Brown Wins

[The Last Man]

This is enormous. Kennedy's seat being won by a Republican. Incredible! Not just that, but it would never have happened but for Obamacare, Cap & Trade, and above all, Democrat high-handedness. Is (was?) there a bluer state than Massachusetts? There is no doubt that this was a referendum on national issues. Brown campaigned solely on those issues.

"By the rude bridge that arched the flood,
Their flag to April's breeze unfurled;
Here once the embattled farmers stood,
And fired the shot heard 'round the world."

Massachusetts heard from on the brink again.

This is an example of the reactionary, emotional black-and-white type of thinking that is the cause of our problems today. Supporting a candidate merely because he talks a good talk about opposing the currently discredited majority party is idiocy. . . do you realise TPT that the motives that got Brown elected are the exact same motives that got Obama elected? Reactionism and emotion, not a focus on the actual fucking person you are voting for. Does anyone give a crap about the fact that you are voting *for* someone? No, they only care about voting against the other guy. Hence we get the downward back-and-forth spiral that has led our political system into the gutter. Shit A or shit B, take your pick slave. Oh, shit A is in charge and shit B says that they dont like shit A, lets vote for shit B then! Seriously. Pathetic.

No one knows or cares what Brown stands for, all they care is that he gives the *appearance* of opposition, of difference, and thus it gives voters a sense of revenge and gloating self-righteousness to vote for him. The motives behind voting for Brown are as impure and idiotic as the motives were for voting for Obama.

Not to mention that the disorganisation and internal differences within the DFL over health care and other major issues is likely a huge cause of the lack of voter support for Coakley. This election is more the work of the infighting and uncertainty among DFL members and voters, combined with the idiocy of "conservative" voters who just want to stick it to Obama and dont care how they do it.

[Mr_Anderson]

This is enormous. Kennedy's seat being won by a Republican. Incredible! Not just that, but it would never have happened but for Obamacare, Cap & Trade, and above all, Democrat high-handedness. Is (was?) there a bluer state than Massachusetts? There is no doubt that this was a referendum on national issues. Brown campaigned solely on those issues.

"By the rude bridge that arched the flood,
Their flag to April's breeze unfurled;
Here once the embattled farmers stood,
And fired the shot heard 'round the world."

Massachusetts heard from on the brink again.

This is an example of the reactionary, emotional black-and-white type of thinking that is the cause of our problems today. Supporting a candidate merely because he talks a good talk about opposing the currently discredited majority party is idiocy. . . do you realise TPT that the motives that got Brown elected are the exact same motives that got Obama elected? Reactionism and emotion, not a focus on the actual fucking person you are voting for. Does anyone give a crap about the fact that you are voting *for* someone? No, they only care about voting against the other guy. Hence we get the downward back-and-forth spiral that has led our political system into the gutter. Shit A or shit B, take your pick slave. Oh, shit A is in charge and shit B says that they dont like shit A, lets vote for shit B then! Seriously. Pathetic.

No one knows or cares what Brown stands for, all they care is that he gives the *appearance* of opposition, of difference, and thus it gives voters a sense of revenge and gloating self-righteousness to vote for him. The motives behind voting for Brown are as impure and idiotic as the motives were for voting for Obama.

Not to mention that the disorganisation and internal differences within the DFL over health care and other major issues is likely a huge cause of the lack of voter support for Coakley. This election is more the work of the infighting and uncertainty among DFL members and voters, combined with the idiocy of "conservative" voters who just want to stick it to Obama and dont care how they do it.

QFT.

I direct this at all Republicans, but none on this forum obviously>

A patriot is not a Republican with a boner for war, it's a person who cares enough to attack his system when it is sick and not pettilly squable amongst the other non Republicans like some sad little ass wipe.

End of story, all I see these vocal Republicans who mess up democratic process as is whining gimps and idiots. The same goes for anyone remotely libertarian; you're as bad as the communists, get over yourself grow up and start contributing to society you elitist sack of shit nobody mushroom. No one cares how much money you have it's fucking trivial you dumb twat.

