The "Left" = Communism....???

[newtothegame]

lol...:lol:

For all of you on the left either being duped or trying to dupe others into what your real agenda is...,
Here is one person's take....

Communist Backing for 'One Nation' March Raises Eyebrows


Friday, 01 Oct 2010 04:58 PM

The Communist Party USA’s open endorsement of Saturday’s One Nation march on the Mall in Washington shows just how radicalized the mainstream of the American left has become, says noted author Paul Kengor. Organizers such as NAACP President Ben Jealous have labeled the march as the “antidote” to the tea party movement. The event also is a response to Glenn Beck’s Aug. 28 “Restoring Honor” rally.

“We aren’t the alternative to the tea party; we’re the antidote,” Jealous told The Washington Post Thursday.

The NAACP put the team responsible for its annual Image Awards show in charge of organizing the One Nation rally, the Post reports.

“The surprise here is that the communists have openly endorsed this,” Kengor tells Newsmax. “In the past, the communists carefully duped liberals and progressives by secretly enlisting them in rallies, marches, and protests.

The communists did this as they concealed the fact that they were communists.

“The fact that communists can now act so openly, locked arm in arm with fellow travelers in the ‘liberal/progressive’ left, shows just how far liberals and progressives have come. It’s a new day for the left, apparently,” says Kengor, who recently authored a book detailing the communist infiltration of the progressive left during the past 100 years.

“I guess the liberal/progressive left and communist left are closer than ever. There seems to be a surge in confidence and a lot of common ground.”

The organizers’ list of endorsing groups (http://www.onenationworkingtogether.org/partners) also includes the International Socialist Organization; the Democratic Socialists of America; and the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America, which President Barack Obama addressed in 1996 while campaigning for the Illinois state Senate.

http://www.newsmax.com/US/One-Nation-Communist-NAACP-tea-party/2010/10/01/id/372305

[ElKabong]

the lefties in here go into fits when someone mentions obama and communism in the same sentence....get the straightjackets ready

[boxcar]

the lefties in here go into fits when someone mentions obama and communism in the same sentence....get the straightjackets ready

...and the padded cells.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Watch the MM go ga-ga over this "rally". They'll swear at least 10,000,000 showed up. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[boxcar]

I just noticed that the whacko greenies are represented well with with organization. I wonder if they'll put on a 1010 kinda show for us. :D

Boxcar

[mostpost]

So the twelve members of the USA communist party got together and decided to endorse the one nation march. Who cares? As long as Sarah Palin doesn't endorse it were all good.
10 million probably not. More than Beck. Definitely.

[boxcar]

So the twelve members of the USA communist party got together and decided to endorse the one nation march. Who cares? As long as Sarah Palin doesn't endorse it were all good.
10 million probably not. More than Beck. Definitely.

You mean there's only 12 commies here in the U.S.? :rolleyes:

Boxcar
P.S. I wish Palin would endorse it. I'd love to watch all the pinko freaks in attrendence shrivel up, as she'd be to them as a cross in the face of a vampire.

[newtothegame]

Did you look at the list of supporters?? Seems alot more then twelve communists. A whole bunch of socialist as well..
And whats the expression I heard another poster use....
"if it walks like, acts like...looks like...." :lol:

[ArlJim78]

I just noticed that the whacko greenies are represented well with with organization. I wonder if they'll put on a 1010 kinda show for us. :D

Boxcar
I imagine the chants you'll hear tomorrow will include this one.

"One Nation! No Pressure! One Nation! No Pressure!"

[fast4522]

So the twelve members of the USA communist party got together and decided to endorse the one nation march. Who cares? As long as Sarah Palin doesn't endorse it were all good.
10 million probably not. More than Beck. Definitely.

As I recall you folks said there were only 12 black conservatives in the country when something else was said, then each of us mentioned people we knew of. Your elitist view makes your posts worthless. Just like your view of the economy and how great it is.

[Tom]

ABC was all over this one today.....I must have missed the coverage of the Glenn Rally! :D

These people say they are the antidote to the Tea Party, so I will dub them the Coffee Commies.

[PhantomOnTour]

The term is "An Asshole" not "A Asshole".

[fast4522]

The term is "An Asshole" not "A Asshole".

Thank you fro the correction, great you get it!

[BlueShoe]

Around 1970 I came to the disturbing conclusion that I could not tell the difference between a Liberal Democrat and a Communist. Forty years later, even more so, I still cant. Imo, liberalism is just another branch of the worldwide communist movement. Needless to say, leftists often vehemently dispute this charge, and become incensed when accused of being Marxists. However, I remain unmoved by their denials. The Democratic party has swung so far to the left in recent years that is now the de facto Communist Party. It is no longer the party of Harry Truman or even John Kennedy; it is now the party of Gus Hall. The CPUSA is no longer keeping a low profile, the fact that they are endorsing this One Nation march is proof of that. The CP is also heavily involved in the illegal alien issue. On O'Reilly last night was a leader from La Raza and the NAACP. Neither expressed any concern or objection when queried by Bill O about the Communist presence at the march.

[fast4522]

Around 1970 I came to the disturbing conclusion that I could not tell the difference between a Liberal Democrat and a Communist. Forty years later, even more so, I still cant. Imo, liberalism is just another branch of the worldwide communist movement. Needless to say, leftists often vehemently dispute this charge, and become incensed when accused of being Marxists. However, I remain unmoved by their denials. The Democratic party has swung so far to the left in recent years that is now the de facto Communist Party. It is no longer the party of Harry Truman or even John Kennedy; it is now the party of Gus Hall. The CPUSA is no longer keeping a low profile, the fact that they are endorsing this One Nation march is proof of that. The CP is also heavily involved in the illegal alien issue. On O'Reilly last night was a leader from La Raza and the NAACP. Neither expressed any concern or objection when queried by Bill O about the Communist presence at the march.

Blueshoe, your mention of two good Presidents sits well with me. These Presidents are not of the same cut of wood these liberals are of today, sure we can accurately call them Communists but I will say they are more like vampires who intend to suck us dry.

[DJofSD]

You mean there's only 12 commies here in the U.S.? :rolleyes:



There's more professors in a single department at any major university than that.

That number of 12 sounds like it came out of the US Census department.

