And Obama said ‘No’
May 22nd, 2008 9:55 pm · 53 comments
Via Sullivan:
The Field can now confirm, based on multiple sources, something that both campaigns publicly deny: that Senator Clinton has directly told Senator Obama that she wants to be his vice presidential nominee, and that Senator Obama politely but straightforwardly and irrevocably said “no.” Obama is going to pick his own running mate based on his own criteria and vetting process.
That, Giordano says, explains Hillary’s comments in Florida yesterday. Too bad in one respect, as I do think Obama-Hillary would be a strong ticket; but you can obviously see why Obama wants to, you know, pick his own running mate.
Share and Enjoy:
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Tags: Obama · Hillary
There are currently 53 comments on this blog postView Topic | Comment on this blogcharlie_crystle 5/23/08 12:23 AM | QUOTE(Lancaster Online @ May 22 2008, 10:00 PM) [snapback]392730[/snapback]
Post your thoughts and comments about this blog post.
Yes, so hard to understand ... http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=92253
|
mam0412 5/23/08 9:02 AM | I think an Obama/Clinton ticket would be a disaster. Obama has the ability to draw moderate Republicans to him. Hillary does not and would take that ability away from Obama if she were on the ticket. The only thing it would do would provide unity for the Democrats, but I find it hard to believe a Democrat would vote for McCain anyway. Should the ticket win, it provides nothing in terms of actually running the country. |
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 9:19 AM | Obama can't run as a change candidate with Hillary on the ticket. At his Lancaster Amtrak speech, he belittled her for opposing NAFTA now, when her husband signed it into law.
The biggest problem in our gov't today is insiders working the system to benefit their interests, not ours. The tax code is rigged to benefit the rich and super-rich. Lobbyists & PACs pay Congress to enact legislation which benefits their supporters, at pennies on the dollar. We invaded Iraq to benefit oil companies and military contractors.
As the saying goes, "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention"
|
Pericles 5/23/08 9:50 AM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 09:19 AM) [snapback]392837[/snapback] Obama can't run as a change candidate with Hillary on the ticket. At his Lancaster Amtrak speech, he belittled her for opposing NAFTA now, when her husband signed it into law.
As the saying goes, "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention"
Would that be comparable to Obama now being an advocate for the Second Amendment? Or Obama being the Great Conciliator, even though he never reaches across the aisle in the senate?
Selective outrage?
You guys view Obama as some messiah, when he's just another politician, albeit a politician who gives a good speech. |
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 9:59 AM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 09:50 AM) [snapback]392857[/snapback] Selective outrage? Relax, it's only money. What's it matter when all the saved folk will be gone and us heathens will be left to clean up the mess they left behind.
|
Pericles 5/23/08 10:07 AM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 09:59 AM) [snapback]392862[/snapback] Relax, it's only money. What's it matter when all the saved folk will be gone and us heathens will be left to clean up the mess they left behind.
When they're gone you'll have no one to blame for your woes. Wait, I've read that book, I know what happens after Farmer Jones is gone.
|
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 11:32 AM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 10:07 AM) [snapback]392864[/snapback]
When they're gone you'll have no one to blame for your woes. Wait, I've read that book, I know what happens after Farmer Jones is gone. For my woes. What part of a gov't that is effectivly operating as an oligarchy, for the rich by the rich, don't you understand?
Who's farmer Jones?
|
dragonrider 5/23/08 11:36 AM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 11:32 AM) [snapback]392928[/snapback] For my woes. What part of a gov't that is effectivly operating a an oligarchy, for the rich by the rich, don't you understand?
Who's farmer Jones?
Why Farmer Jones is that corporate farmer who is going to get a million dollar check from the new Farm Bill. |
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 11:42 AM | QUOTE(dragonrider @ May 23 2008, 11:36 AM) [snapback]392931[/snapback] Why Farmer Jones is that corporate farmer who is going to get a million dollar check from the new Farm Bill. That's just one of his aliases. He's (the corporate farm entity) is probably getting 25 $1M checks under different names.
|
Bigby_M 5/23/08 11:44 AM | QUOTE(dragonrider @ May 23 2008, 11:36 AM) [snapback]392931[/snapback] Why Farmer Jones is that corporate farmer who is going to get a million dollar check from the new Farm Bill.
