Perspective: How It All Happened

[PoliticalChic]

The truth was that it was Eisenhower who broke the Democrats’ hold on the South in 1952. Want to know was appealing to bigots? Democrat Adlai Stevenson, known to experience “personal discomfort in the presence of Negroes.” Taylor Branch, “Parting the Waters: America in the King Years,1954-1963,” p. 360. Oh, yes, and Stevenson chose John Sparkman of Alabama, a Democrat segregationist, as his running mate. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/152564/playing-defense/mark-r-levin

The passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the event that finally moved the majority of Southern states to the Republican Party

Wrong again, Boring.

In ’28, ’52, ’56, and ’60, Republicans generally won Virginia, Florida, Texas, Kentucky and sometimes North Carolina or Louisiana. Did you notice that those years were before 1964?

 

[Foxfyre]

Defending Truman from accusations that he was an opportunistic exploiter of black Americans is an assigned liberal talking point?

Where do you get this shit?

Ok, so you concede that Truman does not fit your inane broad brush indictment of the Democratic party,

so let's move ahead a bit. Was Lyndon Johnson, by pushing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, an exploiter of blacks who was just trying to score political points?

Does he fit your description?

The OP was not about Harry Truman. The OP was not about Lyndon Johnson. The OP was not about the current controversy over immigration.

But then I have long said that it is the rare leftwinger who is able to discuss a concept without benefit of personalities to exalt or discredit. Leftwingers are so very rarely able to separate and discuss a concept separate from their prejudices and assigned talking points. You gave me a Truman campaign speech. I gave you a non partisan history of the era courtesy of PBS lest you accuse me of using only partisan rightwing sources.

I happen to be an admirer of Harry Truman and am fully aware of his policies, his accomplishments, and their place in history. But I am also enough of a historian to not try to make HIM the post child of the culture and dynamics of that time. And I am not going to divert the point the OP was making by allowing you to divert me to a different topic.

You take a haughty attitude defending PC. Here is a fact for you...EVERY single thread PC starts has ONE constant overriding theme...ALL our problems are caused by liberals and Democrats, and ALL our solution come from conservatives. If you are too stupid to be able to glean that fact, then have an adult present when you cross the street.

You'll have to give me a complete synopsis of PC's threads to make a case that you are correct about that. I have neither the time nor the interest to do that because I don't care who started this thread. The topic is interesting and is one worthy of discussion and exploration to determine whether the thesis and/or the history presented as merit and whether the concept is plausible.

I know, as evidenced in this thread, that you are unable to separate personalities from a concept. I know, as evidenced in this thread, that you are unable to separate your partisan prejudices from a concept. I know, as evidenced in this thread, that you are unlikely to, and are probably incapable of, actually focusing on a concept and debating it.\

Like too many Democrats/liberals in this forum, you seem unable to separate a principle or concept from your desire to attack or discredit somebody. Admittedly there are a number of members on the right who are afflicted with the same syndrome.

I really appreciate the very few who are able to set aside their prejudices long enough to actually explore discuss a principle or concept without veering off into their prejudices.

 

[Bfgrn]

You didn't know that Jimmy Carter brought Khomeini back to Iran from exile?
And this unleashed the Islamofascist terrorism that the world faces today.


Good think you came here.... you learn something new every day!

"Jimmy Carter brought Khomeini back to Iran from exile"...??? What number is that in the right wing revision of history?

Gee, one of the hostage takers told an outraged American embassy staffer: “You have no right to complain, because you took our whole country hostage in 1953.”

So...you're proving that you aren't the only one to have gotten it wrong.

Unnecessary.

Now...get a pencil and paper....there'll be a short quiz at the end of this tutorial....no erasing and no crossing out:


Dr. Abbas Milani is he Director of the Iranian Studies Program at Stanford University. His recent book is “The Shah,” is based on ten years studying the archives of the United States and of Britain. The following is from his recent lecture on that subject.

