It really is the economy.

McCain should be hammering away at how the Dems caused this mess and he and the GOP tried to stop it. Emphasis on Obama’s role in ACORN and how that was a critical role in the mess as well. He’s got to expose that, if the folks know that they’re voting the fox into the hen house, they might go for real change–McCain.

We are the hens after all…

Later

http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/10/web-archives-confirm-barack-obama-was.html

Still, I think that Ayers, Wright, and the other radical connections are very important. It is this aspect of Obama that frightens me. They have been a big part of his life in the past; and there is certainly no assurance that the attitudes they represent are not part of his make-up now.

It is not just the cover up. It is not just poor judgement. It is that a man with an extensive history of radical associations and very little actual vetting is too big of a risk.

McCain and Liddy are buddies.

Or may be the association with the convict from Keating5?
How about anti-American party of Alaskan separatists.
Repub slime gets really desperate.
There is nothing left to talk about -economy, wars , etc….

So who is to blame? There’s plenty of blame to go around, and it doesn’t fasten only on one party or even mainly on what Washington did or didn’t do. As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of “layered irresponsibility … with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role.” Here’s a partial list of those alleged to be at fault:

* The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.
* Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.
* Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.
* Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.
* The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.
* Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.
* Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.
* Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.
* The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.
* An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.
* Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.

in other words-death of Reaganomics…

Misdefining reagonomics is only a reflection on you not reagonomics.

Copy / pasting and adding an incorrect assessment is a reflection on you.

Ahhh! For the good old days!

Recently a friend sent me an email called “questions,” asking things like: What if things were switched around, What if the Obamas had paraded five children across the stage, following the debate,including a three month-old infant and an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter?
What if John McCain was a former president of the Harvard Law Review? What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his college graduating class? What if McCain had only married once, and Obama was divorced? What if Obama had met his second wife in a bar and had a long affair while he was still married? What if Michelle Obama was the wife who not only became addicted to pain
killers but also acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?

The email goes on to ascribe the narrow gap between the two candidates to racism. But this is not just about racism, this is and has for a long time been a class war deliberately incited by the Republicans since the days of Reagan. , Joe Patterson, the founder of the NY Daily News, once wrote that “class feeling is always antagonistic to the interest of the whole people.” You would think that was a principle on which the United States was founded. We like to believe there are not such differences here, we’re all supposed to be equal.

But what we see, and what is clear from the last 3 elections, if not the last 30 years of politics, is certain Republicans deliberately and strategically manipulating public opinion against the educated, against the “elites” who have been successful in life while holding liberal values.
It’s not something you see in real conservatives. This is the strategy of a certain type of Republican. That strategy has won elections, but has caused a rift in this country that we can’t shake, that’s tearing us apart, weakening our military, and killing our economy.

Pitting race against race among the lower classes is an old story, a convenient way for the upper classes in the South to keep both groups divided and conquered after the Civil War. Pitting North against South has ruled national politics very long too. Pitting the working class against the “elites” and (I love this term) “limousine liberals” and all the other epithets they use to distance their opponents from “real” Americans has worked very well for these particular Republicans, and we are paying the price for it every day. Unfortunately, it’s exactly those working class folks who buy into this divisive mentality who are paying the most for it. And how many Democrats buy into this themselves, disparaging the working class and the South for “not getting it,” then seeming surprised when that plays right into the hands of those Republicans machinating a deeper, wider gap among the people they seek to rule. Many learned and wise conservatives have distanced themselves from the Republican political machine for this reason: they see what it’s doing to America, and they don’t like it either.

I don’t have a solution for it, except to call it what it is, to speak up against it, and to stop letting the post-Reagan Republicans frame these arguments, like the tactic of accusing Democrats of inciting a class war just because Obama wants to roll back taxes for the very rich, back to Reagan-era levels. That’s not class war. But Sarah Palin’s smear strategy is. Hearing people call out “kill him” and “terrorist” and “treason” during her speeches, bragging about her ignorance and lack of education; putting down those who have attended good schools (on a scholarship for godsakes), painting Obama as an elite, and now a Mystery Man, glorifying her isolationism; it’s as if she has never thought out the consequences of what she says. Even if the shouters are Republican plants, this is blatant incitement to crime. It’s no wonder McCain won’t say these things to Obama’s face.

Keep speaking ! But stop misdefining conservatives and saying what YOU think others believe in.