There are a lot of farmers right here getting fat checks but the wingers don't dare speak up.
It's easier to pick on the down and out.
So where are the free marketeers when it comes to Lancaster Co. republican farmers feeding at the trough?
Did I hear someone mention selective outrage??
|
Pericles 5/23/08 11:49 AM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 11:32 AM) [snapback]392928[/snapback] For my woes. What part of a gov't that is effectivly operating as an oligarchy, for the rich by the rich, don't you understand?
Who's farmer Jones?
I understand that communism, facism, socialism and marxism don't offer better alternatives to capitalism. They've been tried and failed, or are failing, miserably. As imperfect as we are, and all governments, I think we could do a lot worse.
Farmer Jones from Animal House.
QUOTE(dragonrider @ May 23 2008, 11:36 AM) [snapback]392931[/snapback] Why Farmer Jones is that corporate farmer who is going to get a million dollar check from the new Farm Bill.
The one that George Bush (lookin' out for the rich) vetoed? That farm bill?
QUOTE(Bigby_M @ May 23 2008, 11:44 AM) [snapback]392938[/snapback] So where are the free marketeers when it comes to Lancaster Co. republican farmers feeding at the trough?
So you're knowledgeable of Lancaster County farm subsidies? Tell us what subsidies local farmers are receiving.
|
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 11:59 AM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 11:49 AM) [snapback]392941[/snapback] I understand that communism, facism, socialism and marxism don't offer better alternatives to capitalism. They've been tried and failed, or are failing, miserably. As imperfect as we are, and all governments, I think we could do a lot worse. Myself & many others think we could do a lot better. We had a capitalist system at one time. We're in the midst of another gilded age.
|
Pericles 5/23/08 12:09 PM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 11:59 AM) [snapback]392944[/snapback] We had a capitalist system at one time.
When was that?
QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 11:59 AM) [snapback]392944[/snapback] Myself & many others think we could do a lot better.
Right. Except the main idea for doing better is simply electing a different party. Of course the same crap continues to happen, but then it doesn't seem so bad, which tells me that "many" people aren't all that concerned about doing better.
|
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 12:17 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 12:09 PM) [snapback]392949[/snapback] electing a different party. Of course the same crap continues to happen, but then it doesn't seem so bad, which tells me that "many" people aren't all that concerned about doing better. It all depends on who is doing better and who is doing worse.
Notice I haven't changed my signature line in years. What part of gov't for the people by the people is untenable?
|
dragonrider 5/23/08 12:41 PM | Socialism seems to be doing ok in Europe. What part of "Commonwealth" of Pa don't you understand. Get it "Commonwealth" = Socialism |
Milton 5/23/08 12:54 PM | QUOTE(dragonrider @ May 23 2008, 12:41 PM) [snapback]392988[/snapback] Socialism seems to be doing ok in Europe. What part of "Commonwealth" of Pa don't you understand. Get it "Commonwealth" = Socialism
I really hope you are kidding!
|
Pericles 5/23/08 1:21 PM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 12:17 PM) [snapback]392962[/snapback]
Notice I haven't changed my signature line in years. What part of gov't for the people by the people is untenable?
You joined in 04. How many administrations has that been? |
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 1:47 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 01:21 PM) [snapback]393018[/snapback] You joined in 04. How many administrations has that been? As many as it takes to dismantle the pay-to-play system.
QUOTE(dragonrider) Socialism seems to be doing ok in Europe. They're doing very well. The EU replaced US as the world's largest economy, earlier this year. Their tax rates are lower, gov't provides more.
|
2fat2ride 5/23/08 1:57 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 11:49 AM) [snapback]392941[/snapback] I understand that communism, facism, socialism and marxism don't offer better alternatives to capitalism. They've been tried and failed, or are failing, miserably. As imperfect as we are, and all governments, I think we could do a lot worse.
Depends on who you are, current account balances of central government:
#1 = China = $ 363,300,000,000
# 164 (last) = USA = $ -747,100,000,000
I'm not saying I want to live in a communist country, I'm just saying...that is a trillion dollars...for a capitalist country, we haven't exactly mastered the concept.
|
Milton 5/23/08 1:58 PM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 01:47 PM) [snapback]393025[/snapback] As many as it takes to dismantle the pay-to-play system. They're doing very well. The EU replaced US as the world's largest economy, earlier this year. Their tax rates are lower, gov't provides more.