1. During the 1953 through 1969, Eisenhower and Kennedy and Johnson pressured the Shah to engage in various reforms based on their fear of a popular uprising, as predicted by the CIA as “…just around the corner!” In mid-1958, “Tomorrow will be a revolution!” Of course, the CIA at that time was factually correct, but chronologically premature by some twenty years! In comparison, in 1978, the CIA was dismally incorrect: “…the Shah is here to stay! There will be no fundamental change…no group is powerful enough.”

2. Prior to 1951, Britain controlled Iran’s oil industry. The US foresaw how the one-sided dominance would result in a nationalist uprising, and warned Britain, but they refused to alter the agreements, claiming that they knew how to deal with the ‘natives.’

a. Mossedeq was the nationalist leader of the Iranian Parliament, becoming so via democratic process, and the first thing he did was nationalize the oil industry. Britain wanted to attack Iran, but Truman wouldn’t allow it. Then the Brits tried to get the Shah to use the army to throw Mossadeq out…but the Shah refused to do anything illegal.


3. Due to the unrest and criticisms, Mossadeq decided to dismiss the parliament; without any constitutional or legal basis. His supporters warned him that this would allow the Shah to make recess appointments, including the Prime Ministers. He didn’t believe that the Shah would do it….he was wrong. On August 13th, 1953 the Shah signed the decree which removed Mossadeq with General Fazollah Zehedi. “When pro-Shah soldiers went to arrest Mossadegh, they instead were captured.” http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/issue51/articles/51_14-15.pdf The Shah fled to Rome.

4. By August 19th, crowds filled the streets, attacked Mossadeq’s home, and took over the radio station.


5. As far as the story the CIA has told, secret operations that unseated Mossadegh...

The question is whether these crowds were simply concerned Iranians, nationalists, communists, as the Shah’s supporters claimed, or paid CIA operatives, and the CIA claims.

a. Professor Milani, using the latest declassified archival documents, suggests two things: a) the crowds were combinations of both, and b) “Although declassified CIA documents confirmed many details of his account, which Roosevelt told with the relish of a John le Carré thriller, his version was exceptionally self-serving. For instance, despite knowing little about Iranian society and speaking no Persian, Roosevelt launched by his own description an instantly potent propaganda campaign. Dwight Eisenhower, president during the 1953 coup, was to characterize Roosevelt’s report as seeming “more like a dime novel.” The CIA claimed more power that it actually had. The ?Great Satan? Begs to Differ | Hoover Institution



Now, aren't you glad you showed up to class today?

Hey PC, do you ever read what you post, or just search like a vulture for ammunition?

In early June, CIA and ISS officials met again to fine-tune plans for the coup. The CIA picked Kermit Roosevelt of the CIA’s Near East and Africa division to direct it.

In March 1953, the CIA’s Teheran station reported that an Iranian general had approached the U.S. embassy about supporting an army-led coup. It reported that support for Mossadegh was crumbling and that the influence of Iran’s Communist Party (Tudeh), was increasing. Tudeh called for elections and urged Mossadegh to form a coalition government which would assure a position for Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi.

As a result, the CIA stepped up its timetable. CIA Director Allen Dulles approved $1 million on April 4. Wilber’s account said that the funds could be used “in any way that would bring about the fall of Mossadegh.” It continued: “The aim was to bring to power a government which would reach an equitable oil settlement, enabling Iran to become economically sound and financially solvent, and which would vigorously prosecute the dangerously strong Communist Party.”

It also read: “A Shah-General Zahedi combination, supported by CIA local assets and financial backing, would have a good chance of overthrowing Mossadegh particularly if this combination should be able to get the largest mobs in the streets and if a sizable portion of the Teheran garrison refused to carry out Mossadegh’s orders.”

Even though the CIA knew from the start that the Shah was reluctant to participate in the coup, the agency still continued to lobby him. He refused to sign CIA-written, royal decrees to change the government. Then, the CIA arranged for the Shah’s twin sister, Princess Ashraf Pahlevi, and General H. Norman Schwarzkopf, the father of the Desert Storm commander, to act as intermediaries to try to convince the Shah to support the coup. In late July, Asadollah Rashidian of the ISS asked the Shah to record anti-Mossadegh remarks that later would be broadcast at prearranged times on the BBC’s Persian language program.