[boxcar]

Did you look at the list of supporters?? Seems alot more then twelve communists. A whole bunch of socialist as well..
And whats the expression I heard another poster use....
"if it walks like, acts like...looks like...." :lol:

Maybe Mosty was confusing the number of commies on the Left for the number who will show up today to demonstrate. :D

Boxcar

[BlueShoe]

Blueshoe, your mention of two good Presidents sits well with me. These Presidents are not of the same cut of wood these liberals are of today, sure we can accurately call them Communists but I will say they are more like vampires who intend to suck us dry.
Those that today define themselvs as liberals or progressives are neither; at best, they are collectivists or statists, at worst, they are Marxists. During the 20th century, those that were ideologically Classical Liberals had a much different philosophy. They were pro business and anti communist. In some respects, they were much like todays neocons. In todays world, classical liberals are an endangered species, they are almost extinct. Truman and JFK are usually considerd to have been from the classical liberal school of thought.

[delayjf]

That list of socialist / communist supporters will make one hell of a Republican campaign ad. I hope a million show up - so as to send a message to the American people that they are serious about where they intend to take this country.

[Native Texan III]

That list of socialist / communist supporters will make one hell of a Republican campaign ad. I hope a million show up - so as to send a message to the American people that they are serious about where they intend to take this country.

Sadly, the 1.3B people of communist China have already long shown up and they already own a great part of USA debt and $ holdings - about $1.7 trillions, plus real estate and industries in USA. The Iraq war "only" cost $1trillion (also wholly borrowed, with zero oil dividend to date that was "promised" to cover costs). USA citizens happily stay in their debt to buy cheap Chinese imports. Soon 50% of USA taxes will go out of the country to pay just the interest on the debt mountain. USA companies queue up to expand factories in China to take away even more USA jobs. And you are predicting a Republican campaign issue?

[bigmack]

10 million probably not. More than Beck. Definitely.
Did the Mothership give you a tally from today? Definitely. :lol:

[Dave Schwartz]

Sadly, the 1.3B people of communist China have already long shown up and they already own a great part of USA debt and $ holdings - about $1.7 trillions, plus real estate and industries in USA.

Gee, then I guess communism must be working for them... those people must ALL be rich.
:lol: :bang: :bang:

[Tom]

So where are the photos showing that it dwarfed Beck's rally?

[fast4522]

Your not going to see pictures containing small business owners singing with the George Clinton band. Two days before the November 2 election a real depression will set into these people that will set the tone for many to stay home figuring why bother. November 3 you will hear rumblings that the angry white man has struck again. When in fact it is (E) none of the above and just the politics of the pendulum correcting to the will of the people.

[boxcar]

So where are the photos showing that it dwarfed Beck's rally?

:lol: :lol: The turnout was pretty pathetic. Who's up to bat next? The coffee grinders party? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[fast4522]

Gee, then I guess communism must be working for them... those people must ALL be rich.
:lol: :bang: :bang:

OK Dave,
What has the effects of this administration had on your business, same or off by so much?

[mostpost]

:lol: :lol: The turnout was pretty pathetic. Who's up to bat next? The coffee grinders party? :rolleyes:

Boxcar
If you put up crowd shot pictures of the Beck rally and the One nation rally without captions, you would have a hard time telling which was which. So, if the turnout yesterday was pathetic, it was also pathetic for Beck.

[fast4522]

If you put up crowd shot pictures of the Beck rally and the One nation rally without captions, you would have a hard time telling which was which. So, if the turnout yesterday was pathetic, it was also pathetic for Beck.

If you were to compare enthusiasm of the two events it would be fair to say the first was more anti Obama, the second was more we need jobs and many unhappy with democrats for not doing more. One month before the election this is a clear signal there is big trouble coming.

[bigmack]

If you put up crowd shot pictures of the Beck rally and the One nation rally without captions, you would have a hard time telling which was which. So, if the turnout yesterday was pathetic, it was also pathetic for Beck.
You assured us with definitiveness it would be greater. You were wrong again.

[ArlJim78]

the commies had one tenth the people as the Beck rally, but left 10 times the garbage. of course personal reponsibility is not their bag. even the WWII memorial to them is nothing but a trash can.


GCcwXlvb74Y






http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/33471_1410101449105_1129548511_30942268_2086345_n-550x643.jpg

[boxcar]

If you put up crowd shot pictures of the Beck rally and the One nation rally without captions, you would have a hard time telling which was which. So, if the turnout yesterday was pathetic, it was also pathetic for Beck.

I can easily understand why you'd prefer unidentified photos -- typical socialist ploy -- bring the rally that had real Americans down to the level of the wanna-bes. You're a real equal opportunity advocate, aren't you? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[fast4522]

They are in denial, how could America pee on their cornflakes. Rose colored glasses worn until November 2.

[NJ Stinks]

Sadly, the 1.3B people of communist China have already long shown up and they already own a great part of USA debt and $ holdings - about $1.7 trillions, plus real estate and industries in USA. The Iraq war "only" cost $1trillion (also wholly borrowed, with zero oil dividend to date that was "promised" to cover costs). USA citizens happily stay in their debt to buy cheap Chinese imports. Soon 50% of USA taxes will go out of the country to pay just the interest on the debt mountain. USA companies queue up to expand factories in China to take away even more USA jobs. And you are predicting a Republican campaign issue?

This excellent post must be ignored! :eek: Makes entirely too much sense for our tunnel-vision friends on the right side of the aisle. How dare you, Tex? :p :)

[Tom]

THAT's the crowd they drew? :lol:

They might call it a rally, I call it Tuesday.

[mostpost]

the commies had one tenth the people as the Beck rally, but left 10 times the garbage. of course personal reponsibility is not their bag. even the WWII memorial to them is nothing but a trash can.


GCcwXlvb74Y







http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/33471_1410101449105_1129548511_30942268_2086345_n-550x643.jpg
You're supposed to be part of the moral majority? What a laugh! The bottom photo was taken hours before the rally began. I saw it online at 9 Chicago time. Two hours before the start of the rally. There are plenty of photos showing a crowd at least as large as beck had. In fact the estimate from satellite photos is that 175,000 to 200,000 attended as compared to 87,000 for beck.
I don't really care if I convince you or not. I already know you are not interested in the truth, only in advancing your ideological agenda.

Calling everyone who disagrees with you a commie gets old real fast. I'm just not sure if you do it because you think, wrongly, that it is an effective tactic, or because you are ignorant of what a commie is. Or, it could be both.

[bigmack]

plenty of photos showing a crowd at least as large as beck had. In fact the estimate from satellite photos is that 175,000 to 200,000 attended as compared to 87,000 for beck.
I don't really care if I convince you or not. I already know you are not interested in the truth,
How has your opinion changed from a few posts ago when you said?
If you put up crowd shot pictures of the Beck rally and the One nation rally without captions, you would have a hard time telling which was which. So, if the turnout yesterday was pathetic, it was also pathetic for Beck.

