and guilt ridden masses, to finally deliver the "articulate Magic Negro™" to the suffering masses as a God before the proletariat....

Hail Obama!

New Paradigm wrote:The "prog" thing I don't really understand. I do sort of but not completely. To me it's like there are fascists that are voting republican and hiding behind that. But my first thought is a republican is someone who is either self-employed or makes money from ownership. A democrat is someone who works for someone else...........................
............ I simply don't know enough and have no experience whatsoever with farming.

Honestly comrade, you need to get out more, step away from academia, leave the acidic mind-meld bubble of the city, step away from the Borg, build a few damns, divert a few rivers... chew the deep roots across the vast veldt of golden grain... and..... and.... and live in a swamp with your head soaking in the primordial ooze for a while... that ought to clear the statist religious dogma from your sincerely grasping mind.

But FIRST, we need about 10 more fresh proles to finish shoveling about 200 yards frozen tundra up in the Yukon... please meet your local Commissar on Platform 13 for further instruction.

And don't forget your shovel.

And REMEMBER We Are Watching You!!!!


Oh, Great Stalin, ok, one more thing.....

New Paradigm wrote:To me it's like there are fascists that are voting republican and hiding behind that.

When (USSR) were friends with Hitler and Germany, da? They were our comrades: fellow socialists/communists. When they turned against us, the KGB went to work and we labeled them Fascists. Through propaganda we have made that term so evil it fills the heart of hardened criminals with disgust... it just so happens Hitler learned how to run grotesque and demeaning Gulag from the soviet who had them first (we hide gulag good, da?).... How does fascist and socialist/communist come about? I am listening comrade?.... Yes, yes, yes, BIG GOVERNMENT!!!! Very good comrade....



Thank you for The Enlightenment™ comrade.

NOW START SHOVELING!!!!

New Paradigm wrote:The "prog" thing I don't really understand. I do sort of but not completely. To me it's like there are fascists that are voting republican and hiding behind that.

That's right! It's what the Third Kapitalist Kabal Internationale counts on; fascism. That, and the stupid and gullible that really believe our lying lies. We count on that too. We'll never relinquish the superstructure of State and if I had my way I'd have all of you freedom fighting progs that are so valiantly struggling against our dark oppressive reign all thrown in prison - but my advisors tell me we can't get away with that yet.

Red Rooster wrote:

New Paradigm wrote:Crime also occurs when there is a disparity between the rich and impoverished as everyone knows. One mile separates the obscenely rich and the exploited poor in Manhattan. Running a city requires more than a small town and much of America's “wealth” is handled in NYC.

Good Lenin in hell! Here we've spent over 50 years Demoralizing this decadent shithole they call Amerika and still comrades claim crime is a product of wealth disparity and not moral disparity, we are doing a damn fine job with these proles comrades! That's right comrade, take their damn kapitalist pig money, take it all, that'll solve the damn crime problem, the poverty problem, the everything problem, throwing money at criminals, poverty, and anything else has always had that effect!

They never ask for more, they never ACT UP again to get more. Why just the other day one of my little chicks threw a hissy, squawking all up and down the street for all the neighbors to see... you know what I did? Gave the little feller more rubles! In fact, every time the little feller screams I give 'em more rubles! Solves the problem every time.

I have no idea where come from comrade, but it ain't from my side of the tracks, I'll tell you that. You see on my side of the tracks we call that shit pimping, and only hoes fall for it.

And now as fine progressives, in the spirit of Woodrow Wilson, we have beat the living corpuscles of pride and dignity from those disenfrachised minorities, and downtrodden poor, and guilt ridden masses, to finally deliver the "articulate Magic Negro™" to the suffering masses as a God before the proletariat....

Hail Obama!

I used the word “also” (check it out, it's the second word of that quote…right after “crime“). What can I say? I was too lazy to type “in addition to” at the time. Why did I just state that? I guess I assumed that the other reasons for crime are known and agreed upon among the members here. Was I korrect?

Do you disagree that people who have little and are nearby those who have a lot are not going to commit crime? Do think the wealthy of Manhattan stick around a liberal city and pay higher taxes that go to the poor are dumb for doing so? OK you might, but they like living in NYC and want to keep things they way they have been since Rudy made the transition from 70's and 80's NYC to what it is now. He was helped out by getting some federal money during the Clinton era to hire more cops. Good thing too, they came in handy in 2001.

Might I ask where you are from?

I know the last part is a joke, no way you would lump everyone from the left together with radicals hiding behind an American political party. I know that because I have hunch you could spot when someone does and explain the error in it, even if they didn't!

Red Rooster wrote:

New Paradigm wrote:The "prog" thing I don't really understand. I do sort of but not completely. To me it's like there are fascists that are voting republican and hiding behind that. But my first thought is a republican is someone who is either self-employed or makes money from ownership. A democrat is someone who works for someone else...........................
............ I simply don't know enough and have no experience whatsoever with farming.

Red Rooster wrote: Honestly comrade, you need to get out more, step away from academia, leave the acidic mind-meld bubble of the city, step away from the Borg, build a few damns, divert a few rivers... chew the deep roots across the vast veldt of golden grain... and..... and.... and live in a swamp with your head soaking in the primordial ooze for a while... that ought to clear the statist religious dogma from your sincerely grasping mind.

But FIRST, we need about 10 more fresh proles to finish shoveling about 200 yards frozen tundra up in the Yukon... please meet your local Commissar on Platform 13 for further instruction.

And don't forget your shovel.

And REMEMBER We Are Watching You!!!!

Hmmm. My quote is in full here but not below. Well OK, it's not in full. It's just selecting more lines from my words from 2 different comments to set up another predisposed point you want to make. In the lines not used I asked about corn subsidies and that I only knew arguments from people who had experience in farming that supported it and some who opposed it. Now I do occasionally get out of NYC but I tend to go where there are palm trees, not farms (one such place is Florida and they have a swamp! It was fun for awhile but all I learned was that using an assault rifle on every gator you see is frowned upon by the authorities). Since I didn't know anything about farms first hand I asked to see if they did and what they thought. Was that a bad idea?

