Who's to Blame: Big Government or Big Business?

[Dante]

The Tea Party started as a populist movement to oppose big government, but it's been co-opted and funded by the Koch Brothers and has become a tool of an extremist right wing, anti-union agenda to oppose any new taxes on the wealthy.

ever hear of astroturfing?

 

[Dragonlady]

This pretension that you can support the TEA Party but also support tax increases and big unions is entertaining.

The Tea Party started out opposing big corporations AND big government. Now they favour big corporations.

The Koch Brothers oppose aren't as opposed to big government as they are opposed to unions, workers' rights, and benefits paid to their workers. They are using the Tea Party movement to support government policies which will put more money in THEIR pockets, and less money into the low paid workers who slave in their casinos on their behalf.

Much of what the Tea Party originally stood for has been removed from their platform in favour of the pro-corporate agenda favoured by the Koch Brothers.

The Koch Brothers are not out to improve the economy, or the country. They are simply out to increase their own wealth. That they would spend 150 million dollars to elect politicians friendly to their personal agenda tells you just how much money they stand to gain.

 

[georgephillip]

I can tell you one thing: you sir are NO Einstein

Neither of your statements are true

"The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs told Morley Safer of 60 Minutes and CBS News:
Look, if you think any American official is going to tell you the truth, then you’re stupid. Did you hear that? — stupid"

Albert Einstein: ?A Foolish Faith In Authority Is The Worst Enemy Of The Truth? | Global Research

You too like others confused about words and terms and how they are used in specific contexts?

"Faith in authority" no one I know has 'faith' in authority. Not these days.

context: Speaking to Reporters/The Press - The Vietnam War and the year 1966(?) Has Morley Safer Ever Told John Miller This Story?: "Look, If You Think Any American Official Is Going to Tell You the Truth, Then You're Stupid" | MichaelMoore.com

ABOUT THE ARTICLE

Arthur Sylvester, assistant secretary of defense in charge of public affairs, said Wednesday that no government official should lie when giving out information about the country.

He said it was all right to withhold information to safeguard the country. He was testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. This article is one correspondent's report of Sylvester's statement about truth in public affairs one year ago.

THIS article is excerpted from "Dateline 1966: Covering War," a publication of the Overseas Press Club of America.

---

your lack of critical thinking skills is frightening

"In August, 1965 Safer appeared in what became one of most famous TV segments of the Vietnam War, showing U.S. troops setting fire to all the huts in a Vietnamese village with Zippo lighters and flamethrowers.

"A year later in 1966, Safer wrote an article about what he'd seen firsthand during a visit to Vietnam by Arthur Sylvester, then Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs (i.e., the head of Pentagon PR). Sylvester met with reporters for U.S. news outlets at the U.S. Embassy in Saigon:

"There was general opening banter, which Sylvester quickly brushed aside. He seemed anxious to take a stand—to say something that would jar us. He said:

"'I can't understand how you fellows can write what you do while American boys are dying out here,' he began. Then he went on to the effect that American correspondents had a patriotic duty to disseminate only information that made the United States look good.

"A network television correspondent said, 'Surely, Arthur, you don't expect the American press to be the handmaidens of government.'

"'That's exactly what I expect,' came the reply.

"An agency man raised the problem that had preoccupied Ambassador Maxwell Taylor and Barry Zorthian—about the credibility of American officials. Responded the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs:

"'Look, if you think any American official is going to tell you the truth, then you're stupid. Did you hear that?—stupid.'

"One of the most respected of all the newsmen in Vietnam—a veteran of World War II, the Indochina War and Korea—suggested that Sylvester was being deliberately provocative. Sylvester replied:

"'Look, I don't even have to talk to you people. I know how to deal with you through your editors and publishers back in the States.'

"At this point, the Hon. Arthur Sylvester put his thumbs in his ears, bulged his eyes, stuck out his tongue and wiggled his fingers."

Your link.