Facts? Not interested in truths? You're coming unglued.

How 'bout this, find one of the those (they're everywhere) satellite pic's from the Loony Rally and post it here for us to see.

[fast4522]

Mostpost, on November 3 I am so ready to have you rub it in on just how much that you were right, are you?

[mostpost]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mostpost
plenty of photos showing a crowd at least as large as beck had. In fact the estimate from satellite photos is that 175,000 to 200,000 attended as compared to 87,000 for beck.
I don't really care if I convince you or not. I already know you are not interested in the truth,


How has your opinion changed from a few posts ago when you said?

Quote:
If you put up crowd shot pictures of the Beck rally and the One nation rally without captions, you would have a hard time telling which was which. So, if the turnout yesterday was pathetic, it was also pathetic for Beck.



Facts? Not interested in truths? You're coming unglued.

How 'bout this, find one of the those (they're everywhere) satellite pic's from the Loony Rally and post it here for us to see.
Both of the quotes which you attributed to me could be correct. The crowd pictures which I have seen of the two rallies are quite similar. The picture which ArlJim78 posted was definitely taken well before the rally began.

The quote in which I said there could have been 175,000 to 200,000 present at the rally was based on what I read.
Let me say it this way. Photographic evidence shows that the area on either side of and at the far end of the reflecting pool was at least as dense as at the beck rally. I have only seen one wider shot and that was the one ArlJim78 posted. That shot was taken much earlier.

[bigmack]

The quote in which I said there could have been 175,000 to 200,000 present at the rally was based on what I read.
Let me say it this way. Photographic evidence shows that the area on either side of and at the far end of the reflecting pool was at least as dense as at the beck rally. I have only seen one wider shot and that was the one ArlJim78 posted. That shot was taken much earlier.
You didn't say 'could have been' you said "In fact". You're a phony./

There are plenty of photos showing a crowd at least as large as beck had.
Let's go, cough it up. If there are plenty of photos why can't I find any showing this huge crowd? My Google skills are as good as any.

Show us the shot or you are a bald faced liar. I've seen time stamped shots and the turnout was weak at best.

[mostpost]

You didn't say 'could have been' you said "In fact". You're a phony./


Let's go, cough it up. If there are plenty of photos why can't I find any showing this huge crowd? My Google skills are as good as any.

Show us the shot or you are a bald faced liar. I've seen time stamped shots and the turnout was weak at best.
I said "in fact the estimate". That means could have been.
Until I find a satellite or aerial photo taken in the middle of the rally (say between 1 and 3 EDT, I will neither claim the One Nation Rally was much larger nor accept a claim it was much smaller.

Just so you know, I based my opinion on what I saw watching this rally and the Beck rally on CSPAN.

[serp]

If group A (Communists) supports group B (Liberals) does that mean that group B is now part of or supports group A?

This is the equation used by this thread to say liberals are communist. I'm curious if anyone making this argument would stand behind this equation so that we could plug in some other values for A and B and see if you still agree.

[bigmack]

I said "in fact the estimate". That means could have been.
Until I find a satellite or aerial photo taken in the middle of the rally (say between 1 and 3 EDT, I will neither claim the One Nation Rally was much larger nor accept a claim it was much smaller.
You're a phony!

Where's all these photo's you said are over the place? As well as give us a link where you read the LuLu Rally was estimated over 175,000.

[bigmack]

I will neither claim the One Nation Rally was much larger nor accept a claim it was much smaller.

Just so you know, I based my opinion on what I saw watching this rally and the Beck rally on CSPAN.
Come on, show me that same outrage you had when Fox used the wrong photo.
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/p00.png

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/p000.png
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/figures-cspan-uses-tea-party-rally-shot-for-leftist-one-nation-rally/

You're so resourceful when you want to be. Here's a little Google help for ya:
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=aerial+one+nation+rally&aq=f&aqi=g4g-o1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=c6affe93747c32d0

[fast4522]

If group A (Communists) supports group B (Liberals) does that mean that group B is now part of or supports group A?

This is the equation used by this thread to say liberals are communist. I'm curious if anyone making this argument would stand behind this equation so that we could plug in some other values for A and B and see if you still agree.

It is to say Liberals will get into bed with anyone, when people vote they will feel repugnant to that.

[serp]

It is to say Liberals will get into bed with anyone, when people vote they will feel repugnant to that.

So does this mean that the liberals aren't communists?

Does it also mean you agree that the equation can be used to show someone in bed with someone else then?

[boxcar]

If group A (Communists) supports group B (Liberals) does that mean that group B is now part of or supports group A?

This is the equation used by this thread to say liberals are communist. I'm curious if anyone making this argument would stand behind this equation so that we could plug in some other values for A and B and see if you still agree.

Sure. Haven't you heard the old Arab proverb: "Then enemy of my enemy is my friend"?

Boxcar

[bigmack]

There are plenty of photos showing a crowd at least as large as beck had.
cEsZaDWsgkE

[boxcar]

I didn't know Mosty was fat...or is it just his head? :D

Boxcar

[BlueShoe]

If group A (Communists) supports group B (Liberals) does that mean that group B is now part of or supports group A?

This is the equation used by this thread to say liberals are communist. I'm curious if anyone making this argument would stand behind this equation so that we could plug in some other values for A and B and see if you still agree.
Okay, lets go back and take a look at our old high school math. Recall those old equations that went something like this; If A=B, and if B=C, and if C=D, then A is equal to D. Now apply that to political ideology;
Liberalism=Progressivism, Progressivism=Socialism, Socialism=Communism, therefore Liberalism=Communism.

[mostpost]

Come on, show me that same outrage you had when Fox used the wrong photo.
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/p00.png

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/p000.png
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/figures-cspan-uses-tea-party-rally-shot-for-leftist-one-nation-rally/

You're so resourceful when you want to be. Here's a little Google help for ya:
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=aerial+one+nation+rally&aq=f&aqi=g4g-o1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=c6affe93747c32d0
So Gateway Pundit accuses CSPAN of deliberately using the wrong photo.
Then it posts a photo that is actually from Reuters not C-Span. Then it tells us to notice the Gadsden flags in the background. There are no flags which can be read by any stretch of the imagination. There is no proof that the photo shown is not of the One Nation Rally. And there is no reason that Reuters would post a fake picture.
As for CSPAN, they do not do political commentary. CSPAN is not a liberal organization. CSPAN is not a conservative organization. Apparently you don't watch CSPAN. Their hosts do not express opinions. In interviews they ask questions designed to elicit the opinions of their guests, not to challenge those opinions. One of the things CSPAN is most proud of is that a viewer can not determnine the political leanings of any of its on air personnel. CSPAN would not post a picture which was not what it purported to be.