But the Shah refused to make remarks in support of the covert operation.

On July 11, Eisenhower approved the covert operation. CIA and ISS officers visited Princess Ashraf on the French Riviera and persuaded her to return to Iran to tell her brother to follow the plans. When the unpopular princess returned, Mossadegh supporters protested against her. The Shah was furious and refused at first to see her.

In early August, the CIA stepped up pressure against Mossadegh by stirring up anti-communist sentiment within the country’s Islamic community.

The agency’s Teheran station worked directly with royalist military officers to recruit Irans to demonstrate in Teheran. They posed as members of the Communist Party to direct havoc against the Mossadegh government.

Protesters harassed religious leaders, and in one instance the CIA staged the bombing of a Muslim cleric’s home [and blamed it on communists]. The CIA planted “grey propaganda” – anti-Mossadegh articles and cartoons in newspapers. The CIA gave one leading newspaper owner $45,000 to publish propaganda.

On August 1, the Shah met with Schwarzkopf and again refused to sign the CIA-written decrees authorizing the dismissal of Mossadegh and the appointment of Zahedi. The Shah was relentless pressured by Roosevelt and Rashidian at subsequent meetings.

When Mossadegh learned of the CIA plot, he moved to consolidate power by calling for a national referendum to dissolve Parliament. On August 4, he won 99.9% of the vote. Because of the prime minister’s enormous popularity, the CIA thought that the Shah would immediately sign the decrees to eliminate Mossadegh. But he still refused to budge. On August 10, the Shah agreed to see Zahedi and a few army officers involved in the plot.

Finally, on August 13, he signed the decrees. Word that he would support an army-led coup spread rapidly among army officers backing Zahedi.

Two days later, the coup was underway.

http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/issue51/articles/51_14-15.pdf

 

[numan]

I gave you a non partisan history of the era courtesy of PBS lest you accuse me of using only partisan rightwing sources.

You have the fantasy that PBS is not a partisan Establishment source??

.

 

[Foxfyre]

I gave you a non partisan history of the era courtesy of PBS lest you accuse me of using only partisan rightwing sources.

You have the fantasy that PBS is not a partisan Establishment source??

.

Of course it is. It clearly tilts left, favors Democrats, disfavors Republicans. But it is not a partisan rightwing source so I thought it might be acceptable to a leftwing extremist. And it did do a decent job summarizing FDR's New Deal and how that prolonged the Great Depression.

Being left of center does not automatically mean being righ tor wrong any more than being right of center automatically means being right or wrong.

 

[numan]

'

I think you are quite naive in thinking that PBS is a "left-wing source" -- considering how much money it gets from mega-corporations, far-right propagandists like the Koch Brothers, and from prominent bankster-gangster financial institutions.

.

 

[asaratis]

'

I think you are quite naive in thinking that PBS is a "left-wing source" -- considering how much money it gets from mega-corporations, far-right propagandists like the Koch Brothers, and from prominent bankster-gangster financial institutions.

.

If you don't think PBS is a left wing source either a) you never listen to it or b) you do not comprehend what is being said.

On edit: The Koch brothers fund NOVA on PBS.They threatened to discontinue funding if PBS did back off of attacking their political posture in another program. NOVA is hardly a partisan program.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_H._Koch



Koch contributed $7 million to the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) show Nova,[36] and is a contributor to the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C., including a $20 million gift to the American Museum of Natural History, creating the David H. Koch Dinosaur Wing and a contribution of $15 million to the National Museum of Natural History to create the new David H. Koch Hall of Human Origins, which opened on the museum's 100th anniversary of its location on the National Mall on March 17, 2010.[37] In 2012, Koch contributed US $35 million to the Smithsonian to build a new dinosaur exhibition hall at the National Museum of Natural History.[38]