They are not all socialist, and the ones that are are social democracies with HUGE welfare states and HUGE taxes. Moreover, their cost of livinging is typically 25-30% higher than ours and have historically had signigicantly higher unemployment rates.
|
Bigby_M 5/23/08 2:14 PM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 01:47 PM) [snapback]393025[/snapback] As many as it takes to dismantle the pay-to-play system. They're doing very well. The EU replaced US as the world's largest economy, earlier this year. Their tax rates are lower, gov't provides more.
Ireland is in the midst of a tech boom because anyone who wants to gets a university education. They get universal healthcare as well.
All we get is a used war and a few trillion in debt that pericles will help to repay .
|
Pericles 5/23/08 2:14 PM | QUOTE(2fat2ride @ May 23 2008, 01:57 PM) [snapback]393027[/snapback]
Depends on who you are, current account balances of central government:
#1 = China = $ 363,300,000,000
# 164 (last) = USA = $ -747,100,000,000
I'm not saying I want to live in a communist country, I'm just saying...that is a trillion dollars...for a capitalist country, we haven't exactly mastered the concept.
Would you trade your freedom of speech for a $1 million?
|
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 2:15 PM | QUOTE(Milton @ May 23 2008, 01:58 PM) [snapback]393028[/snapback]
They are not all socialist, and the ones that are are social democracies with HUGE welfare states and HUGE taxes. Moreover, their cost of livinging is typically 25-30% higher than ours and have historically had signigicantly higher unemployment rates.
Yea, but they get 5 weeks vacation every year.
We're a HUGE tax system, it's all in what you report as income and exploiting the loopholes, can you say charitable trust fund. It's all perfectly legal under existing tax code, implemented since 83 by D & Rs alike.
The middle class pays the bulk of the taxes in this country. We're seeing diminished return on investment in gov't. The tax burden is being shifted to state & local governments.
|
dragonrider 5/23/08 2:16 PM | QUOTE(Milton @ May 23 2008, 01:58 PM) [snapback]393028[/snapback]
They are not all socialist, and the ones that are are social democracies with HUGE welfare states and HUGE taxes. Moreover, their cost of livinging is typically 25-30% higher than ours and have historically had signigicantly higher unemployment rates.
can you cite your sources and statistics? |
Bigby_M 5/23/08 2:16 PM | QUOTE(2fat2ride @ May 23 2008, 01:57 PM) [snapback]393027[/snapback]
Depends on who you are, current account balances of central government:
#1 = China = $ 363,300,000,000
# 164 (last) = USA = $ -747,100,000,000
I'm not saying I want to live in a communist country, I'm just saying...that is a trillion dollars...for a capitalist country, we haven't exactly mastered the concept.
The republicans have. That's why they have transferred all that wealth to the wealthy.
And people like Pericles fell for it.
When he gets the bill he'll blame Obama.
|
Pericles 5/23/08 2:18 PM | QUOTE(Bigby_M @ May 23 2008, 02:14 PM) [snapback]393034[/snapback]
All we get is a used war and a few trillion in debt that pericles will help to repay .
At last I'm helping to fund something worth paying for.
|
Bigby_M 5/23/08 2:18 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:14 PM) [snapback]393035[/snapback]
Would you trade your freedom of speech for a $1 million?
How much did you get for habeas corpus?
|
dragonrider 5/23/08 2:18 PM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 02:15 PM) [snapback]393036[/snapback] Yea, but they get 5 weeks vacation every year. We're a HUGE tax system, it's all in what you report as income and exploiting the loopholes, can you say charitable trust fund. It's all perfectly legal under existing tax code, implemented since 83 by D & Rs alike. The middle class pays the bulk of the taxes in this country. We're seeing diminished return on investment in gov't. The tax burden is being shifted to state & local governments. One thing I agree with McBush and Huckanutjob on is replacing the Income tax system with VAT as long as there is a way of returning tax collected to the impoverished. |
Pericles 5/23/08 2:19 PM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 02:15 PM) [snapback]393036[/snapback] The middle class pays the bulk of the taxes in this country.