That’s a strawman tactic.

should Obama start talking about Liddy, who served four and a half years in prison as a result of his role in Watergate, plotted to murder journalist Jack Anderson and Howard Hunt and to firebomb the Brookings Institution, and who instructed radio audiences in the 1990s to shoot federal law enforcement agents and bragged that he named his own shooting targets after Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Sure. Go ahead. In fact, please do.

Tater, yes the dems were in power all this years and caused it.

There’s being in power and then there’s having enough votes to do something about it.

The short course in the financial crisis: affirmative action in lending coupled with Wall Street greed.

What if the Obamas had paraded five children across the stage, following the debate,including a three month-old infant and an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter?

Good point. But what if McCain had admitted he’d been a crackhead? Think he’d get a skip on that one? That’s a good point too.

You display what you do…

Keep defining yourself !

I will keep pointing out that you are misdefining Reagonomics and making other points. If you don’t want to have those points made… don’t do it!

BUT IS TRIG REALLY PALIN’S BABY?

“I, for one, welcome my new limousine liberal overlords, why can’t you? You stupid redneck bolsheviks.”

(Hmmmm, maybe he has a point–your can’t spell redneck without “red”. Is that really how simple he is?)

Obamabots! To the BotMobile!

Form of…Comment Troll!

neo, we have an out-of-control diarrhea mouth spamming our threads now with junk that is supposed to pass for thought. I suppose there is a certain value in letting it vent its own dysfunctional emotions.

All of us here know who the Bolsheviks were and what the historical trajectory was going forward from their defeat of the other groups in Russia. sashal is trying to fob on to the unsuspecting a certain view on the Left that the Bolsheviks were not true Communists, but traitors to the Revolution. The myth is that Marxism has not worked because the wrong people were trying to create socialist societies - that the new revisionist Marxists know how to do it better and that those who oppose Marxism in all its forms are morally equivalent to the Bolsheviks.

That is the logic.

As a former Marxist intellectual I reject that myth root and branch.

Olavo de Carvalho’s lecture: The structure of the revolutionary mind
brookesnews.com/082209revolutionarymind.html

Even the best of observers have trouble figuring out what the Left is, or what the difference between left and right is, or what these concepts even mean any more. This apparent malleability of the definitions assigned to these critical concepts has provided cover for the Left to creep insidiously into our political process, our churches and synagogues, and not least, into our hearts and minds. But help is on the way.

as i said, they speak in code that is open and easy to learn. by doing so they can cause a parallelism of conversation where they are talking about their ends and the ones that are listening hear what htey want to hear, and the ones in the know hear the opposite in code.

Thus, obviously, the old left and the new left are different ideologically and many ordinary people are confused (particularly since an astounding percentage of Republican politicians embrace the Left’s policies). Some are confused into thinking that the new Left is more benign. These are the ones who believe the myth that communism is dead. In fact, communism never died, it merely metamorphosed. How to explain that the Left can completely substitute its original ideology and still be the Left?

Carvalho has hit the nail on the head with his “inversions”. the reviewer isnt educated enough (not meaning he is dumb, but he hasnt read so much of this to know where inversion as an idea is from).

i am curious to read this text later to know whether carvalho points out that the idea of inversion was from nietzsche… (this whole thing is a mish mosh of freud, darwin, nietsche, hegel, marx, engels, and a few others on the top rank, and then you can detail next generations after).

it stems from his ideas of “moral inversion”, but in the combinations of thoughts above, combines and takes it farther with an analysis of such and what one can do with it.

[if you can teach ten percent of the population inversionly (?), you can teach them that red means go, and green means stop. their natural actions in the world would destabilize a nation that allows one to do this.

things are going to get messy. i see the votor fraud by acorn being planned. that is that they never intended not to get caught. when the election happens, this will create a similar situation to hanging chads in florida. except this will no longer be divided on candidats, but on race and who is presumed to have privelege. if you look at it all through the glass of history, you can see that they side with jim crow. they then create southern racism through subversion (they were arrested for this). this ‘fact’ becomes common knowlege. they then switch sides, and smear the other side with the broken window they created. now you have a situation where it may be bad enough the way its set up if he loses. but if he wins, and the courts take it away from him because of ACORN, there will be nuts in the streets. what is potentially being set up is a coupe. the stuff will get crazy, and nothing will halt it. obama then calms the masses with his words, everyone sides with him. classic coupe. funny thing about history though, the ability does not dictate its end. just because something is set up that way, doesnt mean that it will flow that way at all. to beleive so is to become paranoid, which i see people doing.