Is “academia” a bad thing? What would be a better alternative? Are there any other “real world” experiences that you would recommend that I might learn from?

And don't worry, I never forget that I am being watched…many, many times a day. It's helping fight terrorism! It's a recent development because as you know the previous administration would never increase the size and power of government.

Would you be shocked to hear that not only did I know this stuff in the video but have had first hand experience with how it's being used today? No, I'm guessing you wouldn't be. Would you be shocked to hear that I have a problem with it? I'm guessing you would be. That of course might lead me to restate the quote about not all people on the right or left are the suspected caricatures their political opponents claim they are. I have a feeling that I might be doing that again in a second.

Seriously, is there a part 4 to this video? Or does it actually end after “they would be viewed as gods”?

Red Rooster wrote: Oh, Great Stalin, ok, one more thing.....

New Paradigm wrote:To me it's like there are fascists that are voting republican and hiding behind that.

When (USSR) were friends with Hitler and Germany, da? They were our comrades: fellow socialists/communists. When they turned against us, the KGB went to work and we labeled them Fascists. Through propaganda we have made that term so evil it fills the heart of hardened criminals with disgust... it just so happens Hitler learned how to run grotesque and demeaning Gulag from the soviet who had them first (we hide gulag good, da?).... How does fascist and socialist/communist come about? I am listening comrade?.... Yes, yes, yes, BIG GOVERNMENT!!!! Very good comrade....



Thank you for The Enlightenment™ comrade.

NOW START SHOVELING!!!!

You might of missed the point of what I wrote. I will rephrase it if it helps. There are fascists that voted republican. Some fascists might of liked the idea of government expanding post-9/11 to clamp down on a minority they didn't like instead of just being freaked and looking for the government to protect them. Clearly a republican with a brain might have had an uneasiness about it though. For instance they aren't happy with the TSA now that everyone is suspect of being a jihadist.

The point was not all democrats are socialists and communists and not all republicans are fascists. Sounds silly but you might be surprised how many people on each “side” think the other is.

Hitler liked communism and Marxism? Didn't he know Marx was Jewish? Or was his “self-hating” hyphen cause for pardon?

I agreed with that video. Are you shocked? What we may disagree on is should tax money be used to field firemen, cops, and other emergency needs. I view health care as an emergency need. Not for me personally because I have it but someone who is self employed or making their money through ownership might fall on bad times and need medical attention. Kim Jung-Un had a nice idea that those of us who support it should be the one's to pay for it. You can see my opinion about it if you scroll up.

I'll give you some ammo, teachers actually teach that he said “a democracy if you can keep it”. Not all teachers, but many (in public schools). One text book (a college text naturally) had the original quote but spent the rest of the chapter explaining what he “really” meant.

Shoveling? No thanks, been there, done that.

But hey, just out of curiosity, say some day-laborers volunteered to help out with the shoveling at the pile after the collapse of the twin towers and they now are getting sick. Can they have health care? Or should I explain to them they are commies for asking?

Seriously, I liked your post. The videos were good and reading the text reminds me of how many here in Brooklyn speak.

$.$. Halliburton wrote:

New Paradigm wrote:The "prog" thing I don't really understand. I do sort of but not completely. To me it's like there are fascists that are voting republican and hiding behind that.

That's right! It's what the Third Kapitalist Kabal Internationale counts on; fascism. That, and the stupid and gullible that really believe our lying lies. We count on that too. We'll never relinquish the superstructure of State and if I had my way I'd have all of you freedom fighting progs that are so valiantly struggling against our dark oppressive reign all thrown in prison - but my advisors tell me we can't get away with that yet.

You can count on tax money without the pesky regulations to tide you over until then.

Comrade!

We have found you a prole friend, our dearest Mulva speaks in the same prozacian prose, perpetuates the prog preference, and lives daintily off his "wife's" government job...

Meet Mulva: https://www.youtube.com/user/alvagoldbook2



Dear Mulva has conferred to me that he wishes your BFF commitment today!

Hahaha

I doubt he is living off his wife's government check. There is no way this guy is married.

Now don't you support death panels? It's ok to admit it.

===========================================
Comrade, please visit your regional sanitarium for further Help™ with your Fascist™ infatuation, we do not delve out the kind of BDSM you desire in this collective.

-Supreme Commander of Thread Jacking™ & Stuffed Mice Toys™

Comrade Mulva is most certainly married! He is apparatchik in good standing. Comrade Mulva will be in charge of many things in The Glorious World of Next Tuesday™.... or shot... The Party hasn't decided which yet... and such is moral relativism....

https://thepeoplescube.com/post62836.html#62836

Hail Obama!

Ohhhh! Mulva is so knowledgeable. There I was thinking that supply creates demand but now I find out that the reason the internet came into existence and the reason other things get invented and gambled on is actually because there was demand for these things and the demand created the supply.

1.) Society demands new previously unthought of invention that no one has yet conceived.

2.) ?

3.) Supply.

And then his thoughts on the economics of the 1920s, that the innovations and wealth creation of that decade were a bubble of false prosperity that burst, with no reference whatsoever to Smoot-Hawley reminds me of the very best in Leftwing thought on the subject.

Ten minutes of Mulva talking economics will entice any young woman to go to bed... and fall asleep laughing at him.

And from all that blather comes the big question from our prog representative: but what about death panels? You're for them aren't you? It's okay to admit it.

Lol! I think that's funny.

Margaret wrote:....
And from all that blather comes the big question from our prog representative: but what about death panels? You're for them aren't you? It's okay to admit it.

Lol! I think that's funny.

The fascist remark was in response to Kim Jung-Un remarking on my “ laissez-faire” attitude towards taxation “for a prog“.. The point was that not all democrats are commies. Of course some commies are hiding behind that title and vote that way because it's closer to their ideals then what the GOP is about. I made that comment to explain it's like framing all republicans as fascists (which you obviously have heard people do). I don't believe anyone here is a fascist.

New Paradigm wrote:The mocking is funny sometimes, but it's not stuff you can use in a classroom. I have no problems being the “useful idiot” here. But I am not an idiot. What I have is the political bias of being a NYC unionized employee. I know how to beat the right‘s arguments but how often do you have to really beat your own position?