As per your request, here is a link to the story with the 175,000
to 200,000 number
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39477161
pertinent excerpt:
Denise Gray-Felder, a spokeswoman for the organizers of the rally, estimated that 175,000 to 200,000 people attended.

Honestly, I would like to see that satellite picture. All the other pictures don't tell me a whole lot, except that the two crowds in the area directly in front of the Lincoln Memorial to the far end of the reflecting pool are similar.

This whole thing has become very aggravating. Not just you, but all these news organizations who can't or won't give an estimate of crowd size. How hard can it be. You go up in a helicopter. You take a photo of the entire crowd. You superimpose a grid with a hundred squares. You choose several squares with varying degrees of density. You count the total number of people in those squares, divide by the number of squares you've chosen then multiply times 100.
I think you would get a good deal of accuracy that way. It would certainly be better than the wimp out "Tens of Thousands" That could mean anything. It could mean 20,000. It could mean 300,000.
The whole thing is just extremely annoying. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[BlueShoe]

Wow Mosty, you give us a link to MSNBC as a supposedly reliable source? Now that is really funny. You do know how MSNBC and its corps of far left loons is regarded here, dont you? Hardly think you wish us to remind you again, do you? Didnt think so.

[mostpost]

Wow Mosty, you give us a link to MSNBC as a supposedly reliable source? Now that is really funny. You do know how MSNBC and its corps of far left loons is regarded here, dont you? Hardly think you wish us to remind you again, do you? Didnt think so.
About the same way I regard Fox News or Breirtbart or Gateway, or Hot Air.
If you had clicked on the link instead of just posting gibberish, you would have seen that the story was from Reuters, not from MSNBC. MSNBC merely picked it up.
If you were really paying attention, you would know that I posted it because someone doubted my statement that I had heard an estimate of 175,000 attendees. I wasn't trying to prove there were 175,000 people there. I was trying to prove that I had read that there were 175,000 people there.

[bigmack]

The whole thing is just extremely annoying.
Not as if I care all that much but we both know the turnout for the LeftFest was WAY under the BeckDay. Acknowledge that and we're square.

[TJDave]

And there is no reason that Reuters would post a fake picture.


Reuters???

Are you frickin' kidding me? :rolleyes:

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/Bold_Distortions_and_Outright_Lies.asp

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/Special_Analysis_Fauxtography_-_Reuters_Caught_Again.asp

[bigmack]

About the same way I regard Fox News or Breirtbart or Gateway, or Hot Air.
OK, I've had to do your work for you. The best evidence I found in your corner was broadcast on a certain network. Are ya ready?

Voilà!
(Darn shame it has no credibility given the source)

W3SbXiA7hbg

[hcap]

Okay, lets go back and take a look at our old high school math. Recall those old equations that went something like this; If A=B, and if B=C, and if C=D, then A is equal to D. Now apply that to political ideology;
Liberalism=Progressivism, Progressivism=Socialism, Socialism=Communism, therefore Liberalism=Communism.YEAH, HIGH SCHOOL MATH AS TAUGHT BY THIS GUY.....

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lAur_I077NA&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lAur_I077NA&hl=en_GB&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

[hcap]

Okay, lets go back and take a look at our old high school math. Recall those old equations that went something like this; If A=B, and if B=C, and if C=D, then A is equal to D. Now apply that to political ideology;
Liberalism=Progressivism, Progressivism=Socialism, Socialism=Communism, therefore Liberalism=Communism.Yeah, and you and your hero Glenn Beck......

And finally, on Sept. 18, 2009, Beck delivered proof of the nefarious link between the two presidents: the "Tree of Revolution."

The tree, which Beck illustrated on his ever-present chalkboard, looked to be a sturdy oak. Buried where the trunk sat was Wilson. To the left of Wilson, also in the roots, was Che Guevara, the Marxist revolutionary. To the right of Wilson was Saul Alinsky, the late social radical. Farther up the trunk was SDS -- Students for a Democratic Society, a group that protested the Vietnam War in the 1960s. Above SDS were the words "Cloward and Piven," an obscure reference to two Columbia University academics who in 1966 wrote a Nation magazine article proposing a radical anti-poverty strategy that Beck believes is the basis of an enduring leftist conspiracy to destroy the American economy.

He then unveiled more elements of the arboreal conspiracy: The Apollo Alliance, funded by Soros, wrote Obama's stimulus bill! Apollo's Jeff Jones, along with Obama friend Ayers, "came right from SDS," which is "code language for Marxism," and formed the Weather Underground, responsible for "blowing up the Pentagon"! (Actually, the group blew up a bathroom, but still . . .) ACORN founder Wade Rathke is connected to SEIU because "his brother Dale is at SEIU, we think." (SEIU denies this, and there is no evidence for it.) The whole bunch was inspired by Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, who wanted to "get everyone on welfare, just start racking up the bills so the American financial system would eventually collapse."

In summary, Woodrow Wilson mated with an Argentine revolutionary and a Chicago radical, gave birth to a 1960s antiwar group and a pair of Columbia academics, who in turn spawned ACORN, the SEIU, the Apollo Alliance, the Weather Underground, George Soros -- and Barack Obama..

.....Milbank

.

[fast4522]

We outnumber you, what and where you live can turn to shit no problem because they are right "we do not care", get used to it.

[hcap]

We outnumber you, what and where you live can turn to shit no problem because they are right "we do not care", get used to it.Cryptic threat Filthmeister?. Learn to speak English before you think you have won.

[Tom]

Learn to speak English before you think you have won.

Will you have this same requirement of all your planned amnesty voters?

[hcap]

Like Meg Whitmans' housekeeper? :)

[boxcar]

Like Meg Whitmans' housekeeper? :)

Or like all the illegals on Colin Powell's house staff.

Boxcar

[delayjf]

And you are predicting a Republican campaign issue?

Come to think of it you're right - I'm now hoping the DNC takes that list and runs with it.

I agree with you about Iraqi Oil - we should hit them with the bill.

[hcap]

Or like all the illegals on Colin Powell's house staff.