there was an incident in home depot the other nite a friend was telling me. they were standing there talking with an employee to get what they needed. when someone came in and yelled something like (i wasnt there, so take it with a grain of salt! i trust the person that told it, but still take it with a grain of salt), “just wait… just wait… in a few more weeks, we are going to throw all your asses out and take this place”. he then turned and left.

so at the very least on some level the fruitbat set is quite ready to not exactly play by the rules.

anyway… back to Carvalho.

so from inverting the virtues into sins, and the sins into virtues, the population becomes destabilized as those who accept one side as goodness square off against those who accept the other side as goodness.

carvalho assigns the youth thing to be a cover of a sort, but in truth it has to do with that AND the fact that disociated youth with no familes or raised just by mothers will accept an inverted definition of the virtues, as the situation is also born of such inversion. (the inversions go pretty far, not just good is now evil and evil is now good, but men are to be women and women are to be men, rich are to be poor the poor are to be rich, whites are to be the slaves while other races are to be lords, etc. note that the inversions are only for the usurption of power, the groups who accept the inversion and fight for it are faulty as far as the new regime believes. they never get to have the end inverted utopia. to the people using them they are dysgenic

According to de Carvalho, revolutionary thought as we know it did not exist before about the 13th century; nor is it a function of chronological age. The myth that the young tend to be revolutionaries arises from the Left itself and serves the purpose of making the Revolution appear to be a natural phenomenon. Instead, this revolutionary inversion has its origins in an early Christian heresy (arrogating to itself the role of Christ the avenger) and has at least three aspects:

1. Inversion of the perception of time.
2. The inversion of morality
3. Inversion of subject and object

there are paragraphs for each, though the last one is most interesting… after the text the reviewer notes that he points out other inversions. however if you know the texts going back, you would already know this stuff…

When revolutionaries like Che, and Hitler’s operatives, for example, killed innocent people, they would blame the people they killed for “making” them do it by refusing to go along with their revolutionary notions. This is one example the author gives of the inversion of subject and object.

so it will be no consequence what will happen… we are watching how a mass murdering regime is created out of normal happy people.

it took the schools, the unions, the colleges, the psychology profession, etc… each doing their part… while we sat learned it, and didnt question if those values were right, because these experts told us (like adorno). but they were abusing a normal society built on merit and trust. we couldnt protect ourselves unless we maintained our morals, and were paranoid as to the ends of the change. normal isnt paranoid… now we are quite paranoid compared to the past… i would say schizo, split mind… accepting contractictions as normal.

got to go.. i hope this wasnt too long…

The neurological and psychological adjustments which human beings would have to make in order to make socialism compatible with human nature are daunting, formidable, and impossible.

It all sounds like a new hybrid of deconstructionism and revisionist Marxism, where the correspondence theory of truth is completely trashed. They pretend that you make your own reality. Truth becomes a construct of power.

The destructiveness of such a degradation of thought is incalculable.

if i was to abstract what you say, i guess it would match my speech on ‘personal versions’ of things. which is close to what your saying about the idea that one can construct ones reality. in the personal versions thing they do that, but they also belong because their personal version is a subset of the first order version.

feminism is the first order version, even women are subordinate to it. notice with palen and greer and others, she is not a woman. feminism now IS woman, more than women are. since gender allows for fluidity of sex, they can claim that palin is not a real woman, she is really a man in gender and unaware that she is a man in a womans body. hence, she is not a woman if she is outside the set of feminism.

the personal versions allow everyone that is outside the first order definition, to still be a part of that defintion (as palin has claimed she is a feminist), however their definition (the personal) does not include the noxious things of their feminism. however to everyone they are all a perceived group of the first order, to which the first order group gets to dictate that power. in this way, they speek for all women, they are all women. anyone that disagrees must be a gender male…

is it any wonder that in their desire to be included in the club that would not have them? they have not questioned whether they would actually want to be a member. Inclusion and Ostracisation plays on our survival instinct for humans are too weak to make it alone easily. but together they are a massive power.

the trick this system has figured is how to assemble people who are not together under one banner to fight in opposition of what they want under a false belief of some fantasy. (and blame them for the outcomes providing them with restful sleep in case they are not fully sociopathic).

