Recent comments

  • Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth   16 hours 51 min ago

    Humans have made it through a million years, so there is some hope.

  • If The Right Hates "Activist Judges"... Then Why Do They Approve Of...   16 hours 54 min ago
    Quote gumball:

    Doing the ole Ultrax two step...

    So when it refers to "the people" in the second amendment it means something different than the other times it refers to "the people" in the bill of rights?

    No... it's the ole GUMMIE two step... trying desperately, over and over, and again for good measure... to negate the militia clause so the last half of the 2ed stands alone. Which is why you refuse to deal with the stated REASON for the 2ed, the difference between natural and positive rights, how an amendment protect the right to own a firearm for self-defense EASILY could have been written etc. And you're ignoring the fact that the states jealously guarded their powers and would not surrender the power to control an individual's right to own a gun unless forced to. Check this list Even black FREEMEN were denied the right to own a firearm. How could that be under the YOUR interpretation of the 2ed?

    By YOUR logic, such as it is... there was NO right to own a firearm in the 3 years between the ratification of the Constitution and the passage of the Second.

  • The difference between regulating behavior and punishing misbehavior...   17 hours 2 min ago
    Quote RichardofJeffersonCity:

    I have not been deliberately rude or condescending to you, but you continue to take a pejorative position toward me. I am not going to engage you any further in these forums because neither of us seem to benefit from the exchange. I have posted before that I have a weakness in grammar, and I am trying to get a handle on it.

    Sheesh, that's your response, just when I had finally decided to address your opinion in all seriousness?

    Actually, on this thread, you haven't been anything to me, Richard, that is, you've pretty much ignored me. That's fine and fair, except that I hate to see a decent topic reduced to pseudo-philosophical BS. I mean, grammar is one thing —yours seems quite good, actually— but composing sentences without regard for good sense and clarity is something else, something that begins to bug me after awhile. Sorry, if you feel abused by my attitude, but I feel abused by sloppy communication.

    You might consider answering whether I got your point or not (#32), and whether you agree, or don't agree, with my response. Eh?

    Gotta go water the wildflowers...

  • War Is A Racket, by General Smedley Butler (USMC)   17 hours 24 min ago

    You're right. So much to say, at least this isn't twitter. :)

  • War Is A Racket, by General Smedley Butler (USMC)   17 hours 24 min ago

    War Is A Racket

    WAR is a racket. It always has been.

    It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

    A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

    In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

    How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

  • Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth   17 hours 35 min ago

    Capitalism by its very nature must consume. Be it built in obsolescence, manipulating "demand" by creating "want" or "desire" through adverstising and marketing or causing social upheavels and wars to force open markets or to acquire certain assets that cannot be acquired otherwise. Capitalism doesn't see beyond its immediate satisfaction. That's always left to the future to deal with. Nevertheless, once it is unable to consume, it will die in spasms.

  • Would Washington have asked for "Fast Track?"   17 hours 41 min ago

    Chuck, I said you defended Obama because you denied he is a fascist, while insisting his heart is in the "right place". You are entitled to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree with it.

    If Obama had put half as much effort into single payer as he's putting into the TPP, we might not still be dealing with healthscare extortion now. The ACA hasn't done doodily-do for poor folks in the so-called red states. What you've listed here is fine as far as it goes, and I will concede that it's a helluva lot better than McCain or Romney would have delivered. But that's not saying much, my friend.

    I am not, nor have I ever been, an Obama fan. And it saddens me to say this, because I think it's so cool to finally have had a black family in the White House. But Obama is a CORPORATIST. His support of the TPP is a huge betrayal, of the sort we can expect from corporatists and centrists. It will nullify and/or reverse much of what he has accomplsihed in our behalf. More people will die because of it, or be bankrupted, and I really have a problem with that.

    What we need is someone who refuses to kiss up to Big Money. Bernie Sanders is the only presidential candidate who fits that description. He's the only one I've seen in my lifetime who fits that description.

