Right-wing populism

[Luke T.]

Pretty ironic when you add the numbers up. Are you unaware that contributions to Bush dwarf all the Democrats put together? Can you honestly state that you believe both parties are equally beholden to Big Business?

Are Labor Unions big business?

edited to add: They may not contribute money, but they hold power over a lot of votes, and that's worth as much as money.

 

[Sundog]

Are Labor Unions big business?

Do labor unions hold too much power in Washington?

 

[Luke T.]

Do labor unions hold too much power in Washington?

We'll have to wait and see.

I have no idea how many Congressmen and Senators they have in their pocket.

 

[Sundog]

We'll have to wait and see.

I have no idea how many Congressmen and Senators they have in their pocket.

51 senators, I hope.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not comfortable with the labor unions' support. But given their reason for existing at all, of course they align themselves against the party of big business. Where's the surprise here?

 

[Jocko]

I see the picture as being a combination of a lack of sense of humor on your part(for all I know, Bush plans on sending the deficit to Mars...), and a reliance on catchphrase instead of reason. For instance, a nationalized health care program, IMO, would work on a sound economic principle, which Republicans seem to love; buying in bulk saves money. Allowing judges to follow the law is an ideal situation, even when you don't much like the particular law in question(like the Constitution, much hated among far-right radicals{except for #2, which is worshipped like a god}) And, of course, while the UN may not be perfect, American sovereignty, IMO, only exists within our borders, and there has to be some form of cooperation between nations that is not based on how many nukes you have.

So you like the idea of universal health care run by the nanny state, you equate WRITING law with FOLLOWING law when applied to judges, and you call suborning one's soveriegnty "cooperation" when applied to an organization tha never "cooperates" with us.

And pray give me an example of the judiciary overriding the letter of the law and plain good sense on what you consider a republican issue?

I think you're the one lacking a sense of humor, otherwise you'd be busting a gut along with me at the lunacy of these "pie in the sky" (your words) ideals pursued by many on the left.

 

[hammegk]

Aw c'mon, Hammy. When was the last time we all worried about the NEA having too much power in Washington? When has even the most paranoid Republican lost sleep because the Kennedys exerted too much control over their lives?

Interesting contention, but I don't think you know who you should lose sleep over.

Enron? Multinational corporate accounting can be abused, and if they're all foxes guarding the hens, you are screwed. We'll even ignore the fact that paper profits are just that too.

Exxon et al. It's a tough business, and you have highly intelligent highly motivated people gunning for the next rung. I think Boards of Directors shenanigans are also facing more scrutiny than ever. That is their is a real tendency for internal self-control of the wildest excesses.

People with unlimited wealth -- and no check mechanisms but their conscience -- scare me a lot. Most people scare me when they pretend they will look out for my interests, or yours, better than we do, but they and theirs will have no part in the ensuing "programs".

And NEA scares me too; this bunch is supposed to be educating the next generation -- and sadly failing. If you are unwilling to apply test results since it might be racism or some other form of (in other cases imaginary) discrimination, and use the results to at least educate the educatable, you scare me.

 

[Luke T.]

51 senators, I hope.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not comfortable with the labor unions' support. But given their reason for existing at all, of course they align themselves against the party of big business. Where's the surprise here?

Labor unions are not immune from the abusing of power.

The point is that neither the left or right is squeaky clean. They both have their hands out and don't care who fills them.

 

[Luke T.]

I'm a little cranky right now. I did my taxes this past weekend and felt both my right and left pockets being emptied.

 

[Sundog]

People with unlimited wealth -- and no check mechanisms but their conscience -- scare me a lot. Most people scare me when they pretend they will look out for my interests, or yours, better than we do, but they and theirs will have no part in the ensuing "programs".

Is this not the source of most of the record-setting Bush war chest - millionaires with agendas?

Hmm. Like No Child Left Behind?

 

[Luke T.]

Is this not the source of most of the record-setting Bush war chest - millionaires with agendas?

Hmm. Like No Child Left Behind?

No Child Left Behind is a direct result of what I was talking about with the problems of the NEA.

 

[NoZed Avenger]

51 senators, I hope.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not comfortable with the labor unions' support. But given their reason for existing at all, of course they align themselves against the party of big business. Where's the surprise here?

Except historically, the Democratic party has gotten more money from "big business" in contributions than the Republicans.

