Say Anything Blog

hmmmmm, very interesting.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

I believe they are called “Fellow Travelers”; the Dems, that is.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

I had lunch many years ago with once with one of the leaders of the communist party of MN.  He was my physics professor at the UMN at the time and also had a store front next to a lefty activist store that sold bumper stickers that my roomate worked at.  Somehow we all managed to be at lunch together somewhere and I remember him sneezing into his food.  Big huge ball of snot flew into his scrambled eggs.  He just kept eating as if it did not happen.  One of the grossest things I have ever seen in my entire life.  I tested out of calculus and was a physics wiz, but dropped out of the hard sciences after that.

Thanks for making me remember.

Communism and democracy do have things in common. That doesn’t mean they are not worlds apart in other aspects of their ideology. Communism always turns around and bites the common worker on the hiny after it attains power. The Democrats are constrained by our checks and balances so that they can’t.

If the KKK cheers on a Republican victory, does this mean the Republicans “really represent” white supremacism?

If the KKK cheers on a Republican victory, does this mean the Republicans “really represent” white supremacism?

Not as long as Robert Byrd has yet to assume room temperature, no!

“The right-wing stranglehold on Congress has been broken,” declared Joelle Fishman, chair of the Communist Party USA’s (CPUSA) political action commission… “This is a victory being celebrated around the world.”

Sounds just like Puzzlefeet, doesn’t it?

Communism and democracy do have things in common.

I guess you meant “Communism and the Democrat Party”, eh?
The Dems would institute Marxism right here in the good old USA, if they could, IMO.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Sparkie, do you really believe that anything we do now can prevent a civil war? Peaceful compromise is as foreign to the Iraqi mind-set as violent overthrow is to ours. I’m sure it bewilders them to see what amounts to a peacefull regime change here, with no one getting shot. They seem to want us to leave them alone to settle their own hash, and I’m beginning to think that we should.

Sorry, wrong blog

r108, doesn’t the Republican party stand for even the little man getting wealthy through business opertunities open to all? The communist party purports to do the same, till they attain power and control, at least.

Margie: While the commies may promise a lot, look at history to see what they deliver.  Totalitarianism, slavery, and death.  Some utopia!
On the other hand, while free enterprise isn’t perfect(and never claims to be), it seems, when practiced fully, to deliver what it claims to: the greatest good for the greatest number.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

r108 said

The Dems would institute Marxism right here in the good old USA, if they could, IMO.

Interesting comment...as a non-American I’ve always viewed the Republican and Democratic parties as two sides of the same coin. Is your opinion based on actual Democratic policy or program?

"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

Irving Kristol

Robert108, I couldn’t agree more and was not defending communism. Even in it’s purest form, it is deceptive. However, if you take their beliefs literally, it sure sounds good. When you remove human initiative from the equation, you get a herd of malleable sheep, tho, ripe for the picking and corruption swiftly follows. Equating the platform of the Democratic party, set in a free enterprise system, with communism just doesn’t wash, tho. Limited social responsibility toward those of our citizens who need help to survive is not the same as the confiscation and suppression of individual industry or effort.

Mike , R108 may never recover from the shock of calling Republicans and Democrats two sides of the same coin. Goodness. They are worlds apart. Not even the same universe. Yet we are all Americans and stanchly freedom lovers, all. Marxism would never stand a chance here, we don’t take kindly to giving up our worldly goods or being told where to live, work, or any other limitations we can get out of. It’s in the national genes.

Margie: I agree that Marxism, presented truthfully, would never stand a chance in the US, because it is in every way inferior to what we have.  Instead, it is being presented to us untruthfully and incrementally.  It is a big step to hand over the means of production to the govt, so instead they seek virtual control by making business obligated to provide things for the “workers”, like healthcare and pension plans.  Instead of supporting individual health savings plans and a govt-administered retirement plan still in private hands, we are presented with the propaganda that individuals don’t have a chance without govt “help”.  This is class warfare at its sneakiest.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