BoxcarWhitman is running for office, Not Powell.
The baggers and repugs are losing ground recently. Whitmans' housekeeper issue does not help

[PaceAdvantage]

The whole thing is just extremely annoying. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:When you've been proven to be so very wrong, I would imagine it would be....

[boxcar]

Whitman is running for office, Not Powell.
The baggers and repugs are losing ground recently. Whitmans' housekeeper issue does not help (emphasis mine)

Your reply in hate speech is duly noted.

Boxcar

[hcap]

Sort of like calling everyone a commie?
Or maybe "filth"?

Btw left out "Tea" purposely.

[boxcar]

Reuters???

Are you frickin' kidding me? :rolleyes:

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/Bold_Distortions_and_Outright_Lies.asp

http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/Special_Analysis_Fauxtography_-_Reuters_Caught_Again.asp

It's no wonder at all that Mosty is such a huge fan of Reuters. Peas in a pod syndrome and all that good stuff...

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Sort of like calling everyone a commie?
Or maybe "filth"?

Btw left out "Tea" purposely.

So, you left it out purposely because you thought it would keep everyone guessing as to whom you were referencing? :bang: :bang: You must think everyone else is as loony as you are.

And "commie" is not a pejorative term. It's more of a colloquialism. The term, can only be thought as hateful speech is you believe "communist" is hateful.
What about "Marxist"? Is that hate speech, too? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Okay, lets go back and take a look at our old high school math. Recall those old equations that went something like this; If A=B, and if B=C, and if C=D, then A is equal to D. Now apply that to political ideology;
Liberalism=Progressivism, Progressivism=Socialism, Socialism=Communism, therefore Liberalism=Communism.
thanks for playing "Really bad analogies" . You say if A=B and if B=C etc. The big word there is the small word "if". If your premise is not true then your conclusion is false.
Liberalism=Progressivism. This could be true. They are at least quite similar.

Progressivism=Socialism. Not even close. Liberals/Progressives support captialism. But we understand that capitalism is like a five year old in a candy store. If we don't watch and control him he will eat all the candy and make himself sick. Not only that but if he is the biggest five year old in the store, he will not share with the other kids. We understand the need for checks and balances between capital and labor and government,
Socialists believe that all aspects of production should be controlled by the workers. Unlike liberals/progressives, socialists would deny a role to capitalists. In socialism, the government enforces the tenants of socialism, but the government is subject to change by vote.
Socialistism=Communism. There is an even bigger disconnect between socialism and communism than between Progressivism and Socialism.
Communists believe that the state, not capitalists, not workers, should control the means of production (capital and labor). Communists believe that the Party (Commumnist) should control the state. Ergo; the party controls government, capital, and labor and is immune to change.

There is a huge difference from liberalism/Progressiveism to Communism.

[mostpost]

Or like all the illegals on Colin Powell's house staff.

Boxcar
Thank you for pointing out another Republican who has illegals on his house staff. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Except you got it wrong, again. People, illegal or otherwise, hired by Powell to work on his house, are not on his staff. They are on the payroll of the contractor doing the work.

Also, Powell later denied knowing if any of those workers was illegal. :rolleyes:

[johnhannibalsmith]

... We understand the need for checks and balances between capital and labor and government...

What we don't seem to entiende is that a lot of actual capitalists, not pseudo-capitalists, the real ones that are the actual catalysts of economic growth and stability - they rarely buy into this shit. When the captalist free-market system becomes, or threatens to become, a capitalist ocassionally-free-depending-upon-the-needs-or-whims-of-government-market system - even if it is perceieved that it MAY move away from traditional systems, the catalysts no longer catalyze.

It's real easy to sit back and lump everyone together and hail the need for our bloated, ineffective, dysfunctional federal government to protect and shield and guard in every capacity other than the common capacity for which it should do so.

When you're on the other side of the coin and simply trying to succeed and you have nitwits putting figurative handcuffs on you, demonizing you, and changing the rules of the game midstream not to be fair per se, but to appease for their own personal political gain - I just can't grasp how you can continue to act as though this non-traditional sentiment of economic policy that has permeated the mainstream isn't holding recovery and growth hostage. But yet, the same folks can read between the slimmest of lines to herald the genius of spending policies that don't appear to have made much, if any impact.

These idiots can make all the laws and create all the regulations, safeguards, agencies, commissions, departments, Co-Chair Pro Tem Subcommittee --- it's all bullshit - they can't do the damn job of saving you from yourself and others any better than you or anyone else can -- ALL they can do is make their own profiteering corporation larger for future generations of slime. Keep believing these degenerates are solving problems with these edicts that you swallow up.

[BlueShoe]

There is a huge difference from liberalism/Progressiveism to Communism.
I remain unconvinced. I have openly stated on several occasions that I consider Barack Obama to be the modern Vladimir Lenin and the Democrats in Congress to be his fellow Bolsheviks. "Communist" is a word that is not supposed to be used. It is rather like the "N" word, if you use use it you are considered to be a bad fellow. Cappys reference to McCarthyism and cheap shot at Beck are typical leftist reactions. Even most conservative politicians and commentators refrain from saying communist. Only Beck, Mark Levin, and Michael Savage, have had the courage to use it when pointing out just how pervasive Marxism has become in modern American society and politics.

[HUSKER55]

are you really going to say that Powell has not idea of what is going on in his own house? I don't think stupid is a word I would use to describe Powell.

Btw, didn't Powell change horses and go with obama?

correct or not?

thanks

[boxcar]

Thank you for pointing out another Republican who has illegals on his house staff. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Except you got it wrong, again. People, illegal or otherwise, hired by Powell to work on his house, are not on his staff. They are on the payroll of the contractor doing the work.

Also, Powell later denied knowing if any of those workers was illegal. :rolleyes:

I'm equally as happy to point out the hypocrisies of RINOs as I am with Dem libs. So, you're quite welcome.

Of course, Powell would deny it. Why would you expect any differently from a lib? (Oh yeah...that's right because you're one.) :rolleyes:

Also, here's the bottom line: The buck stops with Powell because he's paying the contractor. The onus is on Powell to know if the contractor's workers are here legally.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

There is a huge difference from liberalism/Progressiveism to Communism.

No there is not! The huge difference of which you speak is really between freedom-loving Constitutionalists and liberals/progressives. The latter share very many of the values of communists including but not limited to the support of the progressive income tax system, class warfare propaganda, identity politics, mobilization of unions against corporations who employ workers, "social justice" policies, anti-God policies and rhetoric, control of public education, intense focus on propagandizing the youth in our schools, the aggressive pursuit of the communist ideal of "from each according to his need to each according to his need", equal outcomes, usurping the real property rights of owners, man-made global whatever change :rolleyes: etc., etc., etc.