That is incorrect.
|
mam0412 5/23/08 2:25 PM | QUOTE(Milton @ May 23 2008, 01:58 PM) [snapback]393028[/snapback] They are not all socialist, and the ones that are are social democracies with HUGE welfare states and HUGE taxes. Moreover, their cost of livinging is typically 25-30% higher than ours and have historically had signigicantly higher unemployment rates.
And you don't think our cost of living and unemployment rates are heading much higher? It's globalization at it finest. I think it's at least worth studying the EU.
|
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 2:25 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:19 PM) [snapback]393043[/snapback] That is incorrect. Let me qualify it, the middle class pays the bulk of overall taxes in this country. The rich pay the most income taxes on reported income. It all boils down to what's reported as income. How else would billionaires and their secretaries BOTH pay 15%. Accept it or remain blissfully unaware & happy.
|
Pericles 5/23/08 2:40 PM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 02:25 PM) [snapback]393050[/snapback] Let me qualify it, the middle class pays the bulk of overall taxes in this country. The rich pay the most income taxes on reported income. It all boils down to what's reported as income. How else would billionaires and their secretaries BOTH pay 15%. Accept it or remain blissfully unaware & happy.
Then the billionaire pays $150 million and his secretary pays $15 thousand. Yep, it's the same.
http://www.american.com/archive/2007/novem...-pays-the-taxes
QUOTE(Bigby_M @ May 23 2008, 02:18 PM) [snapback]393040[/snapback]
How much did you get for habeas corpus?
The lives of some innocent terrorism victims.
|
2fat2ride 5/23/08 2:42 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:18 PM) [snapback]393039[/snapback] At last I'm helping to fund something worth paying for.
Hah. Now that's funny hawkish fundamentalist rationality fer ya. Neither the war nor the debt incurred is getting us anything except a very bad rep as imperialists and a lot of enemies...oh yeah, and a whole bunch of dead guys, both 'mericans and irackees.
You are funding a war machine. Nothing more, nothing less.
I want a peace machine.
|
Pericles 5/23/08 2:51 PM | QUOTE(2fat2ride @ May 23 2008, 02:42 PM) [snapback]393058[/snapback]
You are funding a war machine. Nothing more, nothing less.
I want a peace machine.
A peace machine is a war machine at rest. But you don't want to fund that either.
|
2fat2ride 5/23/08 2:58 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:40 PM) [snapback]393056[/snapback]
Ahhh..quoting material found in a neo-con rag?...oh that's rich...
should be easy enough to dissect...
Rule of thumb when critically thinking or writing...don't cite well-known sources with tilted agendas...undermines your case...
Ahhhh, if only I had the time.
QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:51 PM) [snapback]393063[/snapback] A peace machine is a war machine at rest. But you don't want to fund that either.
Wow, you really do subscribe to the neo-con brain transmissions...ya know all the slogans.
|
Pericles 5/23/08 3:02 PM | QUOTE(2fat2ride @ May 23 2008, 02:58 PM) [snapback]393065[/snapback]
Wow, you really do subscribe to the neo-con brain transmissions...ya know all the slogans.
I just made it up, but it's certainly relevant.
Tell us what would happen to Israel if they disarmed. Would peace break out? |
cyberscribbler 5/23/08 3:04 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:40 PM) [snapback]393056[/snapback]
QUOTE Nick Schulz is the Editor-in-Chief of The American Magazine/website & TCS Daily ( Tech Central Station). A biographical note states that prior to joining TCS he was "the Politics Editor for FOXNews.com, the website of the Fox News Channel. Schulz orchestrated the site's coverage of the 2000 election and the Florida deadlock." So it was his decision to throw the 2000 election to Bush. Yea i trust him [/sarcasm off]
|
dragonrider 5/23/08 3:07 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:19 PM) [snapback]393043[/snapback]
That is incorrect.
Again cite your source and statistics.
QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ May 23 2008, 02:25 PM) [snapback]393050[/snapback] Let me qualify it, the middle class pays the bulk of overall taxes in this country. The rich pay the most income taxes on reported income. It all boils down to what's reported as income. How else would billionaires and their secretaries BOTH pay 15%. Accept it or remain blissfully unaware & happy.