MikeA: I agree with you that the Parties used to be two sides of the same coin, being two different approaches to the American Constitutional ideal, but things have changed in the last fifty years.
The old polarity was that the Republicans were more focused on the businessman, the affluent citizen, and the Democrats represented the working man, but more specifically, the blue collar worker.  With the upward mobility in our society, even blue collar workers are now quite affluent, and have been becoming more conservative, as they have assets to protect.  The Dem Party has gone far left, and is now composed of antiwar radicals, environmentalists and domestic terrorists, like Earth First! and PETA.  Go to the leftie blogs, like DK and DU, and just read what those people write.  They need wholesale illegal immigration, combined with amnesty, to replenish their voter rolls.  When I listen to what they say, even the Dem leaders are preaching war against those who don’t agree with them.  IMO, the national Dem Party no longer represents any US interests, and are aimed at centralized power over the individual citizen to an ever-increasing degree.  They want to weaken the US in relation to the rest of the world.
That is why I wrote what I wrote before.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Robert, I think is inaccurate to lump all Democrats into the far left group. I think the majority is more moderate. For instance, I think illegal immigration must be dealt with harshly and quickly. No amnesty. I was for the war before I was against it. (Sorry, couldn"t resist). My doubts now center on the mind-set of the Iraqi people being such that any effort at establishing democracy there is futile. I believe they will revert to a theoracy no matter what we do, so we may have to be content to be the ones who gave them the chance to choose for themselves. I will always be fiercely glad we invaded and deposed the Monster, regardless of how it turns out, nor do I think we were wrong to do it. I am in favor of social programs as a civic responsibility to our weakest and most helpless citizens. I am not in favor of supporting anyone able to care for themselves and just unwilling. I am in favor of educational programs or job skill programs that lift people out of poverty by their own efforts and the outside help they need to make it. I am in favor of raising the minimum wage to a more reasonable and acceptable level, while giving tax breaks to small businesses that need them because their employees now receive a better chance at survival. I have seen too many unskilled, uneducated families, not students, trying to make it to buy the “it’s not really needed by the typical minimum wage worker” stuff. Wonder how long its been since the people who come up with these statistics have ventured out from behind their desks and onto the streets to take a look around?I am for a strong economy and healthy corporations, but with a bit more trickle down to the people who make it strong and make profits possible with their sweat. I am not in favor of outrageous salaries for CEOs with backdated stock.Or a congress that consistently votes higher salaries for themselves each year, yet can’t bear to vote even a $1 an hour for the lower tier of voters they purportedly serve because their corporate friends would not like it.  I strongly believe in the right to bear arms, but see no need to wear one in McDonnels. If you burn my flag, I’ll probably slap you, freedom of speech or not. I’m divided, as many Americans are, in my feelings toward abortion. Would not have one, don’t want the government telling me I can’t. But what makes me a Democrat most of all is my sheer terror at the power grabs by an Executive branch, bent on upsetting the checks and balances built in to the Constitution he swore to defend. What dangerous territory, and we must not begin to accept it as a temporary measure for the sake of some false feelings of security. It just might start to feel too normal until it is too late to go back. Sorry, didn’t mean to be so long winded

Margie: I guess I didn’t make it clear that I was referring to the national Democrat Party.  Individual Dems may be anything, of course.
Even if the Iraqi people choose a theocracy, or a virtual one, it will be an improvement over what they had before.

I am in favor of educational programs or job skill programs that lift people out of poverty by their own efforts and the outside help they need to make it. I am in favor of raising the minimum wage to a more reasonable and acceptable level, while giving tax breaks to small businesses that need them because their employees now receive a better chance at survival.

All very good intentions; I have only one question: Have any of those programs every made a measurable improvement in society?
I am in favor of any social program that is proven to have benefited society to a sufficient degree to justify its expense.  Otherwise, there is a better way, and we should do that, instead of confiscating taxpayer money to pump into govt and useless programs.

what makes me a Democrat most of all is my sheer terror at the power grabs by an Executive branch, bent on upsetting the checks and balances built in to the Constitution he swore to defend.

Unfortunately, you have been deceived by leftie propaganda created by the extreme left who hate our President.  None of what you wrote is true.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Forgot to mention that these same CEOs like to dismember pension funds set up years ago to “make the company more competitive”. What has happened to integrity and keeping promises?