Koch also financed the construction of Deerfield Academy's $68 million Koch Center for mathematics, science and technology,[39] and was named the first and only Lifetime Trustee.[39]

Koch gave $10 million to the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory[40] where he was honored with the Double Helix Medal for Corporate Leadership for supporting research that, "improves the health of people everywhere".[41]

 

[Foxfyre]

'

I think you are quite naive in thinking that PBS is a "left-wing source" -- considering how much money it gets from mega-corporations, far-right propagandists like the Koch Brothers, and from prominent bankster-gangster financial institutions.

.

It receives a tremendous amount of funding from government--enough that there is no way they would want to anger anybody in government who disburse that funding. There was some criticism of David Koch sending contributions for Nova--I believe that is the Koch Bros. ONLY involvement with PBS--but the producers of Nova are adament that Nova retains its editorial integrity and is not influenced by David Koch. Most of those big mega-corporations you mention, however, are as likely or even more likely to have funded Obama's campaign as Romney's. Evenmoreso those who contribute to PBS are far more likely to be leftwingers than rightwingers.

Obama Backers Make President Top Fundraiser From Business - Bloomberg

We know PBS is slanted left because of its programming emphasis and because it fires anybody who strays off the liberal planation there. Have you ever seen a program promoting a conservative point of view of any kind? I daresay you have not seen that for decades.

But at least PBS was honest enough to portray an honest summary of the effects of the New Deal. Being leftwing does not necessarily mean being wrong.

But I don't look to PBS to help us sort out the perspectives offered in the OP of this thread. PBS is much more likely to favor larger and more authoritarian government than any conservative concept; is not likely to challenge or criticize motives of the international community, and it has allowed programming just touching on the concept of moving closer to a one-world government.

From the PBS kids site (emphasis mine):

What is government and what role does it play in our lives? Why do we need government?

In its simplest form, a government determines the way in which a country, state, county, township, city, or village is run. At every level, government makes laws that citizens must obey and creates policies about everything connected with the daily life of a community—whether that community is a nation, a state or the town where you live.
PBS KIDS: The Democracy Project | My Government

You don't get anymore leftwing than that.

 

[Bfgrn]

"In fact.....they killed every anti-lynching bill that made its way to the Senate. Democrats."

No PC, the Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill (1922) was ultimately defeated by a Southern Democratic filibuster.

Those Southern Democrats were conservative, not liberal. And there was no support from Southern Republicans for the Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill.

"On June 13, 2005, in a resolution sponsored by senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and George Allen of Virginia, together with 78 others, the US Senate formally apologized for its failure to enact this and other anti-lynching bills "when action was most needed."[3] From 1882-1968, "...nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced in Congress, and three passed the House. Seven presidents between 1890 and 1952 petitioned Congress to pass a federal law."[3] None was approved by the Senate because of the powerful opposition of the Southern Democratic voting bloc"
Senate Apologizes for Not Passing Anti-Lynching Laws | Fox News



"Those Southern Democrats were conservative, not liberal."

Horsefeathers.

They were the same boilerplate Democrats that fought civil rights for a century.

Even after the Civil Rights bill, you had Democrats supporting racist rapists like Bill Clinton.

"Bill Clinton told Ted Kennedy that Obama 'would be getting us coffee' a few years ago: 'Game Change'"
Bill Clinton told Ted Kennedy that Obama 'would be getting us coffee' a few years ago: 'Game Change' - NY Daily News

From the link Foxfyre posted:

Truman's action on behalf of civil rights splintered the Democratic Party. A conservative Southern faction responded by forming the States Rights' Democratic Party, with Strom Thurmond as its presidential candidate.

Domestic Policy . Truman . WGBH American Experience | PBS

 

[Bfgrn]

'

I think you are quite naive in thinking that PBS is a "left-wing source" -- considering how much money it gets from mega-corporations, far-right propagandists like the Koch Brothers, and from prominent bankster-gangster financial institutions.