I'll indulge you by breaking one of my rules. We on the Right are surrounded by, and have been for life, those on the Left. We've been defending our position for a long long time. It isn't that we're the ones insulated from discussion with people that don't see eye to eye with us, the Left is.

I have very little interest in defending or refuting isolated points on this or that issue. Politics is a higher level abstraction based on a person's fundamental beliefs in what the nature of Man is and Man's relationship with reality. I have no interest in political skirmishes that do not go to the philosophical roots of political differences.

The thing is, the Left is collectivism. There are many shades of collectivism. It isn't that people think Democrats are commies, it is that they are collectivists. Progressives on the Left and the Right are collectivists. They are collectivists because of their fundamental beliefs on the nature of Man and Man's relationship with reality.

wikipedia wrote:Collectivism is any philosophic, political, economic or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence of every human in some collective group and the priority of group goals over individual goals. Collectivists usually focus on community, society or nation. Collectivism has been widely used to refer to a number of different political and economic philosophies, ranging from communalism and democracy to totalitarian nationalism.

This is why we on the Right find it amusing that we are lumped in, by the Left, as having anything to do with or promoting fascism. Fascism is a very collectivist idea.

What I personally am interested in is simply living my life in civilization. I detest politics. I do not care to live in interesting times. But collectivism is a destroyer and it is wreaking havoc on the world because the politics of collectivism is finally running out of other people's money. So we find ourselves living in interesting times and even people like me must take up politics in self-defense.

Margaret wrote: I'll indulge you by breaking one of my rules.

Thanks. It's appreciated.

I'm sure I don't have to tell you that the curriculum is set up to demonize and "expose" that view...it's no longer subtle. It's blatant.

The voluntary taxation idea Kim Jung-Un had was perfect to toss in the kids' direction. They asked other teachers and weren't happy with the answers they got. Two kids saw right through their social studies teacher.

Commissar_Elliott
“And for this very reason America is in the tank economically. With the government's hands in the economy, they can make something artificially happen (like make housing prices low), but what happens when the payer can't make the payment because the interest rates catch up, now what happens when this happens in mass?”
Bankers have conned people and that was a major cause in America's economic problems. This is only a problem to the people though as many wealthy people have done very well for themselves."

“By this logic, Rush Limbaugh should still be living/doing business in New York! Also by that logic, New York should have the greatest police and fire departments in the country and yet check out these statistics on crime. Now don't misunderstand me, the government's primary job is to protect its people, and the police and fire department are the core of that duty, my point is, if New York has a high tax rate to pay for them, why is its violent crime rate at or above the national average, and don't say "because you can't prevent all violent crimes", because that's a big fat "doy!" I'd go off on a wild guess here, but maybe it's because the tax dollars aren't paying for just the police and fire department. . . Hmm”

If Rush needed to do business in NYC he would. His show however can be done anywhere and as man driven by money he chose to do so where he could hoard more of his money.

I would say that NYC does have the greatest police and fire departments. I know I am not alone on that feeling even here. Are crime rates above average? Depends on how precincts fill out their reports. Crime also occurs when there is a disparity between the rich and impoverished as everyone knows. One mile separates the obscenely rich and the exploited poor in Manhattan. Running a city requires more than a small town and much of America's “wealth” is handled in NYC.

Taxes are also paying for mass transit, public schools, heavily used and vital public roads, and the list goes on.

I thank you for engaging me on my points.

I would also like to add that I understand the point of this site.

You answered my point about Rush, but I think you said it with the wrong intention. My point is, yes, if Rush has to do business in New York, he will, but since the tax rate is so high in NY, why in tar-nation did he make comments about leaving?

March 30, 2009 Rush Limbaugh wrote:Now, let's see. In New York, they've been going back and forth at the state level on budgets. They are over-budget. They have a deficit in the double-digit billions, and they've been going back and forth in the State Assembly in New York over whether to raise taxes. They finally decided to do it over the weekend. "Personal income taxes for the upper-middle class and the rich are about to skyrocket under a secret deal reached last night by Governor Paterson and the leaders of the legislature. It's a two-tier tax plan." You heard about this, Snerdley? "It's a two-tier tax plan. They say it's going to bring in $4 billion annually..." I'll bet you that it does not come close to bringing in $4 billion annually. How's it going to do this? "...in part by raising income taxes 31% for all New Yorkers making more than $500,000 a year.

. . .

When I am there working I pay whatever, you know, my rate is based on income for that day in New York. And I try to go as little as possible. If it weren't for hurricanes down here, I would never go up there. New York is the escape valve in case hurricanes are showing up in our area, because of the loss of electricity. So I'll tell you what I'm going to do. I'm going to look for an alternative studio somewhere outside New York, perhaps Texas -- another no-income-tax state -- and I'm going to get the hell over there, when a hurricane starts coming our way, 'cause I told Mayor Bloomberg: I'll be the first to lead the way. You know, this is just... I'll sell my apartment. I'll sell my condominium. I'm going to get out of there totally, 'cause this is just absurd, and it's ridiculous -- and it isn't going to work. It's punishing the achievers for the mistakes and the lack of discipline on the part of a bunch of corrupt politicians that have run that city and state into the ground for I don't know how many years -- and I, for one, am not going to take the blame for it.

Yes, that's because he wants to keep as much money as he can, anyone worth their hard earned money would want to do that, not give it away to the government outside of what pays for the police and fire department. It's one thing to pay for the police, it's another thing to pay for the welfare cheat's booze.

New Paradigm wrote:

Margaret wrote: I'll indulge you by breaking one of my rules.

I'm sure I don't have to tell you that the curriculum is set up to demonize and "expose" that view...it's no longer subtle. It's blatant.

What View™ is that comrade? The View? Of course not... You meant The View™ is set up to "expose" and demonize individualism. Yes we know comrade, we are re-educated, it's all about the collective. Race, Class, and Gender ad infinitum... the masses are reduced to biological and societal specimens by The Party™ and the useful idiots fall for it every time.