  • LBJ and McNamara Were Right   17 hours 44 min ago

    From the Huns to the Islamic extremist, the US government's propaganda network has keep the American war machine flooded with public money.

  • For $30 m fee, operating under the pretense of bringing HIV relief, Hillary threatened to withhold US Taxpayers’ money meant to combat WMDs in order to help Bill’s friend, Giustra, screw Kazakhstan people out of billions in Uranium.   17 hours 46 min ago

    ...and all that ain't shit compared to what hillary's been up to more recently with Dilma and Brazil's oil$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

  • Is it time for a transaction tax on all Wall Street trades?   17 hours 49 min ago

    Yes, especially if they can find a way to get the public taxpayer to pay for it! Actually, I'm kidding, but I seriously doubt the controlling elite which run our oligarchy we call the federal government wouldn't try to find a find for the public to pick up the tab ust as they have so many times already.

  • The Weight- Bluegrass Style   18 hours 2 min ago

    I have their first three albums.......with grooves still barely there and a cd or two as copies for whats left of my original vinyl. Truthfully though Doug, I'd have a lot more respect for them if Page and Plant hadn't become so full of themselves. If they hadn't taken themselves so seriously. If they hadn't become the naval gazing self-indulgant little jerkoffs they turned into. Who knows? Maybe Bonham, if he'd lived, might have kept them grounded.

    Blues can be found in the strangest places though:

  • The difference between regulating behavior and punishing misbehavior...   18 hours 3 min ago

    I have not been deliberately rude or condescending to you, but you continue to take a pejorative position toward me. I am not going to engage you any further in these forums because neither of us seem to benefit from the exchange. I have posted before that I have a weakness in grammar, and I am trying to get a handle on it.

  • Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth   18 hours 4 min ago

    It is really sad to see what is happening to our world, and the saddest thing is we are blase about what has been told to us again and again. I guess humanity wasn't meant to inherit the world, we were put here to move it along to the next step in it's evolution to a planet where wild storms, high water levels, higher temperatures insuring that insects and plant and animal life moves into territories unaccoustomed to them. This is happening already with the spread of insects killing many types of trees as the trees have no defences against them.

    How many of us will be able to afford to protect ourselves against this onslaught from Mother Nature? For awhile the monied will be able to lift their homes build ever higher walls to protect against man and beast, but it will all end badly for us.

    If we continue to ignore the warnings we deserve what we get, I won't live long enough to see what we will have wrought, but our Grand Children surely will.

    What a legacy to leave them, the destruction of our world just so that the richest of us can have it all for a bit longer.

    We really are stupid, have you ever warned a child that if they do this or that, due to you having life experience, they can be hurt, only to see your warning ignored and exactly what you knew would happen, happened?

    Change that previous paragraph from child to, you and I, and the one doing the warning to, scientific community.

    Mad Maxx here we come, God I hope we wake up from this horrible dream.

  • Has California Gone Too Far?   18 hours 8 min ago

    You figure it out. As the saying goes, "you can't fix stupid."

  • Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth   18 hours 15 min ago

    I think that dirtman 2 has some valid points, but Im sure thom would agree that, by and large the stage of the industrial revolution in which burning fossil fuels to help better the economy and not just the middle class but every class aside from the super rich is over, and has been for a long time. We have now moved into a dark phase where their is a complete disreguard, buy carbon burning for profit corporations, for not only the environment in which we all live, but the general overall health of we the people that live in this said environment. We now live in an era where big oil and coal and natural gas corps. Would rather lie about the environment, and lie to us citizens about the health risks of pollution and global warming so that they can turn a higher profit, rather than invest in cleaner air. We now live in a world where the bottom line is more important than pollution and our national Parks, more important than protecting endangered species, more important than our planets rain forests, more important than keeping our oceans pollution free. More important than keeping our air clean, more important than keeping our working class coal miners safe, more important than installing safty measures on our off shore oil rigs to make sure that if an accident happens oil doesn't just shoot out of the bottom of the ocean to contaminate hundreds of millions of gallons of sea water and leave "underwater oil plumes" that are miles long and hundreds if not thousands of feet high in the gulf of Mexico to float around freely and kill our underwater foodsources at will, and at an alarming rate. Killing the Fido plankton to, one of the cornerstones of life and nutrition as we know it in the ocean and on the face of the earth. Did I mention that it's bad for the f****n air we breath. What about the pollution that companies are allowed to dump into our streams, as long as they arnt a certain size, that of which being anything large enough to put an industrial water craft on. So rivers like the Mississippi are out, the Colorado, and Arkansas, but all the smaller streams and rivers that lead into them are not protected.