The colors of a rainbow…..so pretty ..in the sky
Are also on the faces…..of people ..going by
I see friends shaking hands…..sayin.. how do you do
Theyre really sayin……i love you.

I hear babies cry…… I watch them grow
Theyll learn much more…..than Ill never know
And I think to myself …..what a wonderful world

Leftists ask “what has war ever solved”. Well, war solved the question for all time of whether fascism and Nazism were evil. THere was no war to resolve that issue concerning communism, however.

Forget William Ayers. The McCain campaign needs to make Acorn the central issue. It brings everything together:

1. Acorn is closely linked to the subprime mortgage fiasco. They would picket banks who they felt didn’t make enough subprime loans and intimidate them with charges of racism.

2. Obama has a long-standing relationship with Acorn. He used to be their attorney.

3. Acorn has a long history of involvement with phony registrations and voter fraud.

If we can familiarize the public with Acorn’s sordid history before the election, we may be able to short-circuit their inevitable charges of “stolen election” should McCain win by a narrow margin.

tiny url dot com slash 4g4agj

here is an interesting piece where a person in his radio show went to upper manhattan and switched points of each candidate including who is running as vice president.

tiny url dot com slash 5yo3h7

and iceland moves into russias sphere… there are no capitalist countries, all are a little socialist to a lot socialist…

Ayers philosophy is alive and well and being fed to students in the inner city.

There’s another inversion for ya: the Red states calling themselves Blue.

The smaller party calling itself the Bolsheviks and their opponents the Mensheviks.

On Broadway: The Wicked Witch of the West is now the “victim” of Glinda the Good– Broadway’s Wicked.

And on it rolls. We’re gonna need another American Revolution before we’re done.

But it’s not going to be all bad. Your first born won’t get the mandatory abortion, although you will have to give them a middle name of Obama. And you will all get to have at least one gay marriage to the same sex partner of your choice.

I would have told you all earlier, but why spoil the fun! Best wishes, and so long.

Conservatives, by definition, are against progress. And seeing as how the world keeps moving forward, opposing process is just a stupid position to take. Liberals are more modern and forward thinking, but that doesn’t mean every one of their ideas is perfect. So the only reasonable role for a conservative is as an opposition minority, a group to ask questions and sometimes apply the brakes to liberal policies.

When cons try to actually take over, it’s like using a screwdriver to hammer in nails. Wrong tool for the job, and that’s a simple explanation for how we got in this mess.

For me it does not matter, which party embraces liberalism, the real one or will be closer to it- republicans or democrats. I will be with them.

Right now, in my view, Obama will be pragmatic, centrist, may be slightly left of center ( I bet many on the far left will be dissappointed), but not the guy depicted in lies and smears of NRO.
Right now I think GOP is dangerously unhinged and invokes/incites all the feelings in anti-intellectual crowds of the Wiemar republic.
Dangerous times, sergey, and neocons are largely responsible for this..
talk to you later….

The folks who insist that Obama is some kind “socialist” are hysterical.

All anyone needs to do to understand how ridiculous this is, is to talk to an actual socialist.
Obama will governs as a centrist, and that’s good.

fughedaboudit.

The cover up of the cover up over the cover up, literally, has to do with Obama’s tattoo.

Yes, Obama not only has a tattoo, but a big fat head and shoulders portrait of Mao Zedong.

And cover up of cover up of cover ups indeed, it’s RIGHT THERE ON HIS FOREHEAD.

The only reason the satanic mainstream media has not reported it is that, in order to see this tattoo, you have to attend Sarah Palin’s church on a Wednesday night when the hold the special revival meeting.

I pray for our nation!

Conservatives, by definition, are against progress. And seeing as how the world keeps moving forward, opposing process is just a stupid position to take. Liberals are more modern and forward thinking, but that doesn’t mean every one of their ideas is perfect. So the only reasonable role for a conservative is as an opposition minority, a group to ask questions and sometimes apply the brakes to liberal policies.