Classism is fundamentally collectivist. Collectivism is fundamentally classist. Sexism is fundamentally collectivist. Collectivism is fundamentally sexist. Racism is fundamentally collectivist. Collectivism is fundamentally racist.


Rooster Ghetto Rant:

Ahem... yes I am from there.. yes your ideological bent is insulting to someone like me.



Are you enlightened yet. Because you are doing no enlightening here. Tribalism has been tried, and your notions are far from enlightening. The Enlightenment was not about collectivist ideals, to the contrary. A Renaissance happens with the freedom of individuals to fail or succeed, to explore freely, without coercion, without stipulation -- free from the tyranny of others and Otherness™.

The Borg of collectivism be damned.




Who is kapitalist pig bastard writing on my blog posts! The Party™ website has been hijacked by evil Rethuglikan Neo-Kons who watch Faux Snooze!! Call the SS, alert the KGB!!!



Hail Obama!

Commissar_Elliott wrote:
You answered my point about Rush, but I think you said it with the wrong intention. My point is, yes, if Rush has to do business in New York, he will, but since the tax rate is so high in NY, why in tar-nation did he make comments about leaving?

Yes, that's because he wants to keep as much money as he can, anyone worth their hard earned money would want to do that, not give it away to the government outside of what pays for the police and fire department. It's one thing to pay for the police, it's another thing to pay for the welfare cheat's booze.

Sorry this is a long one but it's as honest as I can be.

I understood his reasons. He doesn't have to do his show here so it would be silly for him to stick around. I don't begrudge him for wanting to keep his money. That's his choice.

There are people who are wealthier than him that choose to stay so it‘s not everyone. Either their business or lifestyle makes it worth it them. These are the “elites”. Even something as silly as a late night show needs to be in LA or NYC. Will you attract as many guests elsewhere? It all depends on how you make a buck or how you want to live.

The consequence is that those with the means to influence others remain because they agree. Those with right leaning ideals will go to a place where there are like minded people. You always know what color NY will be every 4 years.

The bribing of the poor is also due to the elites here. Rich people walk around, take the subway, etc. They do it so they don't have to see it. Or guilt, who knows really? I'm cynical so I would say both. But there is something to be said about keeping desperation at manageable levels when it's a short walk from poor to wealthy areas.

The change when Rudy was mayor combined with federal money made available under Clinton for more cops was quick and shocking. It was a success no matter how either side wants to spin it.

The real concern you may have is not what we give out in freebies to the lazy. It is how unions are crossing the line (my opinion). Cops, Firemen, teachers, social workers, transit workers, sanitation, you name it, all union. All throwing their endorsements behind the one who will award the next sweetheart deal. We all but guarantee election results. Cut us down and NYC is back to being a war zone and not the place to do big business. The middle class is destroyed here (it's mostly city and state employees).

In the case of the teacher's union we are doing what many of you claim. We pump these kids full of our opinions. When they are voting adults they will vote accordingly and polls will show how the “educated” favor so and so. We have a monopoly on shaping the minds of the high earners (those with degrees).

3 ½ hours a day, 182 days a year, all holidays off, you can't fire us no matter how inept or unethical, full benefits, and a pension that we will take to Florida (where there are no state taxes). And all we have to do is keep teaching the ideology of the party that gives us more and more. That's where the spending really is going. That should anger you more than the poor getting a handout in exchange for a vote and a clear conscience.

Ask any student about the constitution, how the government works, what treaties we have, how to do algebra, CPR or anything unbiased and important to being a good citizen and you will get a lot of blank faces and guessing. Ask them about socialism or some other nation's propaganda and you'll hear a lecture.

Funny story…my friend is right wing all the way. Listens to Rush, votes down the line without fail, always making comments. He is a disabled cop. He gets more money in his pocket to stay home than when he was working. His does not have to pay taxes on any of his income now and funny enough all his money is your taxes. His wife works at a bank in Manhattan (that received a bail out so she can‘t say she works in the private sector because she would have been let go without the bail out). He was the union rep too. He never drinks booze.

This is where the right has a problem. How do you sock it to cops, firemen, teachers, and the like? Notice how I had the audacity to include “teachers' with emergency responders? It's ingrained in us now. It's been that way since we were kids…in school.

The people on food stamps are the least of your problems.

Peace off...

You went to college thanks to grants and loans. Once in the real world you found that the only way to survive was to play the game. So you played it. You became a teacher. You joined the union. And now you are distraught because your union cronies and many in your professed political bent insist that you lie to your students, that you don't give them an objective education consisting of both sides of the story.

So you come here seeking to be vindicated for these inconsistencies, either through a truth you may learn or a disdain you may grow for justification for you envy and bleeding heart altruism at the expense of others.

Yes. I am correct so far.... so what do want from The Party?

We are here to help.

RR is Korrect to be incensed by the loving use of the word "Paradigm."

Any time I see (in written word), or hear (in spoken word) these words: paradigm, post-Modern, collective (said adoringly), my antennas always go up. Modern has become a ubiquitous word that can still be used today, and yet these types wish to relegate the word to the past, simply because it was applied to a certain era. Paradigm is just a fancy, pretentious way to say "model," a much simpler and humbler word, and the use of the word collective is a way to glorify communes and communism.


New Paradigm wrote:

New Paradigm wrote:Not all “progressives”, liberals, democrats or whatever are looking for that. To lump it all together is equal to someone dismissing all republicans as “neo-cons”, fascists, Zionists, or whatever. All it amounts to is to get people to circle the wagons. When that happens people just blindly defend or support their “team”.

There was a time when people voted democrat if they were workers with a union job and voted republican if they owned their own business. The union workers aren't all communists or socialists. In NYC the firemen and police are union. If they get hurt they are taken care of. Not many will have a problem with that. It is all tax money.

Yes, not all Democrats are commies, socialists, but your party has a major infestation of people who feel entitled to other people's labor, time and money. And there are those who even go so far as to say there isn't much difference between Democrats and Republicans, however, if there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats then why do communists only vote for Democrats, and never for Republicans? Therein lies the major difference between the two parties.