    I could go on and on. Being a native coloradoin, I've worked with environment Colorado and other political nonprofit organizations to combat this social and economic evil that has our country in it's grips. We need to Take our country and frankly our world back. This is not a joke, this is not something that can be put off. Prifitization over human well-being is now the standard by which corporations like Exxon and shell, BP and Xcel energy just to name a few, live by. My biggest question at this point is, what the hell is wrong with these people, when it all comes crashing down, when the temperature gets to high globally, and mother nature takes over and wipes us out, or what happens when all the life in the sea starts to die and thus not provide us a healthy foodsource, when breathing our air becomes the equivalent of smoking a pack or more of cigarettes a day, just like Mexico city, which buy the way has been that way for a very long time now, and Im sure lots more places around the world are to, when???? When are they going to realise that they live hear to?? That in the end profit won't matter. In the end when it's all dark, when their is nothing left, when even they are doomed in their little underground pods that they think will sustain them. When?? When are they finally gonna realize they were wrong? When are they going to finally say; Im sorry........

  • Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth   18 hours 16 min ago

    "Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth?" No, HUMANS WILL kill all life on earth; that is the only thing we are truly successful at. America could've picked any other economic system, or a combination of, and we would've ended up with the same result because of the human factor. And if the scientific community believes all humans on earth will suddenly ban together to stop climate change, they haven't ever studied human behavior before! The demise of our planet and all living beings within it will ultimately be blamed on America, because we are the dumbest AND most stubborn bunch of people on earth. Half the country still believes that Jeebus will fix everything once we trash this hotel room, and they also believe that the Lord invented capitalism for America; just listen to them talk about our "terrible, socialist" Obamacare.

  • If The Right Hates "Activist Judges"... Then Why Do They Approve Of...   18 hours 16 min ago

    Doing the ole Ultrax two step...

    So when it refers to "the people" in the second amendment it means something different than the other times it refers to "the people" in the bill of rights?

  • The 13 Democrats that Helped to rush Fast-Track through the Senate   18 hours 24 min ago

    My Democratic Senator is on that list. He also voted for the Keystone pipeline. I have written both times to the DINO. Money talks and Constituents walk.

  • Has California Gone Too Far?   18 hours 29 min ago
    Quote Dexterous:

    I always wonder how the members of the progressive cult from Hartmann right on down to the lemmings here on this board can justify putting words in other peoples mouths. Is it lack of reading comprehension, or are you just seeking attention?

    My quote

    "Hopefully they will also check into left wing whack-a-doodles who would use this event to push their cause."

    A second quote on the same thread,

    "And I posted the fact that there are more than a few leftie whack-a-doodles that would benefit if any pipeline in the US suddenly ruptured."

    In either of these two quotes, how do you extrapolate, Dex thinks? Mine was a statement of fact.

    You are starting to type like Pierpont, and believe me, that is not a compliment.

    What exactly did you mean by these statements. Do you not stand by what you wrote? Maybe I am confused by brilliannt adjectives such as "left wing whack-a-doodles". Could the Right wing not have done this? Does the right wing have right wing whack-a-doodles. Explain your statements so that all can understand.

  • Convince Senator Sanders to change the name of the FTT   18 hours 32 min ago

    Howie Klein ( is right.

    Call it a Sales Tax.

    Sales Tax is something almost everybody is familiar with.

    Most people deal with many varieties of Sales Tax on a daily basis.