Boxcar

[Mike at A+]

Video of people cleaning up the mess after 10/02 ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0Hn-fDLk58

[hcap]

So, you left it out purposely because you thought it would keep everyone guessing as to whom you were referencing? :bang: :bang: You must think everyone else is as loony as you are.

And "commie" is not a pejorative term. It's more of a colloquialism. The term, can only be thought as hateful speech is you believe "communist" is hateful.
What about "Marxist"? Is that hate speech, too? :rolleyes:

BoxcarYou are the Claude Rains of PA off topic.
Yos say shocked, just shocked to find out this is going om here? I guess all the time you told people tthey were the spawn of hell and all that other crap you bandy around is just roses?

Btw,the way you use "commie" os as pejorative as it comes. Accusations of traitorhood and ungodliness is your modus operandi

[boxcar]

Video of people cleaning up the mess after 10/02 ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0Hn-fDLk58

Trash is as trash does!

These folks graphically defined for us what is meant by garbage in, garbage out.
The mess speaks poignantly and poorly to the moral deficiencies of this group -- a group who boasts at every turn how much compassion it has for others -- how much they care for others, how much unfairness there is in the world, etc., etc. Yet, they think nothing about how others must suffer the consequences of their actions.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

You are the Claude Rains of PA off topic.
Yos say shocked, just shocked to find out this is going om here? I guess all the time you told people tthey were the spawn of hell and all that other crap you bandy around is just roses?

Actually, I don't recall telling any poster here that he/she was the "spawn of hell". Can you back that accusation up?

Btw,the way you use "commie" os as pejorative as it comes. Accusations of traitorhood and ungodliness is your modus operandi

I have called many a lib politician (on both sides of the aisle) these things. And again, I don't understand your complaint about being called ungodly. Did you have some epiphany moment recently that we don't know about? Did you actually meet up with your UNKNOWN or UNKNOWABLE god while you were meditating in an outhouse somewhere? Short of this, one would think that you'd wear the badge UNGODLY with great honor. What's your beef?

Boxcar

[riskman]

Headline on Yahoo! Finance TechTicker: Joe Biden on Taxes: “You Call It ‘Redistribution of Wealth,’ I Call It ‘Just Being Fair.’”

Okay, Mr. Vice President. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I see now that the executive office’s position on wealth is that it is not fair for some to have more wealth than others and the fair thing to do then is to redistribute what some people have to others even if it has to be done without their permission. Wow! Was my Kindergarten teacher Ms. Lund wrong. She taught us that that was called stealing. As you can probably imagine, I’m actually quite upset at her right now for not doing a better job of explaining this to us at age 5 since I see now that I have forgone countless opportunities since then to redistribute wealth my way. See more here:

http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/do-you-recognize-this-marxist-country/

[mostpost]

No there is not! The huge difference of which you speak is really between freedom-loving Constitutionalists and liberals/progressives. The latter share very many of the values of communists including but not limited to the support of the progressive income tax system,
there's your first dumb statement. Thinking because I support a progressive income tax, that I support any communist policies. The progresive tax system is the fairest system because it puts the largest burden on the group most able to carry that burden.
class warfare propaganda,
Indeed there is class warfare in this country. Corporations have been waging war aganst the people who work for them since the start of the Industrial Revolution. People worked seven days a week. People worked 14 hours + a day. Children as young as 8 worked. Workers were chained to their work station and not allowed bathroom breaks. Now after years of progress, the corporations are trying to return to the good old days.
identity politics,
You mean like Sarah Palin, Gleen Beck and Rush Limbaugh?
mobilization of unions against corporations who employ workers,
Mobilization of unions to protect workers from corporations.
"social justice" policies,
As opposed to greed and only thinking of yourself.
anti-God policies and rhetoric,
Not anti-God, but anti narrow minded and pro respect for others
control of public education, intense focus on propagandizing the youth in our schools,
As compared to Conservatives who want to destroy public education and replace it with a private system accessible to only the privleged few.

the aggressive pursuit of the communist ideal of "from each according to his need to each according to his need",
At least get the quote right. "From each according to his ability, etc. BTW that is a philosophy that never happened in any Communist country, for the same reason trickle down never worked here. Because in both cases a powerful elite took control.

equal outcomes, usurping the real property rights of owners, man-made global whatever change :rolleyes: etc., etc., etc.

Boxcar
Nothing you say is ever right. Proving you wrong is so easy that it's boring.
The hard thing is getting you to realize you've been beaten. Every time.

[BlueShoe]

Trash is as trash does!

These folks graphically defined for us what is meant by garbage in, garbage out.
The mess speaks poignantly and poorly to the moral deficiencies of this group -- a group who boasts at every turn how much compassion it has for others -- how much they care for others, how much unfairness there is in the world, etc., etc. Yet, they think nothing about how others must suffer the consequences of their actions.

Boxcar
Try to catch the replay of todays Beck program to see a firsthand example of this. Graphic difference between the 10/28 gathering in DC and the one on 10/02. According to the Fox schedule, not on again until 11 PDT, 2 EDT, so set your recorders and take a look at how the left treated DC that day.

[mostpost]

Headline on Yahoo! Finance TechTicker: Joe Biden on Taxes: “You Call It ‘Redistribution of Wealth,’ I Call It ‘Just Being Fair.’”

Okay, Mr. Vice President. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I see now that the executive office’s position on wealth is that it is not fair for some to have more wealth than others and the fair thing to do then is to redistribute what some people have to others even if it has to be done without their permission. Wow! Was my Kindergarten teacher Ms. Lund wrong. She taught us that that was called stealing. As you can probably imagine, I’m actually quite upset at her right now for not doing a better job of explaining this to us at age 5 since I see now that I have forgone countless opportunities since then to redistribute wealth my way. See more here:

http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/do-you-recognize-this-marxist-country/
Not redistribution of wealth. Proper distribution of wealth. If someone acquires his wealth because someone else is not sufficiently compensated for their contribution, then that first person does not have a claim on that wealth.
Put it this way. You buy 100 balls of yarn at $1 each. You hire people to knit that yarn into 100 sweaters. Then you sell those sweaters for $50. Without those employes your 100 balls of yarn are worth $100 . With them they are worth $5000 dollars. You, being the rotten guy you are, ;) pay your employees $1000 dollars for the work they did. You contributed 2% to the value of the product. They contributed 98% in total. You get 80% of the gross. They get 20%. The 80% is all for you. The 20% is divided among x number of employees.