.

It receives a tremendous amount of funding from government--enough that there is no way they would want to anger anybody in government who disburse that funding. There was some criticism of David Koch sending contributions for Nova--I believe that is the Koch Bros. ONLY involvement with PBS--but the producers of Nova are adament that Nova retains its editorial integrity and is not influenced by David Koch. Most of those big mega-corporations you mention, however, are as likely or even more likely to have funded Obama's campaign as Romney's. Evenmoreso those who contribute to PBS are far more likely to be leftwingers than rightwingers.

Obama Backers Make President Top Fundraiser From Business - Bloomberg

We know PBS is slanted left because of its programming emphasis and because it fires anybody who strays off the liberal planation there. Have you ever seen a program promoting a conservative point of view of any kind? I daresay you have not seen that for decades.

But at least PBS was honest enough to portray an honest summary of the effects of the New Deal. Being leftwing does not necessarily mean being wrong.

But I don't look to PBS to help us sort out the perspectives offered in the OP of this thread. PBS is much more likely to favor larger and more authoritarian government than any conservative concept; is not likely to challenge or criticize motives of the international community, and it has allowed programming just touching on the concept of moving closer to a one-world government.

From the PBS kids site (emphasis mine):

What is government and what role does it play in our lives? Why do we need government?

In its simplest form, a government determines the way in which a country, state, county, township, city, or village is run. At every level, government makes laws that citizens must obey and creates policies about everything connected with the daily life of a community—whether that community is a nation, a state or the town where you live.
PBS KIDS: The Democracy Project | My Government

You don't get anymore leftwing than that.

There is nothing 'left wing' about the truth. Maybe a civics course would fill the void in you brain. How about such radical 'policies' like building codes? Garbage storage?? Disposal of waste products???

You right wing turds need to move to Somalia where there is little or no government.

 

[Bfgrn]

I gave you a non partisan history of the era courtesy of PBS lest you accuse me of using only partisan rightwing sources.

You have the fantasy that PBS is not a partisan Establishment source??

.

Of course it is. It clearly tilts left, favors Democrats, disfavors Republicans. But it is not a partisan rightwing source so I thought it might be acceptable to a leftwing extremist. And it did do a decent job summarizing FDR's New Deal and how that prolonged the Great Depression.

Being left of center does not automatically mean being righ tor wrong any more than being right of center automatically means being right or wrong.

Link?

 

[Oddball]

Great Myths of the Great Depression [Mackinac Center]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ta2m3D9Ig0g]Great Myths of the Great Depression! - YouTube[/ame]

 

[candycorn]

'

I think you are quite naive in thinking that PBS is a "left-wing source" -- considering how much money it gets from mega-corporations, far-right propagandists like the Koch Brothers, and from prominent bankster-gangster financial institutions.

.

It receives a tremendous amount of funding from government--enough that there is no way they would want to anger anybody in government who disburse that funding. There was some criticism of David Koch sending contributions for Nova--I believe that is the Koch Bros. ONLY involvement with PBS--but the producers of Nova are adament that Nova retains its editorial integrity and is not influenced by David Koch. Most of those big mega-corporations you mention, however, are as likely or even more likely to have funded Obama's campaign as Romney's. Evenmoreso those who contribute to PBS are far more likely to be leftwingers than rightwingers.

Obama Backers Make President Top Fundraiser From Business - Bloomberg

We know PBS is slanted left because of its programming emphasis and because it fires anybody who strays off the liberal planation there. Have you ever seen a program promoting a conservative point of view of any kind? I daresay you have not seen that for decades.

But at least PBS was honest enough to portray an honest summary of the effects of the New Deal. Being leftwing does not necessarily mean being wrong.

But I don't look to PBS to help us sort out the perspectives offered in the OP of this thread. PBS is much more likely to favor larger and more authoritarian government than any conservative concept; is not likely to challenge or criticize motives of the international community, and it has allowed programming just touching on the concept of moving closer to a one-world government.