 

[Abishai100]

Strange Bedfellows

Ironically it does seem that in the modern world business and politics are strange bedfellows. The international successes of the Korean electronics company Samsung and the Korean airline company Korean Air have opened up new doors of negotiation between democratic America and communist North Korea. Indeed, relevant North and South Korea 'intrigue' have made the region in some ways as 'hot' for the global free market as Hong Kong has been in recent years for USA-China negotiations.

Big Business and Big Government have comparable obligations in our age of mercantilism-catalyzed globalization (i.e., eTrade) and resultant culture contact (i.e., European Union).


We already know that past daredevils such as Jimmy Hoffa (Teamsters) picked up on this post-Industrialization trend, perhaps with sometimes problematic implications.

Why do we make Hollywood (USA) movies such as "King of New York" (1990) anyway?





King of New York - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[georgephillip]

Strange Bedfellows

Ironically it does seem that in the modern world business and politics are strange bedfellows. The international successes of the Korean electronics company Samsung and the Korean airline company Korean Air have opened up new doors of negotiation between democratic America and communist North Korea. Indeed, relevant North and South Korea 'intrigue' have made the region in some ways as 'hot' for the global free market as Hong Kong has been in recent years for USA-China negotiations.

Big Business and Big Government have comparable obligations in our age of mercantilism-catalyzed globalization (i.e., eTrade) and resultant culture contact (i.e., European Union).


We already know that past daredevils such as Jimmy Hoffa (Teamsters) picked up on this post-Industrialization trend, perhaps with sometimes problematic implications.

Why do we make Hollywood (USA) movies such as "King of New York" (1990) anyway?





King of New York - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


View attachment 32551

Because Hollywood is part of "The Big Ripoff?"
"Praise for THE BIG RIPOFF

"Politicians like to say that government is on the side of the little guy. But with impressive documentation and persuasive examples, Tim Carney shows how government power and regulation are typically used to assist the powerful."

"-Paul A. Gigot Editorial Page Editor, the Wall Street Journal

Every government since the first has served its richest citizens at the expense of its majority; the solution would seem to involve erecting a "wall of separation" between government and the influence of private wealth.

Amazon.com The Big Ripoff How Big Business and Big Government Steal Your Money 9780471789079 Timothy P. Carney Books

 

[bripat9643]

This pretension that you can support the TEA Party but also support tax increases and big unions is entertaining.

The Tea Party started out opposing big corporations AND big government. Now they favour big corporations.

How do they favor big corporations? Mandatory labor unions are the right arm of big government, so it's absurd to claim opposing them means they favor big government.

The Koch Brothers oppose aren't as opposed to big government as they are opposed to unions, workers' rights, and benefits paid to their workers. They are using the Tea Party movement to support government policies which will put more money in THEIR pockets, and less money into the low paid workers who slave in their casinos on their behalf.

Liberal propaganda. Everything liberals say about the Koch brothers is obvious horseshit. They hate the Kock brothers because they hate anyone who actually does anything to whittle down the size of government.

Much of what the Tea Party originally stood for has been removed from their platform in favour of the pro-corporate agenda favoured by the Koch Brothers.

Provide one example. I mean a specific example, not the vague generalities you constantly spew into the forum.

The Koch Brothers are not out to improve the economy, or the country. They are simply out to increase their own wealth. That they would spend 150 million dollars to elect politicians friendly to their personal agenda tells you just how much money they stand to gain.

Why would the Koch brothers want to harm our country? They have to live here. They get wealthier only when the economy grows. Your criticism of the Koch brothers applies to every fat cat leftwing donor that you are strangely mum about.

 

[JoeNormal]

[

Why would the Koch brothers want to harm our country? They have to live here. They get wealthier only when the economy grows. Your criticism of the Koch brothers applies to every fat cat leftwing donor that you are strangely mum about.

OMG, could you be any more idiotic? They don't have to live here. And especially not with thr riff raff. They live in any of a dozen homes with the finest security. And if the environment here became too threatening, they could retreat to a gated compound in a part of the world that would be all too happy to provide them with military assistance.

 

[Mac1958]

We The People are to blame for allowing money to control politics, for electing and re-electing dishonest, narcissistic thugs.