Actually what is that multibillionare? says that he pays a lower percentage of his income in taxes than his secretary. So you feel its ok that a secretary that is prolly just scraping by is paying a higher percentage of her salary in taxes than her boss who is making a 1000 x's what she makes is paying at a lower rate. And this is a just system??? |
dragonrider 5/23/08 3:25 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 03:16 PM) [snapback]393075[/snapback] What is the percent of income paid in taxes paid compared to the percent of income paid by the middle income. That is a truer measure of fairness. when you pay sales tax the sales tax rate doesn't go down as the cost of the item rises. its the same across the board but in a reverse system we have the highest earners who are earning money from capital gains are paying at a 10% lower rate of 15% than their secretaries who are paying on payroll taxes at 25% |
Pericles 5/23/08 3:50 PM | QUOTE(dragonrider @ May 23 2008, 03:25 PM) [snapback]393079[/snapback] What is the percent of income paid in taxes paid compared to the percent of income paid by the middle income. That is a truer measure of fairness. when you pay sales tax the sales tax rate doesn't go down as the cost of the item rises. its the same across the board but in a reverse system we have the highest earners who are earning money from capital gains are paying at a 10% lower rate of 15% than their secretaries who are paying on payroll taxes at 25%
The secretary is paying a higher "rate" of total income into his/her retirement system (Social Security), which I'd like to see privatized, but you oppose that. It's your system. Don't complain about it. That's what you all want.
QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 03:02 PM) [snapback]393069[/snapback] Tell us what would happen to Israel if they disarmed. Would peace break out?
Still waiting for an answer 2fat2ride. |
dragonrider 5/23/08 4:05 PM | [quote name='Pericles' date='May 23 2008, 03:50 PM' post='393092']
The secretary is paying a higher "rate" of total income into his/her retirement system (Social Security), which I'd like to see privatized, but you oppose that. It's your system. Don't complain about it. That's what you all want.
Wrong without the retirement system the secretary still pays at a higher percent rate becuase IRS payroll tax rate is higher than the capital gains tax rate.
|
Milton 5/23/08 4:48 PM | QUOTE(dragonrider @ May 23 2008, 02:16 PM) [snapback]393037[/snapback] can you cite your sources and statistics?
I can get out my text books from graduate school, but I'm pretty sure this stuff is online somewhere, try wiki.
On thing you need to realize is the the EU is a capitalist enterprise, or a rather weakly structured economic confederacy, and not a government. Each member has their own national government with different taxes, welfare programs, uemployment and such. Together they form a strong economic alliance, which really does not explain or necessarily speak to their individual domestic policies.
A traditional value of the older European social democracies was full employment. After realizing that government jobs were needed to achieve this, their nationalized programs became wrought with inefficiencies because you simply don't need five guys to replace a lightbulb. Realizing these inefficiencies, many of these countries turned to the expansion of private enterprise and an abandondment of many of their more socialist programs. In other words, it just didn't work. Large welfare states are essentially all that remain. Unemployment following govenment reforms was in the 20% range at one time, but they are doing better now (although I believe still worse than us). Then again, I'm not an European scholar, but I did study this in detail in graduate school.
As for Ireland, they may have some social programs like universal healthcare, but their economic boom is purely unrestrained capitalism...they relaxed things like business taxes and other cumbersome roadblocks to capitalist economic expansion and it worked.
I guess I would have to say that, and I am at the lower end of middle class, if you guys want socialism, I'm moving! I can honestly say that what motivates me at work is the idea that I too may someday be wealthy. Calll me crazy, but I believe it works.