This isn’t true at all!
Conservatives believe in internally driven change and progress. That the intrinsic progress is made by each individual. It starts with each individual upbringing and experience. Thus progress is evolutionary.
Conservatives view liberals as those seeking to impose change from government and or social engineering. Thus conservatives reject the idea of revolutionary changes from those empowered

Obama’s association with Ayers is street cred in the eyes of the radicalized intelligentsia (including the media) and its neophytes. Not making an issue of it keeps the average citizen uninformed; in fact, it reinforces the street cred by telling the citizen associations with radicals are not important. We must break through the the left controlled media and undermine Obama’s street credentials and demonstrate the danger.

The media agenda determines the relevancy of an issue: Obama and Ayers is irrelevant; Palin and her pat association are relevant, as are McCain’s. C’mon, stop playing by the dominant ideology’s rules. You must be prepared to counter the media and promote the truth.

I think therein lies the problem: the internalized liberal/leftwing default position.

Having said all that, highlighting the Obama/Ayres connection is a case of too little too late. McCain (and the RNC) should have highlighted Obama/Ayers connection earlier on. Now it is being looked on (and promoted in the press) as the act of desperation it is.

Your blowing smoke out your pie hole. You didn’t learn anything from the inversions did you? Conservatives and capitalism are about progress; new left and socialism are about stagnation and maintaining a fixed social order.

We have to stop all energy from increasing… is that a progress policy, or is that a stagnation policy?

We have too many people, we have to have less… is that a progress policy, o is that a stagnation policy (note that it takes a certain amount of population in order to have economy of scale to progress further. If the us had only 10 million people, the space program wouldn’t be possible).

Global warming, from the left libertarian green party (nazi party, look it up), says that we should attempt to flatten the fluctuations of weather and must stop all progress to save the world… (even though its all a hoax, and the sun controls this. ergy the cooling for the past decade and the lack of sunspots for a new recent record. We may have a small ice age from it)

Conservation of endangeres species. If these people lived during the dinosaurs, would they have attempted to stagnate everything so that mammals couldn’t develop? Basically another stagnation plan. We cant develop or do anything because we have to preserve in perpetuity the conditions that then stagnate Darwinian development of species.

Is that a recipe for progress, or regress?

See, regression is now progress…. that inversion was done 40 years ago.

sashal is a brain dead leftist who cant think or examine whats in front of them.

we went from a conservative world that gave you the rennaisaance, the enlightenment, the reformation, classical music, uplifting modes of art, poetry and literature unmatched till today. the greatest rise in the personal power of the person and through that the withering of the control of the state (even that was more progress toward the end of the state, than socilism is, which pretends that that is the goal, a la marx).

conservativism, made the system that created the computer your using.. the job you have rather than picking rocks out of a field when plowing.. the fact that you will live longer than 30… (but if in russia your death expectancy is 30 years lower than ours).

ALL that through conservativism, free market, judeo christian thought, etc.

since socialism has been bleeding gas from the system for the type of greed that doesnt work for it (while hating the kind of greed that earns it), its productivity has gone down.

when conservatives were dominant, we went to the moon… now our hubble is coming down, we dont have a shuttle fleet… etc.

since the left has taken hold.. russian culture hasnt produced a damn thing of worth… remember dostoyevsky was anticommunist… but revisioned so that even he was inverted… but tell me who since before the revolution has written such great things?

in europe, the acceptance of socialism meant a regression… just before it arrived, brahms was a hit… by the time it got older, arbeit mach free was the thing

and in the US… you can look…

james fenimore cooper, mark twain, and tons others…

replaced by socialist realism…

dead and nihilistic… no more celebration of life, man, merit, and more… no we get amorphous blobs.. just as the soviets designed.

you should take some time and look at the photos of the old great buildings that stalin destroyed. and look at the ugly things that replaced them…
and while people were starving, how much did he put into a building that could never be compl;eted?

imagine if we didnt stop the space program for socialist communist programs? failure to go into space meant failure to green our technology, give disposal to nuclear material, and more…

stopping it was progress, right?

halting medicine, like lysenko is progress right?

deconstructing the 10k progress of culture so that people dont know how to even rear their kids anymore… thats progress…

indoctrinating children to have sex, so that STDs reduce population, thats progress?

disguising a racial eugenics program as a social good in abortion, that is progress..

hey… right now women in russia are having more abortions than babies…

they hate the progress so much they would rather not have children!!!!!!!

i guess that will leave the country to the socialist overlords… who are willing to stagnate everything in exchange for owning everyting and reasserting feudal rule.

got that? FEUDAL RULE…

or whta do you think you have in russia?

duh