 

[candycorn]

[

Why would the Koch brothers want to harm our country? They have to live here. They get wealthier only when the economy grows. Your criticism of the Koch brothers applies to every fat cat leftwing donor that you are strangely mum about.

OMG, could you be any more idiotic? They don't have to live here. And especially not with thr riff raff. They live in any of a dozen homes with the finest security. And if the environment here became too threatening, they could retreat to a gated compound in a part of the world that would be all too happy to provide them with military assistance.

It's also incorrect that an economy has to expand for actors in the enterprise to make a profit.

 

[JoeNormal]

[

Why would the Koch brothers want to harm our country? They have to live here. They get wealthier only when the economy grows. Your criticism of the Koch brothers applies to every fat cat leftwing donor that you are strangely mum about.

OMG, could you be any more idiotic? They don't have to live here. And especially not with thr riff raff. They live in any of a dozen homes with the finest security. And if the environment here became too threatening, they could retreat to a gated compound in a part of the world that would be all too happy to provide them with military assistance.

It's also incorrect that an economy has to expand for actors in the enterprise to make a profit.

Absolutely correct. And we're currently in 'squeeze' mode.

 

[bripat9643]

[

Why would the Koch brothers want to harm our country? They have to live here. They get wealthier only when the economy grows. Your criticism of the Koch brothers applies to every fat cat leftwing donor that you are strangely mum about.

OMG, could you be any more idiotic? They don't have to live here. And especially not with thr riff raff. They live in any of a dozen homes with the finest security. And if the environment here became too threatening, they could retreat to a gated compound in a part of the world that would be all too happy to provide them with military assistance.

It's also incorrect that an economy has to expand for actors in the enterprise to make a profit.

Absolutely correct. And we're currently in 'squeeze' mode.

It's bullshit. Perhaps some businesses can make profits, but in general a stagnant economy means that businesses are not growing, and they are therefore not earning profits.

The "squeeze mode" is purely the result of Obama's anti-capitalist policies.

 

[bripat9643]

We The People are to blame for allowing money to control politics, for electing and re-electing dishonest, narcissistic thugs.

That's how democracy works. Your objection seems to be with democracy itself.

 

[Wry Catcher]

This pretension that you can support the TEA Party but also support tax increases and big unions is entertaining.

The Tea Party started out opposing big corporations AND big government. Now they favour big corporations.

How do they favor big corporations? Mandatory labor unions are the right arm of big government, so it's absurd to claim opposing them means they favor big government.

The Koch Brothers oppose aren't as opposed to big government as they are opposed to unions, workers' rights, and benefits paid to their workers. They are using the Tea Party movement to support government policies which will put more money in THEIR pockets, and less money into the low paid workers who slave in their casinos on their behalf.

Liberal propaganda. Everything liberals say about the Koch brothers is obvious horseshit. They hate the Kock brothers because they hate anyone who actually does anything to whittle down the size of government.

Much of what the Tea Party originally stood for has been removed from their platform in favour of the pro-corporate agenda favoured by the Koch Brothers.

Provide one example. I mean a specific example, not the vague generalities you constantly spew into the forum.

The Koch Brothers are not out to improve the economy, or the country. They are simply out to increase their own wealth. That they would spend 150 million dollars to elect politicians friendly to their personal agenda tells you just how much money they stand to gain.

Why would the Koch brothers want to harm our country? They have to live here. They get wealthier only when the economy grows. Your criticism of the Koch brothers applies to every fat cat leftwing donor that you are strangely mum about.

Greed has no other intent, greed and the lust for power; They are an end in themselves and there be no other agenda (such as harm to our country).

Why do the Koch Brothers entertain Scalia and Thomas, and why do Scalia and Thomas seek their 'friendship'? And why are the Justices of the Supreme Court the only American Judges not bound to a Code of Ethics (Gee, a Life-Time Appointment and no means to hold them accountable - Slick)?

 

[georgephillip]

We The People are to blame for allowing money to control politics, for electing and re-electing dishonest, narcissistic thugs.

That's how democracy works. Your objection seems to be with democracy itself.

What's your alternative to a political system that allows all eligible members of a state electing their representatives?