|
dragonrider 5/23/08 4:52 PM | Better buy some lottery tickets then Milton |
2fat2ride 5/23/08 7:09 PM | [quote name='Pericles' post='393069' date='May 23 2008, 03:02 PM'] I just made it up, but it's certainly relevant. [/quote]
Actually, you only think you made it up. That's how brainwashing works. [/quote] Tell us what would happen to Israel if they disarmed. Would peace break out? [/quote] Well, it would certainly prevent Israel from committing any more war crimes. [quote name='Pericles' post='393092' date='May 23 2008, 03:50 PM'] Still waiting for an answer 2fat2ride. [/quote] Sorry, trying to pack for a gas-free vacation, bicycle touring through the glorious Peeyay landscape. Well, don't have much time, so I'll deliver to you my party line: [quote]From Bertrand Russell in 1970ish:
"The tragedy of the people of Palestine is that their country was "given" by a foreign power to another people for the creation of a new state. The result was that many hundreds of thousands of innocent people were made permanently homeless. With every new conflict their numbers increased. How much longer is the world willing to endure this spectacle of wanton cruelty? It is abundantly clear that the refugees have every right to the homeland from which they were driven, and the denial of this right is at the heart of the continuing conflict. No people anywhere in the world would accept being expelled en masse from their own country; how can anyone require the people of Palestine to accept a punishment which nobody else would tolerate? A permanent just settlement of the refugees in their homeland is an essential ingredient of any genuine settlement in the Middle East. We are frequently told that we must sympathise with Israel because of the suffering of the Jews in Europe at the hands of the Nazis. […] What Israel is doing today cannot be condoned, and to invoke the horrors of the past to justify those of the present is gross hypocrisy.[/quote] That was 1970 folks. Now, 30 years later: [quote]"From Chris Hedges, former New York Times Middle East bureau chief: The Israeli government is imposing severe and continual collective punishment on the 1.5 million people of tiny Gaza, which includes restricting or cutting off food, fuel, electricity, medicines and other necessities. Malnutrition rates among many children resemble the worst of sub-Saharan Africa. Israel's leading newspaper, Ha'aretz, has reporters and columnists describing these horrific conditions and concluding that the ferocity of the blockade is detrimental to Israel as well as the Palestinians.[/quote]
So it seems to me that 30 years of armament has gotten them nowhere, except for more disagreements and into more battles with other regional entities and into more violations of every entitlement that humanity deserves. But it sure has made a lot of American military suppliers rich, no? god bless their little tax-paying, bomb-making, people-killing hearts. Can I hear an amen?
|
Bigby_M 5/23/08 7:24 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:40 PM) [snapback]393056[/snapback] Then the billionaire pays $150 million and his secretary pays $15 thousand. Yep, it's the same. http://www.american.com/archive/2007/novem...-pays-the-taxesThe lives of some innocent terrorism victims.
So you would trade the constitutional rights of all Americans for that?
Trade your own rights, thank you.
Not mine.
|
2fat2ride 5/23/08 8:17 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 03:50 PM) [snapback]393092[/snapback] The secretary is paying a higher "rate" of total income into his/her retirement system (Social Security), which I'd like to see privatized, but you oppose that. It's your system. Don't complain about it. That's what you all want. Still waiting for an answer 2fat2ride.
Sorry for the repost, but I lost my chance at editing.
QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 03:02 PM) [snapback]393069[/snapback] I just made it up, but it's certainly relevant. Actually, you only think you made it up. That's how brainwashing works.
QUOTE Tell us what would happen to Israel if they disarmed. Would peace break out? Well, it would certainly prevent Israel from committing any more war crimes.
Sorry, trying to pack for a gas-free vacation, bicycle touring through the glorious Peeyay landscape, so I don't have much time, so I'll deliver to you my party line:
QUOTE From Bertrand Russell in 1970ish:
"The tragedy of the people of Palestine is that their country was "given" by a foreign power to another people for the creation of a new state. The result was that many hundreds of thousands of innocent people were made permanently homeless. With every new conflict their numbers increased. How much longer is the world willing to endure this spectacle of wanton cruelty? It is abundantly clear that the refugees have every right to the homeland from which they were driven, and the denial of this right is at the heart of the continuing conflict. No people anywhere in the world would accept being expelled en masse from their own country; how can anyone require the people of Palestine to accept a punishment which nobody else would tolerate? A permanent just settlement of the refugees in their homeland is an essential ingredient of any genuine settlement in the Middle East. We are frequently told that we must sympathise with Israel because of the suffering of the Jews in Europe at the hands of the Nazis. […] What Israel is doing today cannot be condoned, and to invoke the horrors of the past to justify those of the present is gross hypocrisy. That was 1970 folks. Now, 30 years later:
QUOTE "From Chris Hedges, former New York Times Middle East bureau chief: The Israeli government is imposing severe and continual collective punishment on the 1.5 million people of tiny Gaza, which includes restricting or cutting off food, fuel, electricity, medicines and other necessities. Malnutrition rates among many children resemble the worst of sub-Saharan Africa. Israel's leading newspaper, Ha'aretz, has reporters and columnists describing these horrific conditions and concluding that the ferocity of the blockade is detrimental to Israel as well as the Palestinians.