[PavlovianModel146]

Mr. Anderson,

Please keep in mind that whether directed at anyone in this forum specifically or not, posts like that will henceforward be moved to Rant House.

Don't get me wrong, throwing generalizations and insults out there does not bother me so much as long as it is at least balanced by argument, facts and support against the parties being insulted.

[Mr_Anderson]

Mr. Anderson,

Please keep in mind that whether directed at anyone in this forum specifically or not, posts like that will henceforward be moved to Rant House.

Don't get me wrong, throwing generalizations and insults out there does not bother me so much as long as it is at least balanced by argument, facts and support against the parties being insulted.

The Republican fringes are mental lets face it. It doesn't need to be backed up everyone knows what the Anne Coulter types are like.

Republicans have undergone a crisis of faith some are carefully recouperating and considering strategies, some those mentioned in the post above are throwing their toys out of their prams and ranting like infants.

[PavlovianModel146]

The Republican fringes are mental lets face it. It doesn't need to be backed up everyone knows what the Anne Coulter types are like.

Republicans have undergone a crisis of faith some are carefully recouperating and considering strategies, some those mentioned in the post above are throwing their toys out of their prams and ranting like infants.

I don't have much of a problem with that. It might be just my Moderation style, but tone has a lot to do with it when it comes to the way I feel about posts as well. The tone with what you wrote above is fine, in my opinion, generalizations or not.

Besides, those seem more like opinions with underlying insult than insult with an underlying opinion.

[Mr_Anderson]

The Republican fringes are mental lets face it. It doesn't need to be backed up everyone knows what the Anne Coulter types are like.

Republicans have undergone a crisis of faith some are carefully recouperating and considering strategies, some those mentioned in the post above are throwing their toys out of their prams and ranting like infants.

I don't have much of a problem with that. It might be just my Moderation style, but tone has a lot to do with it when it comes to the way I feel about posts as well. The tone with what you wrote above is fine, in my opinion, generalizations or not.

Besides, those seem more like opinions with underlying insult than insult with an underlying opinion.

Truth hurts. The fact that there are Anne Coulter types out there is a fact you can't argue with.

I don't really care if it offends your sensibilities to be assoscaited with such human flotsam, they are all to apparently pretty sorry individuals that really don't represent Republicans as a whole.

[The Paineful Truth]

do you realise TPT that the motives that got Brown elected are the exact same motives that got Obama elected?

Yeah, there's probably some of that. People and scared and they react emotionally. But, paineful truth be known, I saw this coming a long way off as have many others of lesser emotional influence. You equate the opposition to an Ann Coulter fringe. Whatever. You sound just like the leftist fringe who claim that Gore was robbed in 2000, or that global warming isn't a hoax, or that Obama isn't a hard core Alinskyite bent on implementing Cloward-Piven. But it doesn't matter what you or I think, a large majority see it that way and are going to get off their couches and react in November.

Truth hurts.

Yes, Painefully so.

I don't really care if it offends your sensibilities to be assoscaited with such human flotsam, they are all to apparently pretty sorry individuals that really don't represent Republicans as a whole.

I'm pretty sure you don't care, at least not at the moment, but I am neither a Christian nor a Republican, so flail away if it makes you feel better. I have not given you my permission to offend me. And if I was ebullient at the prospects presented by the election in Massachusetts, I'd say I have something of a right given the Democrat hegemony for the last 45 years, and the fraud by which they betrayed me personally in the process by their self-serving misrepresentations.

[Mr_Anderson]

do you realise TPT that the motives that got Brown elected are the exact same motives that got Obama elected?

Yeah, there's probably some of that. People and scared and they react emotionally. But, paineful truth be known, I saw this coming a long way off as have many others of lesser emotional influence. You equate the opposition to an Ann Coulter fringe. Whatever. You sound just like the leftist fringe who claim that Gore was robbed in 2000, or that global warming isn't a hoax, or that Obama isn't a hard core Alinskyite bent on implementing Cloward-Piven. But it doesn't matter what you or I think, a large majority see it that way and are going to get off their couches and react in November.

Truth hurts.

Yes, Painefully so.