From the PBS kids site (emphasis mine):

What is government and what role does it play in our lives? Why do we need government?

In its simplest form, a government determines the way in which a country, state, county, township, city, or village is run. At every level, government makes laws that citizens must obey and creates policies about everything connected with the daily life of a community—whether that community is a nation, a state or the town where you live.
PBS KIDS: The Democracy Project | My Government

You don't get anymore leftwing than that.

There is nothing 'left wing' about the truth. Maybe a civics course would fill the void in you brain. How about such radical 'policies' like building codes? Garbage storage?? Disposal of waste products???

You right wing turds need to move to Somalia where there is little or no government.

They would be happy there if you believe their rhetoric. Of course they have a casual relationship with the truth at best.

 

[Bfgrn]

Great Myths of the Great Depression [Mackinac Center]

Great Myths of the Great Depression! - YouTube

Holy **** Jethro, why waste your time parroting small time malfeasants of government by the people like big tobacco, you go right to the folks who want to dismantle America.

ALEC is a corporate bill mill. It is not just a lobby or a front group; it is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, corporations hand state legislators their wishlists to benefit their bottom line. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC's operations. They pay for a seat on ALEC task forces where corporate lobbyists and special interest reps vote with elected officials to approve “model” bills.

Can there be anyone on this planet more obtuse that you Jethro?

 

[Bfgrn]

It receives a tremendous amount of funding from government--enough that there is no way they would want to anger anybody in government who disburse that funding. There was some criticism of David Koch sending contributions for Nova--I believe that is the Koch Bros. ONLY involvement with PBS--but the producers of Nova are adament that Nova retains its editorial integrity and is not influenced by David Koch. Most of those big mega-corporations you mention, however, are as likely or even more likely to have funded Obama's campaign as Romney's. Evenmoreso those who contribute to PBS are far more likely to be leftwingers than rightwingers.

Obama Backers Make President Top Fundraiser From Business - Bloomberg

We know PBS is slanted left because of its programming emphasis and because it fires anybody who strays off the liberal planation there. Have you ever seen a program promoting a conservative point of view of any kind? I daresay you have not seen that for decades.

But at least PBS was honest enough to portray an honest summary of the effects of the New Deal. Being leftwing does not necessarily mean being wrong.

But I don't look to PBS to help us sort out the perspectives offered in the OP of this thread. PBS is much more likely to favor larger and more authoritarian government than any conservative concept; is not likely to challenge or criticize motives of the international community, and it has allowed programming just touching on the concept of moving closer to a one-world government.

From the PBS kids site (emphasis mine):

What is government and what role does it play in our lives? Why do we need government?



You don't get anymore leftwing than that.

There is nothing 'left wing' about the truth. Maybe a civics course would fill the void in you brain. How about such radical 'policies' like building codes? Garbage storage?? Disposal of waste products???

You right wing turds need to move to Somalia where there is little or no government.

They would be happy there if you believe their rhetoric. Of course they have a casual relationship with the truth at best.

What is amazing is how the right wing mind, which we now know is totally controlled by fear can find a 'slippery slope' in a sentence like that. Then Oddball posts a video by a think tank funded by the biggest polluters on the planet whose ONLY agenda is corporation bottom lines and the dismantling of the marketplace in their interests.

They are like people who can only look to the left when they cross the street, because they believe nothing can possibly run them over coming from the right.

A corporation does not want democracy. It does not want free markets, it wants profits, and the best way for it to get profits is to use our campaign-finance system -- which is just a system of legalized bribery -- to get their stakes, their hooks into a public official and then use that public official to dismantle the marketplace to give them a competitive advantage and then to privatize the commons, to steal the commonwealth, to liquidate public assets for cash, to plunder, to steal from the rest of us.

Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, said that America would never be destroyed by a foreign power but he warned that our political institutions, our democratic institutions, would be subverted by malefactors of great wealth, who would erode them from within. Dwight Eisenhower, another Republican, in his most famous speech, warned America against domination by the military industrial complex.