You said Rush Limbaugh was driven by money: No, he is driven by a passion for his art of speaking, and opining through the medium of radio. Money is his reward, and does give some incentive, but it's a heck of a lot better reward than receiving some kind of government hand out. He started out as a DJ with an intense focus on his career. Do you have a passion for anything as much as he does? I bet not.

FYI here is a way to tell if a person is driven only by money:

Are they more intensely focused on acquiring more and more of other people's money over and above anything, or, as many progressives do, do they spend a good deal of their time thinking and speaking of the wealthy and their wealth? I believe people like Warren Buffett fall into this category, along with Nancy Pelosi, two different kinds of progressives, but progressives nonetheless. Progressives are intensely focused on making sure everyone gets their fair share of money, over and above anything else. If you really want to understand this phenomenon, I suggest you read Shakedown Socialism. But I'll venture to say that you won't be buying it. I don't believe you are curious enough to want to read it. Because I believe you are so stuck in your little boxed in Paradigm, like an ostrich with its head in the sand, that you will keep yourself from learning from someone who has been there, and done that, like the founder of this site and the author of the book.

Red Rooster wrote: Yes. I am correct so far.... so what do want from The Party?

Well, the becoming a teacher and being in a union part is korrect. Good guess!

The rest sounds like someone is overly sensitive and lashing out again.

Hmmmm, what do I want from the party? Let's see, well I was interested in hearing a practical way to solve the unions effect on debt and corrupting elections. Not the run of the mill bashing mind you, but a serious idea.

Sometimes I hear good ideas here and sometimes I hear "you don't know anything about me but I know all about you!".

Just out of curiosity, how do you feel about the G.I. bill? Or scholarships?

Leninka wrote:RR is Korrect to be incensed by the loving use of the word "Paradigm."

Any time I see (in written word), or hear (in spoken word) these words: paradigm, post-Modern, collective (said adoringly), my antennas always go up. Modern has become a ubiquitous word that can still be used today, and yet these types wish to relegate the word to the past, simply because it was applied to a certain era. Paradigm is just a fancy, pretentious way to say "model," a much simpler and humbler word, and the use of the word collective is a way to glorify communes and communism.

I don't remember which thread it is on but I wrote that it was picked for that reason and in keeping with my first impressions of this site. It was a joke. It is the name of a text book that all who take education classes in Brooklyn College have to read.

I agree with you.

Leninka wrote: Yes, not all Democrats are commies, socialists, but your party has a major infestation of people who feel entitled to other people's labor, time and money. And there are those who even go so far as to say there isn't much difference between Democrats and Republicans, however, if there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats then why do communists only vote for Democrats, and never for Republicans? Therein lies the major difference between the two parties.

Yes, it does have more than the original union workers and the "little guys". To reach out for more votes they recruited all those that have no love for the constitution.

Now how many in the GOP will take the unions down? They make token attempts but none are going to be a political martyr. They go after the poor because it's easier politically. Go after some lazy bum and avoid pissing off firemen, cops, teachers, sanitation, etc etc. Dems always win the union endorsements...unless a republican promises a sweeter contract.

Leninka wrote: You said Rush Limbaugh was driven by money: No, he is driven by a passion for his art of speaking, and opining through the medium of radio. Money is his reward, and does give some incentive, but it's a heck of a lot better reward than receiving some kind of government hand out. He started out as a DJ with an intense focus on his career. Do you have a passion for anything as much as he does? I bet not.

Actually what I said was he doesn't need to do his show in NY and doesn't want to pay the tax so he left. Others haven't.

As for being passionate how would any written answer be when you are already "betting against it".

Leninka wrote: FYI here is a way to tell if a person is driven only by money:

Are they more intensely focused on acquiring more and more of other people's money over and above anything, or, as many progressives do, do they spend a good deal of their time thinking and speaking of the wealthy and their wealth? I believe people like Warren Buffett fall into this category, along with Nancy Pelosi, two different kinds of progressives, but progressives nonetheless. Progressives are intensely focused on making sure everyone gets their fair share of money, over and above anything else. If you really want to understand this phenomenon, I suggest you read Shakedown Socialism. But I'll venture to say that you won't be buying it. I don't believe you are curious enough to want to read it. Because I believe you are so stuck in your little boxed in Paradigm, like an ostrich with its head in the sand, that you will keep yourself from learning from someone who has been there, and done that, like the founder of this site and the author of the book.

I'm liberal which means that sometimes people here just assume things and miss the point of my posts.

I read the sample chapter. No offense but I already knew that stuff. It would be a nice thing for kids to read after they read the communist manifesto or have had their dose of Marx. I won't even bother telling you about how literature from the Saudi's is here in public classrooms too.

See? That's my point. The unions are the problem with the debt, with creating a climate that disregards the constitution when it's convenient, etc etc.

We have a huge infrastructure in NYC. It's dangerous to mess with the unions here so how do you do it? In the FDNY it was easy to look someone in the eye and demand a better contract. In the teacher's union you need to be delusional to do so.

Kim Jung-Un hit me with a voluntary tax and that it should be the people who vote on a new pet project that have to pay for it and nobody else. I mentioned it some students and they asked a socials studies teacher. The teacher showed his hand to them. They know he's just pumping them with commie ideology now.

Just a simply little online jousting and some kids can see for themselves what's being done.

If I had my head in the sand or had no clue or wasn't curious about other views and ideas I wouldn't come here. I come here to see who's got an idea that will work on keeping the constitution in tact, knocking down the union's effect on our debt, and their influence on getting everyone here to willingly go along with this nonsense.

It's the constant theme of every post of mine. It might not be obvious because I don't just say how screwed up it is as often as I ask people how they can practically deal with it.

New Paradigm wrote:

Commissar_Elliott wrote:
You answered my point about Rush, but I think you said it with the wrong intention. My point is, yes, if Rush has to do business in New York, he will, but since the tax rate is so high in NY, why in tar-nation did he make comments about leaving?

