General Music Chat

Self explanatory video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwetW1B3J8A&feature=player_embedded

Germany said that the Stimulus Act was "clueless" and the Chinese said it was "dangerous." (As I remember it). Amazing that the Chinese would condemn any act that taxes and redistributes money. Isn't that what Communism is (or WAS) all about? I believe when the Chinese acquired Hong Kong from the British in 1999 they learned that capitalism has its benefits, so much so that Now the Chinese consider Obamas shift towards socialism "dangerous." Sometimes foreigners have a much better, unbiased view of America. It pays to listen to what other countries think of us. Sometimes we can't see the forest for the trees....

I had a history professor in the 70's who talked about convergence, that the West would eventually become more Socialistic and the East would become more Capitalistic. Wouldn't it be ironic for the West to become MORE socialistic than the East and a new Cold War erupts because WE become Socialists and they become Capitalists? Right now in the U.S. we are POLARIZED like I've never seen it in my lifetime. A good dose of capitalism with healthy regulation is the best answer IMO. The giant chasm that separates our two political parties MUST be made narrower. If not we desperately need a viable third political party that operates entirely on a practical business model and does away with leadership that is driven by idealized political theory. It's time for this country to be run like a business and get rid of the damned theorists.

I had a history professor in the 70's who talked about convergence, that the West would eventually become more Socialistic and the East would become more Capitalistic. Wouldn't it be ironic for the West to become MORE socialistic than the East and a new Cold War erupts because WE become Socialists and they become Capitalists? Right now in the U.S. we are POLARIZED like I've never seen it in my lifetime. A good dose of capitalism with healthy regulation is the best answer IMO. The giant chasm that separates our two political parties MUST be made narrower. If not we desperately need a viable third political party that operates entirely on a practical business model and does away with leadership that is driven by idealized political theory. It's time for this country to be run like a business and get rid of the damned theorists.

The chasm between our parties should be narrower? That's how we got into this mess. In a choice between "bad" and "worse" people stay home on election day, which favors the more ideologically conservative party, further shifting the "center" farther and farther rightward. Thus, the cycle reinforces itself. Obama is more conservative than RONALD REAGAN.

Third party pressure could reverse this trend. But, it would require working within the "established" parties (status quo approved) to get any reform as well.

As far as running the country like a business, well we had an MBA president with the most corporate-friendly administration since Hoover. They ran the country like their buddies Enron would. In a REAL meritocracy system the previous administration would have been impeached and probably held for criminal charges. But, no one but the lowest peons wee actually held accountable.

How can you make such a statement without something to back it up, M.N. ?
Obama more conservative than bush?
Do you mean fiscally conservative, or something else?

How can you make such a statement without something to back it up, M.N. ?
Obama more conservative than bush?
Do you mean fiscally conservative, or something else?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILg1-H6oNuM

How can you make such a statement without something to back it up, M.N. ?
Obama more conservative than bush?
Do you mean fiscally conservative, or something else?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILg1-H6oNuM

Sorry, 'Reagan'.

That host is a moron.
The video isn't sufficient evidence to back up your statement.
Why? Well, you need to fact check the information in the video instead of taking some goobers word for it.
Things can be welded together out of context, etc.
Also, you have to consider the time frames in history and the prevailing winds of public opinion during those times.

It's too early in Obamas run to make a concrete comparison.

How can you make such a statement without something to back it up, M.N. ?
Obama more conservative than bush?
Do you mean fiscally conservative, or something else?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILg1-H6oNuM

Sorry, 'Reagan'.

That host is a moron.
The video isn't sufficient evidence to back up your statement.
Why? Well, you need to fact check the information in the video instead of taking some goobers word for it.
Things can be welded together out of context, etc.
Also, you have to consider the time frames in history and the prevailing winds of public opinion during those times.

It's too early in Obamas run to make a concrete comparison.

I have this thing called "memory", such as it is. I remember this stuff on the news at the time. If you want to choose denial over fact-checking for yourself that's your problem. I've got better things to do.

Reagan's "landslide" was 27% of registered voters, not the general population. It was the lowest voter turnout since 1924. "None of the Above" should have been president. Barack Obama, 52.9%. The turnout was the highest since the 1950's. Obama's highest approval rating 69% (1/22/09), Reagan's 68% (5/16/86). Obama's Lowest 41% (8/17/10, 8/18/10, 10/23/10), Reagan's 35% (1/28/83).

Geeez... testy, testy.

It's on the person that makes the statement to do the fact checking and cite references.
Not on me.

I'm not choosing denial.
My last statment was "It's too early in Obamas run to make a concrete comparison."