Abraham Lincoln, the greatest Republican in our history, said during the height of the Civil War "I have the South in front of me and I have the bankers behind me. And for my country, I fear the bankers more." Franklin Roosevelt said during World War II that the domination of government by corporate power is "the essence of fascism" and Benito Mussolini -- who had an insider's view of that process -- said the same thing. Essentially, he complained that fascism should not be called fascism. It should be called corporatism because it was the merger of state and corporate power. And what we have to understand as Americans is that the domination of business by government is called communism. The domination of government by business is called fascism. And our job is to walk that narrow trail in between, which is free-market capitalism and democracy. And keep big government at bay with our right hand and corporate power at bay with our left.

 

[Meister]

There is nothing 'left wing' about the truth. Maybe a civics course would fill the void in you brain. How about such radical 'policies' like building codes? Garbage storage?? Disposal of waste products???

You right wing turds need to move to Somalia where there is little or no government.

They would be happy there if you believe their rhetoric. Of course they have a casual relationship with the truth at best.

What is amazing is how the right wing mind, which we now know is totally controlled by fear can find a 'slippery slope' in a sentence like that. Then Oddball posts a video by a think tank funded by the biggest polluters on the planet whose ONLY agenda is corporation bottom lines and the dismantling of the marketplace in their interests.

They are like people who can only look to the left when they cross the street, because they believe nothing can possibly run them over coming from the right.

A corporation does not want democracy. It does not want free markets, it wants profits, and the best way for it to get profits is to use our campaign-finance system -- which is just a system of legalized bribery -- to get their stakes, their hooks into a public official and then use that public official to dismantle the marketplace to give them a competitive advantage and then to privatize the commons, to steal the commonwealth, to liquidate public assets for cash, to plunder, to steal from the rest of us.

Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, said that America would never be destroyed by a foreign power but he warned that our political institutions, our democratic institutions, would be subverted by malefactors of great wealth, who would erode them from within. Dwight Eisenhower, another Republican, in his most famous speech, warned America against domination by the military industrial complex.

Abraham Lincoln, the greatest Republican in our history, said during the height of the Civil War "I have the South in front of me and I have the bankers behind me. And for my country, I fear the bankers more." Franklin Roosevelt said during World War II that the domination of government by corporate power is "the essence of fascism" and Benito Mussolini -- who had an insider's view of that process -- said the same thing. Essentially, he complained that fascism should not be called fascism. It should be called corporatism because it was the merger of state and corporate power. And what we have to understand as Americans is that the domination of business by government is called communism. The domination of government by business is called fascism. And our job is to walk that narrow trail in between, which is free-market capitalism and democracy. And keep big government at bay with our right hand and corporate power at bay with our left.

I just couldn't get past the part that I bolded....I just had to laugh.
Wasn't it Obama that played the fear mongering with how the sequester would make the sky fall?
Yup, when I read your posts, they just reek of hypocrisy.


just an observation

 

[Oddball]

Great Myths of the Great Depression [Mackinac Center]

Great Myths of the Great Depression! - YouTube

Holy **** Jethro, why waste your time parroting small time malfeasants of government by the people like big tobacco, you go right to the folks who want to dismantle America.

ALEC is a corporate bill mill. It is not just a lobby or a front group; it is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, corporations hand state legislators their wishlists to benefit their bottom line. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC's operations. They pay for a seat on ALEC task forces where corporate lobbyists and special interest reps vote with elected officials to approve “model” bills.

Can there be anyone on this planet more obtuse that you Jethro?

See: Ad homenim.

Bravo.

 

[candycorn]

They would be happy there if you believe their rhetoric. Of course they have a casual relationship with the truth at best.

What is amazing is how the right wing mind, which we now know is totally controlled by fear can find a 'slippery slope' in a sentence like that. Then Oddball posts a video by a think tank funded by the biggest polluters on the planet whose ONLY agenda is corporation bottom lines and the dismantling of the marketplace in their interests.