Yes, that's because he wants to keep as much money as he can, anyone worth their hard earned money would want to do that, not give it away to the government outside of what pays for the police and fire department. It's one thing to pay for the police, it's another thing to pay for the welfare cheat's booze.

Sorry this is a long one but it's as honest as I can be.

I understood his reasons. He doesn't have to do his show here so it would be silly for him to stick around. I don't begrudge him for wanting to keep his money. That's his choice.

There are people who are wealthier than him that choose to stay so it‘s not everyone. Either their business or lifestyle makes it worth it them. These are the “elites”. Even something as silly as a late night show needs to be in LA or NYC. Will you attract as many guests elsewhere? It all depends on how you make a buck or how you want to live.

The consequence is that those with the means to influence others remain because they agree. Those with right leaning ideals will go to a place where there are like minded people. You always know what color NY will be every 4 years.

The bribing of the poor is also due to the elites here. Rich people walk around, take the subway, etc. They do it so they don't have to see it. Or guilt, who knows really? I'm cynical so I would say both. But there is something to be said about keeping desperation at manageable levels when it's a short walk from poor to wealthy areas.

The change when Rudy was mayor combined with federal money made available under Clinton for more cops was quick and shocking. It was a success no matter how either side wants to spin it.

The real concern you may have is not what we give out in freebies to the lazy. It is how unions are crossing the line (my opinion). Cops, Firemen, teachers, social workers, transit workers, sanitation, you name it, all union. All throwing their endorsements behind the one who will award the next sweetheart deal. We all but guarantee election results. Cut us down and NYC is back to being a war zone and not the place to do big business. The middle class is destroyed here (it's mostly city and state employees).

In the case of the teacher's union we are doing what many of you claim. We pump these kids full of our opinions. When they are voting adults they will vote accordingly and polls will show how the “educated” favor so and so. We have a monopoly on shaping the minds of the high earners (those with degrees).

3 ½ hours a day, 182 days a year, all holidays off, you can't fire us no matter how inept or unethical, full benefits, and a pension that we will take to Florida (where there are no state taxes). And all we have to do is keep teaching the ideology of the party that gives us more and more. That's where the spending really is going. That should anger you more than the poor getting a handout in exchange for a vote and a clear conscience.

Ask any student about the constitution, how the government works, what treaties we have, how to do algebra, CPR or anything unbiased and important to being a good citizen and you will get a lot of blank faces and guessing. Ask them about socialism or some other nation's propaganda and you'll hear a lecture.

Funny story…my friend is right wing all the way. Listens to Rush, votes down the line without fail, always making comments. He is a disabled cop. He gets more money in his pocket to stay home than when he was working. His does not have to pay taxes on any of his income now and funny enough all his money is your taxes. His wife works at a bank in Manhattan (that received a bail out so she can‘t say she works in the private sector because she would have been let go without the bail out). He was the union rep too. He never drinks booze.

This is where the right has a problem. How do you sock it to cops, firemen, teachers, and the like? Notice how I had the audacity to include “teachers' with emergency responders? It's ingrained in us now. It's been that way since we were kids…in school.

The people on food stamps are the least of your problems.

Since this is my fifth time trying to post a response and something interrupting me, I'll keep this one short.

Liberalism is the greatest threat to America today, the very thing you preach. As Ayn Rand so beautifully described "The absurdities of today become the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by precedent, by implication, by erosion, by default, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other - until the day when they are suddenly declared to be the country's official ideology."

Unions aren't the problem, welfare cheats aren't the problem, stupid kids aren't the problem, all of them are but consequences of liberalism. The problem is, you guys have the best weapon available, kindness. To the average person, which sounds better? Taking from the rich to give to the poor, or allowing the rich to keep more of their money so they can hire the poor to work for them? Making cuts in education to remove superfluous junk form the program, or raising your taxes to keep those programs so your kids can stay in basket weaving?

It's unfortunate I have to keep this generic, but I'm quite a busy person. Hopefully next I'm I can put more substance to it.

Commissar_Elliott wrote: Since this is my fifth time trying to post a response and something interrupting me, I'll keep this one short.

Liberalism is the greatest threat to America today, the very thing you preach. As Ayn Rand so beautifully described "The absurdities of today become the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by precedent, by implication, by erosion, by default, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other - until the day when they are suddenly declared to be the country's official ideology."

Unions aren't the problem, welfare cheats aren't the problem, stupid kids aren't the problem, all of them are but consequences of liberalism. The problem is, you guys have the best weapon available, kindness. To the average person, which sounds better? Taking from the rich to give to the poor, or allowing the rich to keep more of their money so they can hire the poor to work for them? Making cuts in education to remove superfluous junk form the program, or raising your taxes to keep those programs so your kids can stay in basket weaving?

It's unfortunate I have to keep this generic, but I'm quite a busy person. Hopefully next I'm I can put more substance to it.

Happened to me too.

I disagree. "Liberal" means so many things.

I am a liberal. I don't care how someone thinks or what they do so long as it doesn't go against the constitution. Nothing more. Some may have a problem that I won't push faith in school but I won't push my political ideology either.

You nailed it when you said we have "kindness" or the appearance of it. We do. But where I do disagree strongly with you because it is that the union has made the selling of that appearance an "education". Remember the poll that showed how people with degrees favored Obama?

The liberals you speak of do this indoctrination nonstop. Every one you meet will at some point give you the smug "I'm educated and you would see my point if only you were too" line.

This version of being a liberal is taught in school. It's where they are all coming from.

I will debate politics with you but I won't do so in front of your kids let alone behind your back in a classroom. The ones that do seriously don't know they are giving their opinions, they think it's a fact.

It's one thing that people think the way they do. But should you have to pay for it? If you lived in NYC your taxes would be paying for those that brainwash your kids, erode their morals, and vote in blocks that can't be beat.

New Paradigm wrote:I'm liberal which means that sometimes people here just assume things and miss the point of my posts.

Is that what that means? Comrade Bernie, I think you may be getting somewhere fast, but I dare to question where that is.

Children say they were joking when caught in a lie, and so do those with political bents they can not back ontologically nor cognitively.

To be in this world and not divorced from reality you must be honest with yourself and the facts.