And please, nobody say, "well they agreed to work for that wage" because there is no longer a balanced negotiation on wages in most places in this country. Conservative policies have damaged the power of unions. The conservative recession has increased the number of persons seeking employment, thereby driving wages down.

Someone will surely bring up those who are not working and receiving welfare. I am a retired postal worker. Not a rich person by any means. I don't begrudge helping people who need it. But you apparently do.

[boxcar]

Not redistribution of wealth. Proper distribution of wealth. If someone acquires his wealth because someone else is not sufficiently compensated for their contribution, then that first person does not have a claim on that wealth.

No, it's REdistribution. The money was always distributed once, but misguided socialists don't like how it was distributed the first time, so now they want to redistribute due to some fanciful theory that the money was earned unfairly -- "on the backs of the poor" (the same way Marx believed, by the way!) What the socialists don't want to consider or talk about are the multitudes of other [b]disparities[/i] in life that we all commonly experience. We could start by discussing a point Tom raised once -- the GREAT Disparity in EFFORT. Or how 'bout the disparity in skills? Or how 'bout the disparity in intelligence? You socialists never want to dig below the surface of money. Money is only the expression of reward for hard work, wise investment in education, etc. In short, someone has applied himself in order to achieve a substantial reward. The opposite is equally true in most cases. Underachievers rightfully don't deserve ample rewards.

Boxcar

Put it this way. You buy 100 balls of yarn at $1 each. You hire people to knit that yarn into 100 sweaters. Then you sell those sweaters for $50. Without those employes your 100 balls of yarn are worth $100 . With them they are worth $5000 dollars. You, being the rotten guy you are, ;) pay your employees $1000 dollars for the work they did. You contributed 2% to the value of the product. They contributed 98% in total. You get 80% of the gross. They get 20%. The 80% is all for you. The 20% is divided among x number of employees.

No, the hypothetical 80% the COMPANY keeps as GROSS profit BEFORE all the business expenses are paid and BEFORE taxes are paid. The 80% is not kept by an individual.

Boxcar

[johnhannibalsmith]

Not redistribution of wealth. Proper distribution of wealth. If someone acquires his wealth because someone else is not sufficiently compensated for their contribution, then that first person does not have a claim on that wealth.
...

The guy that invents the telephone and spends all of his capital and time on his creation needs to be dictated to about how much he can earn relative to those that would not have that job without his creation. Gotcha. I'm probably the poorest son of a bitch in the room, but even I realize that if I rob from Peter today, Peter won't be producing anything to steal in short order.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by mostpost
Not redistribution of wealth. Proper distribution of wealth. If someone acquires his wealth because someone else is not sufficiently compensated for their contribution, then that first person does not have a claim on that wealth.


I want out out of this country right now.

[ArlJim78]

Its not up to the state to stick its nose into private affairs with the aim to determine what is a "proper distribution of wealth". Once the state is involved so deeply, it is ALL an improper distribution of wealth, which in turn is a breeding ground for all of the maladies which currently infect our country. The state does not, and cannot know what each persons correct distribution of wealth should be.

[BlueShoe]

Not redistribution of wealth. Proper distribution of wealth. If someone acquires his wealth because someone else is not sufficiently compensated for their contribution, then that first person does not have a claim on that wealth.
Okay Mosty, lets take this line of logic to the racetrack. Lets say that you and I go to the same track on the same day. We each put in a great deal of time and effort handicapping the card, and we each wager the same amount of money during the day. It is my day, I pick several good priced winners and come home a big winner. You, on the other hand, do not cash a single ticket and go home broke. According to your twisted logic, you deserve a share of my winnings. You put in just as much time and effort as well as investing as much money as did I, so proper distribution of wealth would require me to hand over a portion of my earnings to you, right? This is the kind of socialist, collectivist, Marxist mindset that leftists have. Even though they may have done little or nothing to earn a part of the wealth they envy because of lack of effort or incompetence, they feel entitled to part of it.

[mostpost]

Okay Mosty, lets take this line of logic to the racetrack. Lets say that you and I go to the same track on the same day. We each put in a great deal of time and effort handicapping the card, and we each wager the same amount of money during the day. It is my day, I pick several good priced winners and come home a big winner. You, on the other hand, do not cash a single ticket and go home broke. According to your twisted logic, you deserve a share of my winnings. You put in just as much time and effort as well as investing as much money as did I, so proper distribution of wealth would require me to hand over a portion of my earnings to you, right? This is the kind of socialist, collectivist, Marxist mindset that leftists have. Even though they may have done little or nothing to earn a part of the wealth they envy because of lack of effort or incompetence, they feel entitled to part of it.
Here's where you're wrong. I don't feel that I deserve any part of your winnings because I did not contribute to those winnings. If we were a betting partnership wherein I handicapped Maiden Special Weights races and turf races and you handicapped claiming races and allowance races, then we should have an agreement as to division of spoils. Otherwise, we are independent entities and what I do has no relation to what you do and vice versa.
But an employee has a direct relationship with his employer, and what that employee does impacts the profit made by the employer. He ought to be fairly compensated for that.
How do we decide what is fair compensation? Through negotiation between equals. Obviously a single worker will not contribute what the owner of a business contributes. So in face to face negotiations he will not have equal footing. But all the workers negotiating together will.

There are two issues here. One is proper compensation for people who work for a company and add value to that company. The other is people who are not working for anyone.

You don't think we should help those people. I do. I think the best way to help them is to get them into a situation where we no longer need to help them, but, failing that, we should provide them with basic help.

While I don't like the idea that there are those (much fewer than you think) who are gaming the system, I believe that we still need to help those in need. And, BTW I contribute to that help just as much proportionally as the owner of any business.

[mostpost]

I want out out of this country right now.