The Patriot Act is not true? Warrantless wire taps is not true? The disclaimers that in essence say he does not have to abide by laws passed by Congress unless he wants to are not true? “ Anyone willing to give up freedom for security does not deserve either freedom or security’” Not an exact quote and I don’t even know who said it, but it expresses my sentiments exactly.

Yes, some to these programs work. George Allen, tho I dislike him and consider him very much a part of the good old boy network, was a very good Governor of Virginia. He took the welfare program in this state and made sense of it, in many instances putting a screeching halt to generational welfare. But he did so by offering education to people who couldn’t afford it, job training for unskilled people, changing lives forever. After three years you got kicked off the welfare rolls, so it was up to you to make the most of the opertunity offered to you. My grand-daughter, unfortunately dropped out of school, bright as she was, had a baby she is trying to rear alone. Instead of spending the rest of her days paying for that awful, life destroying mistake, the state is paying for nursing school, helping with a shortage of nurses in the state, and assuring that she will be able to make a salary that is sufficient to support her child. Her daughter will not grow up in government housing or on welfare by example. If she were asked to repay the cost of this reprieve from poverty to the tax-payers of Va. in affordable installments, that would be fair.

I’ve forgotten the exact statistics that I read, but I believe that the welfare rolls are about half what they were before these programs were instituted, in spite of a population increase

r108...so it’s not what the Democratic Party is advocating that leads you to say that it wants to impose a marxist model on America but rather what posters at a couple of blogs say? I believe that is what you said in your reply to me but please correct me if I am putting words in your mouth.

"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

Irving Kristol

The only “better way” that conservatives seem to come up with is a totally unrealistic reliance on private charity, the results of which you would find in every alley come morning. Other than that, it is sink or swim, not societys problem.

MikeA: It’s as I said before; it is what the national Dems are advocating; I simply referred you to some blogs which will confirm that a certain part of the Dems advocate.  I thought I was clear on that.  I also didn’t say that the national Dems want to “impose a marxist model” on the US; they want real Marxism, but won’t be honest about it, so they are using a long range incremental strategy.  It has been in place since the FDR admin, IMO.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Margie: All of the programs you name are designed to take away the “right” of terrorists to attack us.  If you want to study Constitutional rights during time of war, I refer you to both the Civil War and WWII.  In both cases, the rights were suspended, and came right back after the war was won.  The leftie lie is that the President has some interest in taking away the rights of American citizens permanently, which is the fiction.
Your “all or none at all” model of massive taxpayer supported social engineering vs voluntary charity is a straw man argument, for two reasons.
One, if so much of our income wasn’t confiscated for govt programs, a lot more money would be available for charity, so the two aren’t presently comparable at all.
Two, my main argument was for strict means testing, not the total abolishing of all govt programs.  They should be made to justify themselves in terms of benefit produced, preferably on an annual basis, before further funding is approved.  Empty promises just don’t get it.
Instead of trying to invalidate what I say by going to extremes, I would appreciate if you actually read what I wrote.  At no time did I advocate total removal of all govt social programs; I do think, however, if they were evaluated on a cost/benefit basis, about 75% would go away, to the benefit of us all.  Instead of the reflexive, vote-buying social programs, we might get something that actually produces results, instead of just expanding and fattening the political class.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

I’ve forgotten the exact statistics that I read, but I believe that the welfare rolls are about half what they were before these programs were instituted, in spite of a population increase

If this is true, we are moving in the right direction; however, the dollars confiscated to pay for the social engineering programs keep increasing, so something is rotten there.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

MikeA: That should be “...what a certain faction of the Dems advocate...”

Sorry, sometimes my mind goes faster than my fingers can type.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Margie: To further clarify:  Right now, we are spending about 2/3rds of our national budget on social engineering programs of one sort or the other.  I know that there is a fairly small percentage of our citizens who are truly needy, so that money is being wasted, in that it could be generating more wealth, and should be left in the hands of the people who earned it.  It is not only financially right to do that, but also morally and ethically right.  The programs need to be tightened up and trimmed to make sure that our money is well-spent.  That is my concern.  I am also concerned that the money is spent in a way that works to eliminate the need for social spending, by enabling people to live productive lives, not to remain dependent on the earnings of others.  To me, that is the ultimate in greed.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Margie: I would even require a lower standard for govt social programs than is required of business.  Business must turn a profit to survive, but I would like govt programs simply to break even.  For instance, the War on Poverty has confiscated 5 trillion dollars and counting, with no measurable improvement in poverty levels at all.  If a US corporation had done that, they would really be in trouble.  Just a little food for thought.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

That implies that a life is not worth saving unless it can pay for itself in the long run. Job training always pays for itself. Must we always get a fair return on our investment in human lives? Is it just a business venture, never a societal responsibility? I’m sorry, but no amount of cold logic can make me feel this way.