This was, at least in part, because the Democrats held the majority of seats:

(1) business gave money to incumbents, seeing that as more efficient (especially given the 95+% retention rate for Congress); and

(2) much money was given to -avoid- regulation that the companies feared would be put into place if they did not keep giving. It was not money to put new policies into place, but protection money being given in hopes of staving off new laws that the business saw as harmful.

The current numbers -- because of the change in incumbencies in the 90's -- may well tilt Republican, but the late eighties-early nineties had the majority of big business giving going to the Democrats.

 

[Zero]

No Child Left Behind is a direct result of what I was talking about with the problems of the NEA.

I thought "No Child Left Behind" was a direct result of Bush's ability to name programs with a title that expresses the opposite of its actual effect. You know, the way "Clean Skies" leads to more pollution, and "No Child Left Behind" educates fewer children than the programs it was meant to improve?

 

[Zero]

I'm a little cranky right now. I did my taxes this past weekend and felt both my right and left pockets being emptied.

Maybe, instead, you should feel like you did your patriotic duty...you do enjoy being a member in good standing of the United States Of America, don't you?

 

[Tony]

Maybe, instead, you should feel like you did your patriotic duty...you do enjoy being a member in good standing of the United States Of America, don't you?

"Patriotic duty"?? That has the nasty taste of fascism. You sound like those people who said it was "unpatriotic" to question the president leading up to the Iraq war.

Furthermore, I'll contend that it's my "patriotic duty" to oppose something as tyrannical and unamerican as an income tax.

 

[Sundog]

Furthermore, I'll contend that it's my "patriotic duty" to oppose something as tyrannical and unamerican as an income tax.

It's funny, maybe it's just the difference between people; I never really minded paying my income tax, and I pay a fair amount. I just feel that I get a pretty good deal for my money.

Maybe it's that I live on the border and in 5 minutes can be reminded of all the things I pay taxes for that we never think about.

 

[Tony]

It's funny, maybe it's just the difference between people; I never really minded paying my income tax, and I pay a fair amount.

That's just fine, I don't have a problem with that. But if this was really a free country, I would have a choice in the matter.

I just feel that I get a pretty good deal for my money.

Like what? What are you getting that is impossible to get with-out an income tax?

Maybe it's that I live on the border and in 5 minutes can be reminded of all the things I pay taxes for that we never think about.

Doubtful, they have an income tax in Mexico too. It's not the money the government steals from us that makes this country great.

 

[Zero]

"Patriotic duty"?? That has the nasty taste of fascism. You sound like those people who said it was "unpatriotic" to question the president leading up to the Iraq war.

Furthermore, I'll contend that it's my "patriotic duty" to oppose something as tyrannical and unamerican as an income tax.

That's fine...stop paying taxes, ok? Then stop using the roads that taxes pay for, put out your own fires, and hire security, so that you don't have to call the tax-provided police.

Oh, and I wonder how you expect all those soldiers to get paid for protecting your "freedom" in Iraq...

 

[Tony]

Then stop using the roads that taxes pay for, put out your own fires, and hire security, so that you don't have to call the tax-provided police.

Income tax doesn't pay for any of that. Try again.

Oh, and I wonder how you expect all those soldiers to get paid for protecting your "freedom" in Iraq...

They don't HAVE to be there.

 

[hammegk]

It's not the money the government steals from us that makes this country great.

Have you considered the merit of the best armed forces on the planet, or that mutual assured destruction (my god, the insanity!)kept us from vaporizing a couple continents until socialism fell apart economically trying to maintain the arms race?

I like the interstate highways, the power grid & generating facilities, yada-yada-yada. I'd prefer that Equal Opportunity continued as our credo; instead welcome to the welfare state which wants to provide Equal Outcomes. Even that has some altruistic merit, perhaps??? As an aside, I'd rather use my taxes to pay the uneducatable a living wage just to improve their local environment with cleaning, painting, sweeping, trimming, child-care for single moms(if you see my drift): community involvement basically.

Is this not the source of most of the record-setting Bush war chest - millionaires with agendas?

That may be true, although I've not seen stats to support the contention. I'd agree that the bulk of all political contributions come from those individuals, or the individuals that actually control the 'old-money' charitable trust zillions, or PACs with an ax to grind.

I prefer people trying to buy tax breaks or other legislative abra-ca-dabra designed to enrich their own and corporate interests to those who (generously - with other peoples money) only want Equal Outcomes; schools, health-care, etcetec.

 

[Zero]

Income tax doesn't pay for any of that. Try again.





They don't HAVE to be there.

So, you feel that other taxes should be paid, but it is just income taxes that are evil and demonic?