Directions to Fort Erie, ON Total Time: 1 hours 50 mins, Total Distance: 99.52 miSummary and Notes
START Canandaigua, NY
FINISH Fort Erie, ON
Add your notes here...
Map & DirectionsMap OnlyDirections Only Show Cumulative Distance
DistanceCumulative 1.Starting in CANANDAIGUA, NY on ONTARIO ST go toward N MAIN ST go 128 ft0.02 mi
2.Turn RIGHT on N MAIN ST go 1.33 mi1.35 mi
3.Continue on ROCHESTER RD(RT-332) go 4.01 mi5.36 mi
4.Continue to follow RT-332 go 2.96 mi8.32 mi
5.Bear RIGHT on RT-332 (Toll applies) go 0.24 mi8.56 mi
6.Take LEFT ramp onto I-90 W toward BUFFALO (Toll applies) go 79.04 mi87.59 mi
7.Take exit #53/DOWNTOWN BUFFALO/CANADA onto I-190 N go 6.69 mi94.28 mi
8.Take exit #9/PEACE BRIDGE/FT ERIE CAN toward PEACE BRIDGE/FT ERIE CAN go 0.41 mi94.7 mi
9.Turn LEFT on PEACE BRIDGE PLZ (Toll applies) go 0.32 mi95.01 mi 10.Continue on PEACE BRG (Toll applies) go 0.6 mi95.61 mi
11.Continue on QEW (Toll applies) go 0.96 mi96.57 mi
12.Take exit #2/THOMPSON ROAD SOUTH onto THOMPSON RD(RR-122 S) go 0.91 mi97.49 mi Show Detail Map
13.Turn RIGHT on GARRISON RD(HWY-3) go 1.81 mi99.29 mi
14.Turn LEFT on MUNICIPAL CENTRE DR go 0.23 mi99.52 mi
15.Arrive at the center of FORT ERIE, ON 99.52 mi

Time: 1 hours 50 mins, Distance: 99.52 mi

Don't let the door hit you in the A** on your way out. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[boxcar]

Here's where you're wrong. I don't feel that I deserve any part of your winnings because I did not contribute to those winnings.

Oh....Blueie, forgive me...but I gotta jump in here.

Mosty, Mr. Blue is dead on target. He is not wrong! You did contribute to his winnings! Don't you understand how parimutuel wagering works? :bang: :bang: There is a direct connection between Blue and ALL players who contributed into the win pool of the races Blue played! Mr. Blue's winnings came at YOUR expense and the expense of all other losing players! In this sense, therefore, you contributed to his big day. He wouldn't have had that big day had it not been for all the "dumb money" bet on the losers in the races he won. Or stated differently...if the "dumb money" had been smarter and wagered on Mr. Blue's selections instead, he wouldn't have had a big day. In fact, he probably wouldn't have wagered on some of those selections because the "smart money" would have kept the prices too low and diminished the value factor too greatly.

Ball's in your court, Mosty.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Oh....Blueie, forgive me...but I gotta jump in here.

Mosty, Mr. Blue is dead on target. He is not wrong! You did contribute to his winnings! Don't you understand how parimutuel wagering works? :bang: :bang: There is a direct connection between Blue and ALL players who contributed into the win pool of the races Blue played! Mr. Blue's winnings came at YOUR expense and the expense of all other losing players! In this sense, therefore, you contributed to his big day. He wouldn't have had that big day had it not been for all the "dumb money" bet on the losers in the races he won. Or stated differently...if the "dumb money" had been smarter and wagered on Mr. Blue's selections instead, he wouldn't have had a big day. In fact, he probably wouldn't have wagered on some of those selections because the "smart money" would have kept the prices too low and diminished the value factor too greatly.

Ball's in your court, Mosty.

Boxcar
I am fully aware of how the pari mutual system works. And I know all about the theory of looking for value in wagering. You know as well as I do that I was not referring to what I may have contributed monetarily to Blue Shoe's winnings. I was referring any contribution I may have made in selecting the horses on which he wagered. That was obvious from the context. Unless you're being deliberately obtuse.

[TrifectaMike]

Not redistribution of wealth. Proper distribution of wealth. If someone acquires his wealth because someone else is not sufficiently compensated for their contribution, then that first person does not have a claim on that wealth.
Put it this way. You buy 100 balls of yarn at $1 each. You hire people to knit that yarn into 100 sweaters. Then you sell those sweaters for $50. Without those employes your 100 balls of yarn are worth $100 . With them they are worth $5000 dollars. You, being the rotten guy you are, ;) pay your employees $1000 dollars for the work they did. You contributed 2% to the value of the product. They contributed 98% in total. You get 80% of the gross. They get 20%. The 80% is all for you. The 20% is divided among x number of employees.

And please, nobody say, "well they agreed to work for that wage" because there is no longer a balanced negotiation on wages in most places in this country. Conservative policies have damaged the power of unions. The conservative recession has increased the number of persons seeking employment, thereby driving wages down.

Someone will surely bring up those who are not working and receiving welfare. I am a retired postal worker. Not a rich person by any means. I don't begrudge helping people who need it. But you apparently do.

In your chosen occupation do you receive a salary? According to your post, since we obsorb the losses incurred yearly, should we receive a portion of your salary to cover the losses?

Mike

[boxcar]

I am fully aware of how the pari mutual system works. And I know all about the theory of looking for value in wagering. You know as well as I do that I was not referring to what I may have contributed monetarily to Blue Shoe's winnings. I was referring any contribution I may have made in selecting the horses on which he wagered. That was obvious from the context. Unless you're being deliberately obtuse.

Did I not use the phrase "in this sense"? :bang: :bang: You don't read too swell, do you? This phrase implied a different sense than what you intended. :rolleyes:

This is why your opposition to Blue's analogy falls flat on its keister. You don't want to go there because of the obvious: There was a big disparity between his skills on that day and yours -- and your respective rewards were totally fair! You got fully what you deserved; and he got his just reward which he earned and is entitled to. This the way life works.

Now...wanna get into the Disparities part of your redistribution of wealth equation?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

In your chosen occupation do you receive a salary? According to your post, since we obsorb the losses incurred yearly, should we receive a portion of your salary to cover the losses?

Mike

Oh...that's harsh. :lol: :lol: There certainly should a redistribution of losses.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

In your chosen occupation do you receive a salary? According to your post, since we obsorb the losses incurred yearly, should we receive a portion of your salary to cover the losses?

Mike
No, you should not. In the first place, the people you want to ask reimbursement of are not postal workers, but postal management. It was postal management that set rates to bulk mailers below what was required to make that service pay for itself. It was postal management that offered discounts for mail preperation that exceeded the cost savings realized from that preperation. It was postal management that failed to anticipate the effects of electronic mail.

In the second place you don't deserve reimbursement because you never bursed. As I have explained several times, apparently to no avail. USPS does not receive tax money. It operates on revenue earned through the sale of postage and services. When that money is insufficient, as it usually is, USPS borrows money which is repaid from the revenue it earns.

[fast4522]

Right Mostie, just like most of your garb!

Best thing they can do is get rid of Saturday mail.

[HUSKER55]

THE post office does not show a profit and it is always someone elses fault.

You guys are talking to a government mule or to my 6 year old grand son.