So Bernie, What can we do for you?

Red Rooster wrote:

New Paradigm wrote:I'm liberal which means that sometimes people here just assume things and miss the point of my posts.

Is that what that means? Comrade Bernie, I think you may be getting somewhere fast, but I dare to question where that is.

Children say they were joking when caught in a lie, and so do those with political bents they can not back ontologically nor cognitively.

To be in this world and not divorced from reality you must be honest with yourself and the facts.

So Bernie, What can we do for you?

Bernie? It's hard to be insulted if I don't know who you mean.

Sorry, but I can back everything I know easy. What might be giving you trouble is you spend all your efforts concerned with what you want to believe I think.

Ever have a problem with someone in your party of favor? Ever disagree with a policy of the party of you favor? Or have you the enchanted existence of having elected officials that always get it right?

What you can do is keep the videos coming. You do come up with some good ones. The KGB guy was great.

Comrade New Paradigm,

NY is deeply in debt and subsidies from the rest of us taxpayers in flyover country are drying up to both the east and the west coasts. How safe is your job these days? And what do you plan to do when the money runs out and they don't have any money to pay you?

Leninka wrote:Comrade New Paradigm,

NY is deeply in debt and subsidies from the rest of us taxpayers in flyover country are drying up to both the east and the west coasts. How safe is your job these days? And what do you plan to do when the money runs out and they don't have any money to pay you?

I'm a math teacher so I'm not worried. A lot would have to happen before I would even think about selling off everything. If I suddenly lost this job and couldn't find another I'll move somewhere quiet, volunteer to keep busy, and never miss driving around here.

I knew I would be this age and planned for it. And I learned to expect disasters.

The city is the last place on earth you would want to be if that happened.

I'm more concerned about other people in that event.

New Paradigm wrote:

Leninka wrote:Comrade New Paradigm,

NY is deeply in debt and subsidies from the rest of us taxpayers in flyover country are drying up to both the east and the west coasts. How safe is your job these days? And what do you plan to do when the money runs out and they don't have any money to pay you?

I'm a math teacher so I'm not worried. A lot would have to happen before I would even think about selling off everything. If I suddenly lost this job and couldn't find another I'll move somewhere quiet, volunteer to keep busy, and never miss driving around here.

I knew I would be this age and planned for it. And I learned to expect disasters.

The city is the last place on earth you would want to be if that happened.

I'm more concerned about other people in that event.

Very interesting. Do you own guns? When the shit hits the fan, I'll definitely be concerned with those "other people" because they've been taught "entitlement" with the "enlightenment" you speak of so blithely.
Disasters do happen. I'm glad you realize that fact.
I'm glad you have an "escape plan" because if this "concern" isn't about the darker side of human nature of these "other people" you're fucked royally.

Maybe I'm wrong and these "other people" are friends and family? If so, you need to let them in on the plan.

Knowing how to hunt, fish, grow vegetables, identify wild edible & medicinal plants, knowing first aid, having a source for light, heat and cooking, fresh water...etc...and being able to defend myself and the ones I love from the desperate "entitlement" herd...that's my plan.
Fleeing is only an option if radioactive fallout becomes part of the weather pattern for my neck of the woods and I'm prepared for that too

I had a little taste of that during the blizzard last February. My, my, how the welfare crackheads looked on enviously at my warmly lit house when there was no power for over a week. Just a week mind you.
Being that my wife and I defended our lives with firearms with these scum two years prior, they knew better, even in their crack fried minds, than to screw with me.

And by the way, I'm FEMA ISO 100, 200, and 700 certified. It will all work just wonderfully as long as the grid functions and let's say....Iran or the Norks don't make a 50 megaton MOAB over Nebraska....that's where the hunting and fishing...etc..&, &, comes into play.

So, prithee tell, what is thine plan oh enlightened one?

Laika, did you or anyone else here happen to see Sarah Palin's Alaska on TLC the other night? Because having read your post, I see now what a brilliant allegory that episode was.

Sarah's in the great outdoors kicking all manner of wild ass, remaining chirpy and upbeat even in the cold rain. Meanwhile, there stood skinny blonde Kate Gosselin under a canopy, just standing there whining and moaning and bitching, unable to comprehend how everyone else could be moving around doing stuff like catching fish and building fires, when the most sensible thing to her is to just stand there and wait for someone else to make everything better for her.

I'll confess I'm not an outdoorsy type myself, but watching that program, I'd much rather hang out with Sarah than Kate.

About Nebraska - and wild, edible, plants. Along the Missouri and other places, the Moral Mushrooms there are plentiful, and the natives love to pick them. They aren't that easy to find other places. I've only found them once in my life.

Pinkie, I think if neurotic Katie would've walked around and stood by the fire she might not have felt cold. But then she wouldn't have had anything to piss and moan about. Sadly she deprived her kids of the fun of sleeping out.

Just imagine how bitchy she would've been crawling out of a nice warm sleeping bag and then having to huddle around the fire waiting for breakfast (and then taking a poop in the bushes).

No wonder her husband left her. I shudder to think what mental problems she'll imbue her kids with by the time they grow up (I predict the quiet little boy with the glasses will become a serial killer).

Laika the Space Dog wrote: Very interesting. Do you own guns? When the shit hits the fan, I'll definitely be concerned with those "other people" because they've been taught "entitlement" with the "enlightenment" you speak of so blithely.
Disasters do happen. I'm glad you realize that fact.
I'm glad you have an "escape plan" because if this "concern" isn't about the darker side of human nature of these "other people" you're fucked royally.

Maybe I'm wrong and these "other people" are friends and family? If so, you need to let them in on the plan.

Knowing how to hunt, fish, grow vegetables, identify wild edible & medicinal plants, knowing first aid, having a source for light, heat and cooking, fresh water...etc...and being able to defend myself and the ones I love from the desperate "entitlement" herd...that's my plan.
Fleeing is only an option if radioactive fallout becomes part of the weather pattern for my neck of the woods and I'm prepared for that too

I had a little taste of that during the blizzard last February. My, my, how the welfare crackheads looked on enviously at my warmly lit house when there was no power for over a week. Just a week mind you.
Being that my wife and I defended our lives with firearms with these scum two years prior, they knew better, even in their crack fried minds, than to screw with me.