This isn’t being called the Long War for nothing. The war on terrorists will be going on long after we leave Iraq. At what point in the years ahead will Republicans decide that we can afford to have our civil liberties returned to us? Answer: People never willingly let go of power gains. We get them when we take them at the polls. True, beats the heck out of having to take them back at the end of a rifle the way you would have to do it in other countries, but do we really want to take risks with somethig so precious for any reason?

Careful, Robert, the Great Marxist Conspiracy Theory makes you sound a little paranoid.

Margie: Taking the War on Poverty example, someone might have paid, over the 41 years it has been on the books, a million dollars into that little govt venture.  That million, invested conservatively at 6%, would now be returning $60,000 a year, before taxes, which is a decent middle-class income.  Because it is in an investment account of some type, that money gets recycled through the economy as available capital, and helps to fund further business, which results in employment and income for more people.  Wouldn’t it be better used that way instead of being drained from the private sector and used for beer and cigarettes by welfare recipients who will stay at their level as long as they are supported by our earnings?  That is the real question about social spending, IMO.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

I was a little hasty in my reply. We are in complete agreement that scads of money in federal social programs is just plain wasted with no rhyme nor reason to its use, no progress away from dependence to show for it. We can do better. But I still maintain that it is a larger immorallity to turn our backs on our people.

Rob, good comments regarding the War on Poverty.  Puerto Rico is a basket case on how if has made people dependent on govenment handouts, ..how it actually keeps too many people poor, as oppose to making them become self-reliant.

That implies that a life is not worth saving unless it can pay for itself in the long run.

This is not what I said. I said that the programs must create value, in terms of making formerly unproductive people productive, at least equal in value to the money confiscated to pay for their support and training.  You willfully misinterpret my words.

Job training always pays for itself.

I doubt that is true; have any sort of proof?

Must we always get a fair return on our investment in human lives?

Is it better to get an unfair return, or no return at all?  Isn’t it immoral to spend other people’s money without being responsible for getting some social return for it?  Welfare has destroyed much of our inner cities.  What is the good of that?

Is it just a business venture, never a societal responsibility?

It’s both.

I’m sorry, but no amount of cold logic can make me feel this way.

How much must I pay to assuage your feelings?  BTW, logic has not temperature, unless you are trying to denigrate someone instead of giving rational answers.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

But I still maintain that it is a larger immorallity to turn our backs on our people.

We are certainly not doing that. I made an error earlier, btw; the War on Poverty is at 7 trillion dollars and counting.  Sorry.

It is the largest immorality to waste the taxpayer’s money, IMO.  Americans will never allow the truly needy to perish, and we never have.  My fear is that the callous waste of our tax money will harden the hearts of Americans.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

You know how weak I am in economics, but a lot of people can starve to death in 41 years it takes to turn that million into anything useful to the general population. I am very glad that you are not advocating total disregard for the plight of people unable to finance a return to decent living, whether by fate, stupid mistakes, or whatever reason,only want to make sure the money is being used wisely and to good purpose.

You know how weak I am in economics, but a lot of people can starve to death in 41 years it takes to turn that million into anything useful to the general population.

The truth is that any money invested anywhere immediately goes to help the economy grow, and thus tends to reduce the number of poor people, directly.  The “starving people” argument is a straw man, in this country.  No one starves to death here unless they work at it.  You should know better than to try to sell that one.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Margie: I was just talking about one person who had a million of their earnings confiscated for the useless War on Poverty.  Actually, 7 trillion dollars divided by 41 years means over 17 billion dollars a year would have stayed in the private sector, and that’s a lot of jobs and income for working people.  Think about it.  All that for no reduction in poverty.  IMO, people should go to jail for that sort of waste.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

The only reason they don’t is the social network, such as food stamps that keeps low earners alive between minimum wage paychecks. No, private charity would not do it, if history is any example.