I don't really care if it offends your sensibilities to be assoscaited with such human flotsam, they are all to apparently pretty sorry individuals that really don't represent Republicans as a whole.

I'm pretty sure you don't care, at least not at the moment, but I am neither a Christian nor a Republican, so flail away if it makes you feel better. I have not given you my permission to offend me. And if I was ebullient at the prospects presented by the election in Massachusetts, I'd say I have something of a right given the Democrat hegemony for the last 45 years, and the fraud by which they betrayed me personally in the process by their self-serving misrepresentations.

It wasn't directed at you so I'm not sure why you felt the need to post this.

I presume you are a libertarian. In my experience libertarians don't rant, but they do tend to be woefully out of touch with reality much like marxists/communists.

I'm not a US citizen hence I don't support any of your political views, and in fact I think your system is little more than business ran. But I do think Bush was a moron though.

[Mr_Anderson]

peter, no one is listening to your insane babble

It's pretty reasoned if you ask me, but then I like everyone else in the world am not toiling under a business run health service that leaks money on bureacratic waste, and arguing the toss with lawyers.

[The Last Man]

Yes, libertarianism is a joke, if only because it is so out of touch with the way that the real world works. To call libertarianism simplistic would still be giving it far too much credit. The problem is that *all* political "parties" and "systems" and "ideologies" are harmful and ignorant of a great deal of how the world operates - it just so happens that each ideology is ignorant of areas that another might not be, so we get this weird cross-sectional overlapping, where most of the time each ideology is only talking past the other based on its own mistaken and skewed/oversimplified view of the world.

And on top of that, the major parties have a solid interest in convincing you that they are both opposed to each other in fundamental ways as well as they only viable choices out there. That way they can play the reactionary game, and we get a political system which swings from one shit to another shit, not even realising that the "differences" between these groups are superficial only.

Note the hypocrisy of republicans whining about spending and deficits when they presided over massive spending increases and huge deficits during Reagan and both Bush's - and note the hypocrisy of republicans attacking healthcare proposals while they were the ones who passed massive Medicare prescription drug coverage expansions, to score political points with seniors. Spending, debt and the size of the federal government grew *tremendously* under all three previous republican presidents. They have no ground to stand upon here, they are only hypocrites and liars. At least the democrats are somewhat consistent in where they stand, even if their ideologies are for the most part total garbage.

None of these idiots cares about you, or about fixing our government or public systems. They only care about their own power and wealth. They will say what they need to in order to make a good sound-byte for Fox News or CNN to run and for millions of loyal dogs to absorb unquestioningly.

Good thing that Americans have such a short attention span as well as virtually no critical thinking skills, else our entire political house of cards would come crashing down almost immediately.

[The Paineful Truth]

It wasn't directed at you so I'm not sure why you felt the need to post this.

You wrote, "do you realise TPT that the motives that got Brown elected are the exact same motives that got Obama elected?"

I presume you are a libertarian. In my experience libertarians don't rant, but they do tend to be woefully out of touch with reality much like marxists/communists.

Yes, a small "l" libertarian. I used to be a card carrier, but resigned after 9-11.

I'm not a US citizen hence I don't support any of your political views, and in fact I think your system is little more than business ran.

I wish. We have been moving lurchingly toward socialism/anti-capitalism and anti-constitutionalism since the 30's when Social Security was enacted and the War on Drugs was initiated (to spite the anti- Prohibitionists), both without benefit of a Constitutional amendment as Prohibition had. Nobody said anything, so the politicians took it an ran with it, hitting their stride with Johnson's Great Society, Carter/Clinton's devastating "Community Reinvestment Act" which brought about our current economic crisis which is being vastly exacerbated by Obama's total disregard for fiscal responsibility. Our Constitution is now like the Queen of England, a symbol with no teeth.

What political views do you support? Do you understand the probable implications of Brown's win in Massachusetts?

[Mr_Anderson]

It wasn't directed at you so I'm not sure why you felt the need to post this.

You wrote, "do you realise TPT that the motives that got Brown elected are the exact same motives that got Obama elected?"