And by the way, I'm FEMA ISO 100, 200, and 700 certified. It will all work just wonderfully as long as the grid functions and let's say....Iran or the Norks don't make a 50 megaton MOAB over Nebraska....that's where the hunting and fishing...etc..&, &, comes into play.

So, prithee tell, what is thine plan oh enlightened one?

Your first question is being asked to a person who resides in a city that imprisons people for 2 ½ years regardless of what the constitution says.

Which scenario are you asking about? Leninka asked what I would do if I lost my job and couldn't get another one. Bear in mind though that I live in NYC and am a public school teacher. Depending on what you ask I might not answer or be cryptic.

Nothing cryptic...war, economy, jobs, money...it could be any of those things. Shit hitting fan. Leninka question was specific, mine is broad but it doesn't matter. If you're not getting paid in Leninka's scenario, so will many other public servants. What do you think the herd will do? How will they react? Are you prepared for them? I don't believe you're part of the herd.

Leninka...we have plenty of black and yellow morels. They go good with trout and they appear around here with the opening of trout season in April.

Pinkie, you survived boot, so I know you'll be fine. I haven't watched Palin's Alaska but whiners like Kate will be a plenty if things get rough. Sarah should bitch slap her. Gawd, I hate whiners and slackers in the field.

Whoopie...spot on as usual.

I guess I'm lucky. My Scoutmaster was a survivor of the "Frozen Chosin".
I love winter camping. I haven't done it in years but I know what to do if I have to in a moment's notice.

Winter camping to me means snow camping. It's fun for a while but it's a constant battle with wet and soggy and that gets old fast. But I'm talking about hiking and tents and up in the wilderness of the mountains kind of camping miles from anything. I've gotten so I like my camping done in five stars hotels.

Speaking of Sarin Palin's Alaska - and you have to understand I don't have a TV and don't watch TV - I was buying Christmas presents last week and overheard one of the salespeople talking about it. She was one of those young, hip, tattooed and pierced Seattlites and she was telling another salesperson that her father always watched Sarah Palin's Alaska because he thought it was the funniest reality show because everything [he related] is so obviously faked and when Sarah Palin meets people on the show that are supposed to be her good friends [hip young salesgirl said that her father said] it's obvious that they haven't actually seen each other in years.

It made me wonder whether her father actually watched the show. I've never seen it myself. Lot of PDS out there. Hearing her relate this gave me a chuckle. I take a lot of amusement out of the Left's derangement syndromes. They are so sick and twisted.

Laika the Space Dog wrote:Nothing cryptic...war, economy, jobs, money...it could be any of those things. Shit hitting fan. Leninka question was specific, mine is broad but it doesn't matter. If you're not getting paid in Leninka's scenario, so will many other public servants. What do you think the herd will do? How will they react? Are you prepared for them? I don't believe you're part of the herd.

War? If it's nuclear I get vaporized hopefully.

Economically? If it all shuts down I have a place in Jersey and it's stocked. I will be fine money wise. Food just walks by too. If it's something I can see coming then I'm fine. Having to leave suddenly is something I am always prepped for following 9/11. The problem is that all of south Brroklyn, Queens and Long Island has to head for one bridge (Verrazzano). I got 2 miles to cover to get to it. Once in Staten Island you have 2 bridges to Jersey. Friend has a boat and reaching it is easier than the bridges in the event it's backed up.

How will they react? Wait for help ala Katrina, cops and firemen will keep it together except the ones living in this area of Staten Island that has quick access to Jersey. Then everyone will do what they have to. I won't be around for that. Most have no idea that we are completely dependent on the outside for everything. The will find out the hard way.

Survival skills are like sports skills, got to practice or you get rusty. I won't be top of the food chain. First aid is EMT quality and sharp.

I'm a city person so any advice or recommendations would be appreciated.

Laika the Space Dog wrote:Nothing cryptic...war, economy, jobs, money...it could be any of those things. Shit hitting fan. Leninka question was specific, mine is broad but it doesn't matter. If you're not getting paid in Leninka's scenario, so will many other public servants. What do you think the herd will do? How will they react? Are you prepared for them? I don't believe you're part of the herd.

Leninka...we have plenty of black and yellow morels. They go good with trout and they appear around here with the opening of trout season in April.

Pinkie, you survived boot, so I know you'll be fine. I haven't watched Palin's Alaska but whiners like Kate will be a plenty if things get rough. Sarah should bitch slap her. Gawd, I hate whiners and slackers in the field.

Whoopie...spot on as usual.

I guess I'm lucky. My Scoutmaster was a survivor of the "Frozen Chosin".
I love winter camping. I haven't done it in years but I know what to do if I have to in a moment's notice.

Yet another reason to visit Pennsylvania asap.

Just the western part Leninka. We want secession from the eastern part of the state...LOL.

NP...well played old sport. I do hope you have firearms though and I can understand your reason not to disclose. I would caution against your belief in better angels. You're definitely not "herd" now that you have given some thought and have some insight.

Margaret...everybody knows Palin is the anti-Christ (sarcasm)....c'mon! Have you seen her new poll numbers...oh, that's right, no TV.

I do know it will not be Palin or Obama in 2012.

Go Ralph Nader!!!! Naider Rader #26435684 right here comrade. When Ralphy get's voted in. I'll be Commissar of western Penn and then some!

Hail Obama!!!

Maggie, Laika, I love Winter camping. Especially after a snowfall during the night. In the morning everything is so quiet and still.

I like to camp way off the trail in the back country. It's the risk of death that makes it an adventure. Try crawling out a sleeping bag to make breakfast when it's -20. Weird shit happens at those temps. I seen a plastic cup explode when hot coffee was poured into it. At night in your sleeping bag your breath turns into tiny snowflakes that fall back onto your face. The tent walls inside get covered in frost and when the wind howls it gets under the floor, lifts you up and drops you back down knocking all the frost off the walls.

I don't think Kate would like it.