They are like people who can only look to the left when they cross the street, because they believe nothing can possibly run them over coming from the right.

A corporation does not want democracy. It does not want free markets, it wants profits, and the best way for it to get profits is to use our campaign-finance system -- which is just a system of legalized bribery -- to get their stakes, their hooks into a public official and then use that public official to dismantle the marketplace to give them a competitive advantage and then to privatize the commons, to steal the commonwealth, to liquidate public assets for cash, to plunder, to steal from the rest of us.

Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, said that America would never be destroyed by a foreign power but he warned that our political institutions, our democratic institutions, would be subverted by malefactors of great wealth, who would erode them from within. Dwight Eisenhower, another Republican, in his most famous speech, warned America against domination by the military industrial complex.

Abraham Lincoln, the greatest Republican in our history, said during the height of the Civil War "I have the South in front of me and I have the bankers behind me. And for my country, I fear the bankers more." Franklin Roosevelt said during World War II that the domination of government by corporate power is "the essence of fascism" and Benito Mussolini -- who had an insider's view of that process -- said the same thing. Essentially, he complained that fascism should not be called fascism. It should be called corporatism because it was the merger of state and corporate power. And what we have to understand as Americans is that the domination of business by government is called communism. The domination of government by business is called fascism. And our job is to walk that narrow trail in between, which is free-market capitalism and democracy. And keep big government at bay with our right hand and corporate power at bay with our left.

I just couldn't get past the part that I bolded....I just had to laugh.
Wasn't it Obama that played the fear mongering with how the sequester would make the sky fall?
Yup, when I read your posts, they just reek of hypocrisy.


just an observation

Okay...lets go there.

Explain the right wing opposition to equal rights for same sex marriages?

 

[Dot Com]

why do PoliChics OP's all look like 3rd rate rw term paper outlines?

 

[Dot Com]

They would be happy there if you believe their rhetoric. Of course they have a casual relationship with the truth at best.

What is amazing is how the right wing mind, which we now know is totally controlled by fear can find a 'slippery slope' in a sentence like that. Then Oddball posts a video by a think tank funded by the biggest polluters on the planet whose ONLY agenda is corporation bottom lines and the dismantling of the marketplace in their interests.

They are like people who can only look to the left when they cross the street, because they believe nothing can possibly run them over coming from the right.

A corporation does not want democracy. It does not want free markets, it wants profits, and the best way for it to get profits is to use our campaign-finance system -- which is just a system of legalized bribery -- to get their stakes, their hooks into a public official and then use that public official to dismantle the marketplace to give them a competitive advantage and then to privatize the commons, to steal the commonwealth, to liquidate public assets for cash, to plunder, to steal from the rest of us.

Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, said that America would never be destroyed by a foreign power but he warned that our political institutions, our democratic institutions, would be subverted by malefactors of great wealth, who would erode them from within. Dwight Eisenhower, another Republican, in his most famous speech, warned America against domination by the military industrial complex.

Abraham Lincoln, the greatest Republican in our history, said during the height of the Civil War "I have the South in front of me and I have the bankers behind me. And for my country, I fear the bankers more." Franklin Roosevelt said during World War II that the domination of government by corporate power is "the essence of fascism" and Benito Mussolini -- who had an insider's view of that process -- said the same thing. Essentially, he complained that fascism should not be called fascism. It should be called corporatism because it was the merger of state and corporate power. And what we have to understand as Americans is that the domination of business by government is called communism. The domination of government by business is called fascism. And our job is to walk that narrow trail in between, which is free-market capitalism and democracy. And keep big government at bay with our right hand and corporate power at bay with our left.

I just couldn't get past the part that I bolded....I just had to laugh.
Wasn't it Obama that played the fear mongering with how the sequester would make the sky fall?
Yup, when I read your posts, they just reek of hypocrisy.


just an observation

the irony is delicious here considering the repubs ran on fear in 2004 Remember Condi & Dick saying "vote for us or see a mushroom cloud" campaign. Repubs