 

[bripat9643]

We The People are to blame for allowing money to control politics, for electing and re-electing dishonest, narcissistic thugs.

That's how democracy works. Your objection seems to be with democracy itself.

What's your alternative to a political system that allows all eligible members of a state electing their representatives?

Abolish the political system. Government is inherently corrupt, especially democracy. It can't be reformed.

 

[occupied]

This pretension that you can support the TEA Party but also support tax increases and big unions is entertaining.

The Tea Party started out opposing big corporations AND big government. Now they favour big corporations.

How do they favor big corporations? Mandatory labor unions are the right arm of big government, so it's absurd to claim opposing them means they favor big government.

The Koch Brothers oppose aren't as opposed to big government as they are opposed to unions, workers' rights, and benefits paid to their workers. They are using the Tea Party movement to support government policies which will put more money in THEIR pockets, and less money into the low paid workers who slave in their casinos on their behalf.

Liberal propaganda. Everything liberals say about the Koch brothers is obvious horseshit. They hate the Kock brothers because they hate anyone who actually does anything to whittle down the size of government.

Much of what the Tea Party originally stood for has been removed from their platform in favour of the pro-corporate agenda favoured by the Koch Brothers.

Provide one example. I mean a specific example, not the vague generalities you constantly spew into the forum.

The Koch Brothers are not out to improve the economy, or the country. They are simply out to increase their own wealth. That they would spend 150 million dollars to elect politicians friendly to their personal agenda tells you just how much money they stand to gain.

Why would the Koch brothers want to harm our country? They have to live here. They get wealthier only when the economy grows. Your criticism of the Koch brothers applies to every fat cat leftwing donor that you are strangely mum about.

Greed has no other intent, greed and the lust for power; They are an end in themselves and there be no other agenda (such as harm to our country).

Why do the Koch Brothers entertain Scalia and Thomas, and why do Scalia and Thomas seek their 'friendship'? And why are the Justices of the Supreme Court the only American Judges not bound to a Code of Ethics (Gee, a Life-Time Appointment and no means to hold them accountable - Slick)?

I disagree, I believe the Koch brothers are after a kind of immortality by putting their twisted ideological stamp on American politics far beyond their lifetimes. All very rich men start thinking about their legacy when they start getting old, too bad they can't be satisfied with apolitical arts and culture endowments.

 

[georgephillip]

We The People are to blame for allowing money to control politics, for electing and re-electing dishonest, narcissistic thugs.

That's how democracy works. Your objection seems to be with democracy itself.

What's your alternative to a political system that allows all eligible members of a state electing their representatives?

Abolish the political system. Government is inherently corrupt, especially democracy. It can't be reformed.

What will you replace Government with?

 

[Mac1958]

We The People are to blame for allowing money to control politics, for electing and re-electing dishonest, narcissistic thugs.

That's how democracy works. Your objection seems to be with democracy itself.

That assumes that the rules in our system are the only choices we have.

That's not true.

 

[Wry Catcher]

We The People are to blame for allowing money to control politics, for electing and re-electing dishonest, narcissistic thugs.

That's how democracy works. Your objection seems to be with democracy itself.

What's your alternative to a political system that allows all eligible members of a state electing their representatives?

Abolish the political system. Government is inherently corrupt, especially democracy. It can't be reformed.

Why not leave the United States and organize a militia of free-market anarchists and takeover a small country, maybe in Africa. You could tame the population, pay them 'slave' wages and without government and the rule of law live like kings.

No regulations, no EPA, FBI, CDC or other alphabet agencies to get in your way, no laws preventing anything, and no means of enforcement other than the power of your gun.

 

[bripat9643]

We The People are to blame for allowing money to control politics, for electing and re-electing dishonest, narcissistic thugs.

That's how democracy works. Your objection seems to be with democracy itself.

What's your alternative to a political system that allows all eligible members of a state electing their representatives?

Abolish the political system. Government is inherently corrupt, especially democracy. It can't be reformed.

What will you replace Government with?

The Idea of a Private Law Society - Hans-Hermann Hoppe - Mises Daily