    Tobin Tax, Transaction Tax, etc. mean nothing to most people: hear the eyes glaze over. Robin Hood Tax may sound good in England, but (paraphrasing Howie Klein) here it permits Them to hurl accusations of class warfare and play the victim.

    Sales Tax on Wall Street is something almost everybody can instantly understand and say "I pay Sales Tax and so can they".

    "Sales Tax" is what we need to say every time to make it succeed, whatever the formal title becomes,

  • Indian Point could have been much worse...   18 hours 36 min ago

    Everyone who is objecting to Richard is complaining about LWRs. Does anyone know anything about LFTRs (I don't)?

  • Would Washington have asked for "Fast Track?"   18 hours 48 min ago

    AIW -- I said Obama was naive and ignorant about economics. Then you said I was his defender.

    Before I tell you why I am happy I voted for Obama, I want to say I really liked your letter to DeFazio. It would be interesting if you could get a thoughtful reply.

    As I have posted before (with minor differences) these are the reasons I am happy I voted for Obama.

    In the 13 weeks of the 6 years of the Obama presidency in which the dems had control of the congress they accomplished a lot.

    Also, to paraphrase the Jerry McGuire line from Renee Z, Obama had me at nuclear

    1 Chrysler saved

    2 GM Saved

    3 AHCA passed (AKA Obamacare); (because of blue dogs like Max Baucus it was not a single player plan; to get Sen Baucus to sign it, Max's county got single payer.)

    4 Middle class tax cut

    5 Went from losing 750,000 per month to 30 straight months of job gains (in spite of Republican governors cutting 4.5 million jobs)

    6 Education spending increased

    7 Laws against hate crimes strengthened

    8 CHIPS expanded (Children’s Health Insurance Program)

    9 Forced through Child Labor Laws

    10 consumer protection agency formed

    11 Credit card reform

    12 Predatory lending to soldiers restricted

    13 Troops paid for stop loss time

    14 Torture stopped

    15 VA spending increased

    16 Women allowed to serve on subs

    17 A major step towards equal pay for women

    18 Nuclear arms reduction proposal

    19 BP cleanup fund

    20 EPA strengthened

    21 FDA powers broadened

    22 Healthcare for 9-11 responders funded (during Bush Term it was ignored)

    23 DADT was repealed

    24 Within 24 hours of his inauguration in 2009, he ordered that the financial statistics of the top 400 families should be treated like everyone else's; that is, they should not be a classified government document.

    Even when the dems did not have control they demonstrated their support of the 99%.

    25 When the congress was adding Part D to Medicare (the prescription drug assist; I think it was in 2004) the democrats tried to pass an amendment to help fund it by a 1% income tax on incomes over 1 million.

    26 In 2009-10 when Obama lost his filibuster proof senate, the senate had a record number of filibusters (380 or so); during LBJ's 6 year reign as senate majority leader there was one.

    27 The bills that were filibustered would have helped our economy for both the long and short term. My favorites were the card check bill, the Disclose Act, stopping waivers for the Buy American Act of 1936 and the credits for bringing jobs back (no credits for tearing down factories to send jobs overseas.

    28 Republicans supported the Reinhart-Rogoff Study used to push austerity throughout the world; The study was a total scam supported by Pete Peterson who wants all the social security money invested on wall street. It was easy to suck in democrats and the general public because too much debt being a bad thing makes intuitive sense.

    29. Obama said that Faux News should not be allowed at press conferences.

    30. Obama refused to recognize the Honduran government created by military coup. Then Sen. Jim Demint, now the head of the Heritage foundation, went to Honduras and said they could ignore Obama. This all happened in early 2009. Now we have Honduran children coming here. Thanks to Jim D.