I presume you are a libertarian. In my experience libertarians don't rant, but they do tend to be woefully out of touch with reality much like marxists/communists.

Yes, a small "l" libertarian. I used to be a card carrier, but resigned after 9-11.

I'm not a US citizen hence I don't support any of your political views, and in fact I think your system is little more than business ran.

I wish. We have been moving lurchingly toward socialism/anti-capitalism and anti-constitutionalism since the 30's when Social Security was enacted and the War on Drugs was initiated (to spite the anti- Prohibitionists), both without benefit of a Constitutional amendment as Prohibition had. Nobody said anything, so the politicians took it an ran with it, hitting their stride with Johnson's Great Society, Carter/Clinton's devastating "Community Reinvestment Act" which brought about our current economic crisis which is being vastly exacerbated by Obama's total disregard for fiscal responsibility. Our Constitution is now like the Queen of England, a symbol with no teeth.

What political views do you support? Do you understand the probable implications of Brown's win in Massachusetts?

I am Slightly right of liberal in the UK.

[The Paineful Truth]

not even realising that the "differences" between these groups are superficial only.

....not even realizing that the "differences" between these groups are a matter of degree only. Republicans are now merely socialists lite.

Good thing that Americans have such a short attention span as well as virtually no critical thinking skills, else our entire political house of cards would come crashing down almost immediately.

Yeah, well, Obama and the Democrat super-majority has gone so far over the top, they now has a majority of our undivided attentions. That is the critical bit of information contained in Brown's election. People can't wait for November, and the Dems, irrationally, keep flashing their arrogance and incompetence in our faces, building up ever increasing resentment to be released in November.

[Mr_Anderson]

not even realising that the "differences" between these groups are superficial only.

....not even realizing that the "differences" between these groups are a matter of degree only. Republicans are now merely socialists lite.

Good thing that Americans have such a short attention span as well as virtually no critical thinking skills, else our entire political house of cards would come crashing down almost immediately.

Yeah, well, Obama and the Democrat super-majority has gone so far over the top, they now has a majority of our undivided attentions. That is the critical bit of information contained in Brown's election. People can't wait for November, and the Dems, irrationally, keep flashing their arrogance and incompetence in our faces, building up ever increasing resentment to be released in November.

You are kidding right?

I don't think the US has ever been socialist, it doesn't have a socialist bone in its body. If anything it's a scary goblin used to scare kids at night. Until you've lived under a socialist system I'd refrain from ascribing capitalist ones that name.

There are plent of socialist governments or parties, but few socialist systems.

[The Paineful Truth]

We are living under a socialist system by any definition.

Starting with Social Security, how far do you want me to go?
Medicare
Double, triple, quadruple taxation via over 50 types of taxation including the death tax
The War on Poverty via wealth redistribution on down to Obama's answer to Joe the Plumber.
Welfare
government schools, and especially the federal Department of Education
Asset Forfeiture
Overturning eminent domain
The Federal Reserve
Nationalizing banks and auto companies
The Community Reinvestment Act (which pressured companies to make mortgages "more affordable" for those who couldn't afford them), which resulted in our (some are saying intentional) current economic crisis.

Fascism is a socialist system whereby ownership remains in private hands but is controlled via regulation or directly by the government. Of course we've even exceeded that limit now.

Technically, all government is socialist (government courts, law enforcement, military). But when government exceeds that basic mandate, that is what is usually meant by socialism. No matter how you define it, we are heavily socialized in the most negative sense of the word, and with the attendant loss of freedom it entails. To paraphrase Franklin, those who trade freedom for security, will loose both.

No, I'm not kidding.

[Mr_Anderson]

We are living under a socialist system by any definition.

Starting with Social Security, how far do you want me to go?
Medicare
Double, triple, quadruple taxation via over 50 types of taxation including the death tax
The War on Poverty via wealth redistribution on down to Obama's answer to Joe the Plumber.
Welfare
government schools, and especially the federal Department of Education
Asset Forfeiture
Overturning eminent domain
The Federal Reserve
Nationalizing banks and auto companies
The Community Reinvestment Act (which pressured companies to make mortgages "more affordable" for those who couldn't afford them), which resulted in our (some are saying intentional) current economic crisis.