So it seems to me that 30 years of armament has gotten them nowhere, except for more disagreements and into more battles with other regional entities and into more violations of every entitlement that humanity deserves. But it sure has made a lot of American military suppliers rich, no? god bless their little tax-paying, bomb-making, people-killing hearts. Can I hear an amen?
|
2fat2ride 5/24/08 9:34 AM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 11:49 AM) [snapback]392941[/snapback] So you're knowledgeable of Lancaster County farm subsidies? Tell us what subsidies local farmers are receiving.
8.6 million dollars for Lancaster farmers in 2006
http://farm.ewg.org/farm/progdetail.php?fi...tal&page=county
And here is a list of the individual farmers that recieved the various amounts:
http://farm.ewg.org/farm/top_recips.php?fi...&progcode=total
If you click around a little you will be able to see what sorts of subsidies each farmer has received over the past ten years and in what amounts. Some of these names on the list may not sound familiar as they are DBAs or coops, so you can also click on the ownership button to see the individuals who own the farm.
I now consider myself informed.
|
Bigby_M 5/24/08 10:05 AM | QUOTE(2fat2ride @ May 24 2008, 09:34 AM) [snapback]393239[/snapback] 8.6 million dollars for Lancaster farmers in 2006 http://farm.ewg.org/farm/progdetail.php?fi...tal&page=countyAnd here is a list of the individual farmers that recieved the various amounts: http://farm.ewg.org/farm/top_recips.php?fi...&progcode=totalIf you click around a little you will be able to see what sorts of subsidies each farmer has received over the past ten years and in what amounts. Some of these names on the list may not sound familiar as they are DBAs or coops, so you can also click on the ownership button to see the individuals who own the farm. I now consider myself informed.
Thanks. Don't wait for republicans to complain about their tax dollars.
They aren't brave enough.
Any info on some poor woman buying a better grade of burger for her hungry kids with food stamps on their dime?
That will set them off.
Best wait til after church to post it, wouldn't want to ruin their Sunday or anything.
Noah Krieder and Sons?? Ain't they millionaires?
Your move Perse.
Or any one else.
|
dragonrider 5/24/08 10:10 AM | I heard one response to the farm bill pork, "You gotta buy off the rich before you can help the poor." |
SproutingUp 5/26/08 7:19 PM | QUOTE(Lancaster Online @ May 22 2008, 10:00 PM) [snapback]392730[/snapback]
Post your thoughts and comments about this blog post.
If the DNC chooses her as VP at the convention, he won't have a choice. Too bad he doesn't know a little more about politics and the world around him or he would realize this.
QUOTE(mam0412 @ May 23 2008, 09:02 AM) [snapback]392824[/snapback] I think an Obama/Clinton ticket would be a disaster. Obama has the ability to draw moderate Republicans to him. Hillary does not and would take that ability away from Obama if she were on the ticket. The only thing it would do would provide unity for the Democrats, but I find it hard to believe a Democrat would vote for McCain anyway. Should the ticket win, it provides nothing in terms of actually running the country.
Yeah, a Clinton/Obama ticket would be much better. You should always put the best candidate in top billing.
QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:14 PM) [snapback]393035[/snapback]
Would you trade your freedom of speech for a $1 million?
I'll trade mine for 10 million.
I'll trade my right to bear arms for 20 million.
We can bargain on the rest.
|
SproutingUp 5/26/08 7:40 PM | QUOTE(Pericles @ May 23 2008, 02:51 PM) [snapback]393063[/snapback]
A peace machine is a war machine at rest. But you don't want to fund that either.
I have a specific question for you Pericles. This isn't an argument point, it's an actual question.
Do you think that if we had sent in three times the number of troops, had a REAL "shock and awe" and established military rule/martial law in the very beginning of hte Iraq thing, quickly got everything under control with huge numbers of troops, set up the Iraqi government with a ready-made constitution, enforced their adherement to it and then left after say,,,,oh, 6 months.
Do you think we'd be better off today?