    31 On Feb 7, 2014, Obama recharacterized hemp so farmers in US could grow it.

  • The difference between regulating behavior and punishing misbehavior...   19 hours 15 min ago

    I can't tell if you're advocating for relativism —Relativism is the concept that points of view have no absolute truth or validity, having only relative, subjective value according to differences in perception and consideration— or anarchy, or both, or none of the above. But that's perhaps my own difficulty in trudging through your verbal meanderings. In any case, let's go with the possibility that you're saying we cannot decide on laws or standards of behavior, because all's relative, that is, everyone has different sensibilities, thoughts and feelings.

    If that's what you're trying to say, then I would have to disagree: here, let me cut to the chase: Some things are universally valued by human beings; some things are universally abhorred. For example (you might try using examples once in awhile), personal security is universally valued; being tortured is universally dreaded.

    The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was written with such an understanding in mind.

    That some people might find the Declaration "utopian," or naive, or whatever, does not invalidate it. Some dictators would disagree. Does the existence of corrupt, sociopathic opinion mean we should not strive to incorporate the UDHR's values into our law? I think not.

  • Article Presents Interesting Critique of Psychotherapy and Humanistic Psychology   19 hours 24 min ago

    I am not especially interested in being bombarded with a whole bunch of articles which in this case repeat what has been already been studied and reported regarding abuse in prisons. Human Rights Watch just came out with a report which says that force is often used on mentally ill inmates, even if they simply annoy guards.

    Psychotropic drugs help many people who cannot experience improvement in any other ways. Doctors have the training to prescribe medication when they think it will help.

    Getting back to the problem that was brought up by the approach taken by a certain respondent, when someone bases one's entire database of information or opinion on one author, in a field where there there is an almost endless bibliography of books and articles, including research studies in professional journals, that singular approach is not only narrow-minded but is academically substandard. There is no university including medical schools which would base their entire curriculum on the views of one author.

    Authors don't necessarily care about actual patients. They no doubt publish in many cases to sell books and make money.

  • GOP Gerrymandering in Indiana...   19 hours 28 min ago
    Quote Dexterous:

    My turd is cleaner than your turd?

    I have had no problem condemning gerrymandering by EITHER party... but it seems you want to find some way to soften some of the GOP's guilt just as these partisan Dems did.

    Here's an old 2004 post from the old Randi Rhodes forum just before I was banned, taking on partisan Dems....

    I'm no fan of DeLay. He's more despicable than most. But I'm also no hypocrite.

    A lot has been made about Tom DeLay's attempt to redistrict Texas to pick up more GOP seats. Yes he Gerrymandered the state to get some 70% of the seats with about 55% of the vote. He also pushed though redistricting at a non-traditional... but not illegal time.

    Yet... the screams of moral indignation from Dems rings hollow when we see that the Texas Democrats did pretty much the same thing to the GOP back in the 1990s. I first heard about this in Robert Dahl's book How Democratic Is The American Constitution. When I posted this elsewhere some Texan was indignant saying:

    "Why did Texas Democrats win a majority of Congressional seats in the 1990s. It was simple. We had superior candidates who got out and met with conservative constituents and served their interests as well.... Unless you are from Texas you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about in regards to Texas Redistricting. If you want to promote your Naderites pablum that they are all the same, take it elsewhere."

    Could I have been that wrong?

    Not being able to find the Dahl quote I decided to start from scratch. I made a spreadsheet using 1992 election data from the first election after the Democrats 1991 redistricting. It gave me these results

    Final Numbers of 1992 Texas Congressional vote:

    Party----Votes------------------Seats Won

    DEM-----2806044 (50.2%)---- 21 (70%)

    GOP-----2685970 (48%)------- 9 (30%)

    OTHER-----97157 (1.7%)

    70% of the seats with only 50% of the vote? Sounds like Texas Dems were begging for payback.

    Now some are going to say that the REAL offense was DeLay's redistricting at an nontraditional time. But there's NO good or bad time to gerrymander and deprive citizens of representation.... and it's time Dems faced up to their own offences before casting the first stone.

Currently Chatting

Community Archive

Capitalism Could Kill All Life On Earth

Are we going to let capitalism destroy life on Earth? According to 99% of climate scientists – we’ll know by the end of the century.