Fascism is a socialist system whereby ownership remains in private hands but is controlled via regulation or directly by the government. Of course we've even exceeded that limit now.

Technically, all government is socialist (government courts, law enforcement, military). But when government exceeds that basic mandate, that is what is usually meant by socialism. No matter how you define it, we are heavily socialized in the most negative sense of the word, and with the attendant loss of freedom it entails. To paraphrase Franklin, those who trade freedom for security, will loose both.

No, I'm not kidding.

No you are not. Have you ever read anything by Marx or Hegel? Probably not.

Without some form of control then mankinds baser instincts will rule. And our basic instincts are both socialist and selfish in their leanings, the libertarian system is unrealistic. You know it deep down, the only system that will work is one that caters to the most people but seldom all, and is at least majority. Selfish people who live on the fringe of society and begrudge everything but their own selfish moral code are atypical, you are atypical, you can't expect a minority to rule the world. You're atypical you know it I know, I suggest it's about time you got used to it, instead of pretending your ideaology of malcontents could or would ever work; you wont but I suggest you do for peace of mind because it just aint going to happen except after a holocaust.

[The Paineful Truth]

Have you ever read anything by Marx or Hegel? Probably not.

Yes I have, and I think even you have said words to the effect that communism is unworkable. What I am referring to mostly, is the trend toward Fascist socialism--although nationalizing the banks and auto companies is a step toward communism. Of course, neither system is the goal of those who employ them, a double standard with an elite statist class is.

Without some form of control then mankinds baser instincts will rule. And our basic instincts are both socialist and selfish in their leanings, the libertarian system is unrealistic.

Why? It's goal is a balance between the state, corporate and individual liberty. The state has the enforcement of corporate and individual rights, but the individuals have (or are supposed to have) ultimate authority. There is nothing inconsistent between that and libertarianism. In fact I consider it a pretty good definition.

By baser instincts, I assume you mean greed--the poorest defined word in the English language and subject of massive emotional misuse. Man is selfish, and we should free people to follow that drive. But that does not give any individual or corporation license to violate the rights of the lowliest individuals, all of whom have equal rights; and it is the government's primary mandate to define and protect those rights equally under the knowledgeable supervision of the people.

You know it deep down, the only system that will work is one that caters to the most people but seldom all, and is at least majority.

Not "caters to the most people", but provides equal protection under the law for all. If you mean that no system is perfect, yes, and neither is any government, corporation ,group or individual. They all vary from saintlike to evil. If you mean that's impossible to obtain, maybe, but aiming lower will only promote lower standards in all sectors.

Selfish people who live on the fringe of society and begrudge everything but their own selfish moral code are atypical, you are atypical, you can't expect a minority to rule the world.

Where did I ever say I did. But selfishness (a bugaboo word on a par with greed), is a good thing if it doesn't lead to the violation of the rights of others. Guess you can say the same thing for greed. If rights based on a simple moral code* are protected equally, the fiscal health of a society will be much stronger than any system of forced equalization of wealth or forced charity.

You're atypical you know

Yes, I've pretty much overcome the indoctrination I received is church schools and government schools.

suggest it's about time you got used to it, instead of pretending your ideaology of malcontents could or would ever work; you wont but I suggest you do for peace of mind because it just aint going to happen except after a holocaust.

Ideology of malcontents? Which is what? What is a malcontent? If you want to point to counterproductive malcontents, of the political parties, the largest percentage is contained by the Democrat Party.

*Simple Moral Code--The equal rights of all to their life, liberty and property free from violation through force or fraud.

All else is an individual code of virtues, which should never be legislated.

[The Last Man]

*Simple Moral Code--The equal rights of all to their life, liberty and property free from violation through force or fraud.

All else is an individual code of virtues, which should never be legislated.

Your "simple moral code" is completely ignorant of human nature.

[The Paineful Truth]

Your "simple moral code" is completely ignorant of human nature.

What, that people don't adhere to it even though it's simple, and obvious? What do you mean?