I don't like the fact that bush made a war of lies, I don't support it and I never will, but if he was going to do something like that, why did he not do it more intelligently, use sufficient force, get the job done and get out? He has seriously mismanaged this "war on terror". We never should have gone to Iraq to begin with, we should have been hunting Ben Laden, but, since we did go in, why did he half-a$$ it so badly? We could have been in and out in under a year if he had done it correctly, instead, we, along with the rest of the world are suffering from his poor leadership. Everybody knows it was for oil, yet he screwed that up too. We could be recieving all the oil we could possibly want from Iraq this very moment if he hadn't tried to cover his lies that were so blatant in the beginning.
I don't know which makes me more angry, that he started a war based on falsified intelligence killing thousands if not millions of soldiers and citizens of Iraq or that he did it so dang poorly. Even if you're going to be crooked, you can at least do it efficiently and get it over with instead of stretching it out forever and a day by sending barely enough to get the job done without the supplies needed to carry out their mission.
QUOTE(dragonrider @ May 23 2008, 03:07 PM) [snapback]393071[/snapback] Again cite your source and statistics.
Actually what is that multibillionare? says that he pays a lower percentage of his income in taxes than his secretary. So you feel its ok that a secretary that is prolly just scraping by is paying a higher percentage of her salary in taxes than her boss who is making a 1000 x's what she makes is paying at a lower rate. And this is a just system???
I think the higher income brackets should pay a higher percentage. If not, then there should be a flat rate for everyone or do away with income taxes all together and use sales tax with a higher percentage on luxury items.
Food, shelter and clothing should be a low percentage, anything else should be higher according to certain categories.
QUOTE(2fat2ride @ May 24 2008, 09:34 AM) [snapback]393239[/snapback] 8.6 million dollars for Lancaster farmers in 2006 http://farm.ewg.org/farm/progdetail.php?fi...tal&page=countyAnd here is a list of the individual farmers that recieved the various amounts: http://farm.ewg.org/farm/top_recips.php?fi...&progcode=totalIf you click around a little you will be able to see what sorts of subsidies each farmer has received over the past ten years and in what amounts. Some of these names on the list may not sound familiar as they are DBAs or coops, so you can also click on the ownership button to see the individuals who own the farm. I now consider myself informed.
I don't know much about this, but I do know that back in the other Commonwealth, my dad was paid NOT to grow over a certain limit of certain crops. I'm not sure why they wanted to limit production when it would help feed more people, but that's exactly what they did.
|
2fat2ride 5/26/08 8:30 PM | QUOTE(SproutingUp @ May 26 2008, 07:40 PM) [snapback]393743[/snapback] I don't know much about this, but I do know that back in the other Commonwealth, my dad was paid NOT to grow over a certain limit of certain crops. I'm not sure why they wanted to limit production when it would help feed more people, but that's exactly what they did.
Because this really is not a true capitalist nation. If it were, there would be no subsidies and farmers would be forced to compete with each other and the global market on equal and fair terms. It has its good sides and bad sides:
Good:
-by controlling price, farmers will make more money, and people will continue to want to be farmers
-may help to protect the ecosphere by limiting competition
-keeps the price of food (artificially) low for Americans
Bad:
-Unfair global competition. These subsidies make it more difficult for farmers in other countries to earn a living without equal government support (which their governments can't afford or deem unethical)
-by controlling prices, prices may actually be higher than the market would bear
-the types of crops grown are partially controlled by the government (by awarding subsidies for some crops and not others)
-may harm the environment (the subsidies will always be a few years behind in the latest science of conservation)
-does not encourage variety of crop
-may harm the environment (a primary focus of the farm bill are crops specific to the interest of the global market, many of these force farmers into non-sustainable farming)
-not in the true spirit of capitalism
-sadly, people will starve (this is a pretty big thing...over the next ten years there will be a pretty big global food crisis, not because of food production, but simply because some can't afford it).
Historically, most of us are already familiar with reality of a food market that is not entirely based on capitalism. Lancaster began as a market town. For many years (18th and early 19th c.) the Central Market controlled the prices of food being sold there (this was done to avoid low-balling, unfair competition, and out-of-town competition, as well as to keep the prices low enough that people would not go out of town for their food. The subsidies are an ok idea that has gotten corrupt through the lobbyists. Even worse, these subisides do not take into account their negative impact on the global food market.
|
View Topic | Comment on this blog