Wait until Obama completes his term at least.

FishrmanBob wrote:

A good dose of capitalism with healthy regulation is the best answer IMO.

I’d replace “healthy regulations” with strictly enforced regulations” with swift and heavy retributions for the guilty.

I know proponents of free enterprise are going to jump on me for my belief and by doing so they’ll miss the point which is, do not regulate legit capitalism it’s in our nature to want to keep gains honestly achieved through our work however knowing human nature there’ll be people whose addiction to money won’t allow them to play by the rules and by their greedy deeds create havoc for people who do not have access to a fair representation with the government.


These are the people regulations are meant for, these are the people who need to be watched 24/7 these are the measures needed to practice true capitalism.


Let’s not regulate free and honest business practices let’s regulate the excesses the blatant fraud the power brokers the corruption permeating between Wall St. bankers all the well connected corporations and the government, the “ pay to play” game ( Beltway lingo) is neither democracy nor capitalism.

Ironically the regulations are there, unfortunately Federal regulators are no more than agents of Wall St and anyone else with enough money to have their interests represented not to the benefit of the country but strictly for their own interests at the expanse of the rest of us.
It took more than 10 years to bring Bernie Madoff to justice no thanks to fed regulators who knew about his 60 &billions scam and did nothing to stop him, regulators never intervened to prevent the S&L debacle during the Bush1 presidency, actually one of Bush’s sons was indicted in that scandal along with then Sen. Glen, regulators never stopped Enron, World Com, the financial crises that we’re in and other countless corporation’s scams that have managed to stay off the radar of public scrutiny.

How many honest people have lost their livelihood, their retirement benefits, their job and their homes for the deed of irresponsible, corrupt and unscrupulous individuals? How long can a country sustain this kind of damage and survive?

Yeah well, I doubt my rant said anything new to you all.

Where is my guitar? Need to shred a bit

I read a pretty good article in Time, I think it was, maybe Newsweek, the other day in the Dr's office on lobbyists. They're a necessary evil, the way things are run in our gov't, but all too often they create huge problems for the little guy, since they are all too often put in place by the big guys.

Regulation will be a hard thing to do, as long as the lobbyists for the corp's & the rich have the ears of our law-makers more than the pleas of the ppl.

I'm not at all sure what to do about this, but it's clear that something needs doing.

I hesitate to say it, but I think our gov't needs a large dose of valium to slow it down. Too many decisions are being made in haste, without the ramifications of those decisions being thoroughly explored.

For example, we need to really check into this whole "global economy" thing before we jump into it with both feet. I don't think it's in the best interest of our ppl, at this point in time. It seems to be taking us back to the pre-union days of corporate exploitation of the workers AND the consumers in the name pf corporate greed.

aaah good ole Fascism. Just take a look at pre-war Germany and you'll be looking at present America... or should I say Amerika?


Hitlers para-military force was named? = Blackwater
Nazi national defense department? = Homeland Security

Bushes inaugural speech? = different words but many phrases and bodies very similar to Hitlers

Obama's inaugural speech? = different words but many phrases and bodies very similar to Hitlers

Mandatory National Service
Youth brigade
Presidential orders
using military within the country for "domestic threats"
labeling civilian groups as "domestic terrorist threats" ie; veterans, non profits, political activists ect.
First the external threat of communism, then the external turned internal threat of terrorism was used to subvert constitutional law under the premise of a need for national security priority.

U.S. banks and corporations provided funding and supplies to the Nazi's and paid no consequences for it from our government. (other than funds and a financial firm ran by ole Grandpa Bush and a few others were taken, but no personal penalties for him)

All there in black and white for those who heed histories warnings.
The same systematic takeover of free societies has happened time and time again. If the system works, why break it?
They are not the dummies here!

Just who WAS that broad, anyway?

I've had a view from abroad.
Now I have one from inside.
I've met lots of really nice people too, in doing so, For that I will be eternally grateful.
I for one think Mandatory national service is a great idea!
Seen it at work in Britain, still going on in Germany. Get the kids some responsibility, not fast cars and a lift to school that blocks roads for hours.
That's my inside view.
Want my outside one?

Ooooo yah got me insde out Lol!
Great tune that.....

Geeez... testy, testy.

It's on the person that makes the statement to do the fact checking and cite references.
Not on me.

I'm not choosing denial.
My last statment was "It's too early in Obamas run to make a concrete comparison."

Wait until Obama completes his term at least.

If I am curt it is because some people online have been testing my patience. It is not you personally.

This forum is just general chat. I'm not really in the mood to assign myself homework and hunt down the origin of every reference on every point. The video clip made a pretty good summation and I already knew where to find it.