What good are jobs you are not skilled or educated to do? Without gov. or business funded training programs they are useless. What good is a job you can’t live on because your company is not willing to pay you a livable wage to do it?

Margie: Sorry, I made a mistake in my last comment; it’s actually 175 billion a year that would have been left in private hands if the War on Poverty never existed.  My calculator didn’t have a large enough display to handle all the zeros.

The only reason they don’t is the social network, such as food stamps that keeps low earners alive between minimum wage paychecks. No, private charity would not do it, if history is any example.

History doesn’t provide us an example of our economy without the excessive confiscation that takes place today, so there is no example of how much private charity would be available if the govt didn’t steal so much.  In any case, you again make an extreme argument, one which I did not make.  It’s not “all or none at all”, but “how much should we have taken from us with little or no benefit”.  Understand?

Even during the Great Depression, before the gigantic welfare programs kicked in, people didn’t starve to death, yet you continue to use the “starving people” straw man argument.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

What good are jobs you are not skilled or educated to do? Without gov. or business funded training programs they are useless.

It is in the best interest of business to have skilled workers; the money would be better used not being confiscated and run through a wasteful govt infrastructure.

What good is a job you can’t live on because your company is not willing to pay you a livable wage to do it?

It is not the job of business to pay any more than the job is worth.  You seem to have “welfare consciousness” rather than “self-reliance” consciousness.  Our country was built on self-reliance, not welfare.  Welfare is designed to maintain the status quo, not make progress.  In reality, it doesn’t even maintain the status quo, but results in degeneration of the potential workforce.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

All the time I am writing this I am thinking about my husband. But he was a unique individual. He dropped out of school in 8th grade. He was pumping gas in a service station when we met. He got a better job when the first baby came, changing tires in a truck stop, where he worried a one-armed mechanic to death till he taught him all he knew about fixing diesel engines between changing tires, then pestered drivers to let him move their trucks around the lot till he taught himself to handle them. He worked for Ford Motor Co. as a mechanic, going so far as to tell me he lost his wallet when he spent all his pay on tools to get started. He finally secumbed to the lure of over the road driving, but he was not a person to ever give up or think for one minute that he could not do something. This attitude is still strong in this country, but sometimes people just need a little helping hand up.

This attitude is still strong in this country, but sometimes people just need a little helping hand up.

Your husband is the epitome of the self-reliant American; thanks for sharing that with me.  Unfortunately, your undoubtedly good intentions don’t work that way in the real world; that “helping hand” often turns out to result in holding down entire segments of the population for generations.
The other misperception is that the govt helps anybody.  All it does is transfer some of the money to those who haven’t earned it(the smaller portion), and the larger portion to govt employees.  Most social programs get less than fifty cents on the dollar to the actual recipients; the rest is sucked up in the bloated infrastructure.  It’s malfeasance of the first order.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

Margie: Your husband, God bless him, isn’t unique in that he made it on his own.  I intend that most Americans achieve success the way he did.  Govt social spending certainly doesn’t achieve the results he got.

Save America; boycott the MSM.

It is not the amount of money available for private charity that counts, but human nature. People will give very generously, ask New Orleans, but not in a sustained situation as some situations, not remedial, call for.

Agreed, any program that does not lead to self-reliance eventually is unworkable and not justified. They should be efficient bridges to self help, with mechanisms in place to audit results.

Mercy, it is 4 in the morning! Thank you so much for an interesting discussion. Your figures on the war on poverty are astonding. Going to bed, now, safe trip and Happy Thanksgiving.

r108 said

It’s as I said before; it is what the national Dems are advocating; I simply referred you to some blogs which will confirm that a certain part of the Dems advocate.  I thought I was clear on that.

If the national Democratic Party is advocating it then you should be able to point me to some Democratic Party policy or program. The fact that a couple of blogs feature material that you find marxist is irrelevant...I simply want to know whether your opinion is supported by verifiable facts or whether it is supported by something else. I hope I am being clear.

"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

Irving Kristol