Skip to main content

View Diary: Can You Accept Simpson Bowles-Sh!t and Still Call Yourself a Democrat? (251 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Uh... Both Clinton AND Obama Mentioned the Poor (14+ / 0-)

    Is it possible you haven't seen a Democratic Convention Speech since 1984?

    Too Folk For You. - Schmidting in the Punch Bowl - verb - Committing an unexpected and underhanded political act intended to "spoil the party."

    by TooFolkGR on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 08:34:43 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  You're kidding me right? (4+ / 0-)

      There are no sacred cows.

      by LaEscapee on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 08:37:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

        •  Wow that "impressive" factless diary again (6+ / 0-)

          And I've proven I have been right but context and reading is not really your thing. Cuomo's speech hit this theme.

          Rich-Poor Gap Widens to Most Since 1967 as Income Falls

          Since it's not fawning over a politician it's probably not your thing, though. It wasn't really hit on either as a theme at the DNC or in this campaign.

          ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

          by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 08:53:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Just Making Sure It's Linked Early (9+ / 0-)

            So any new Kossacks can appreciate your... pile of... information in the appropriate context.

            Too Folk For You. - Schmidting in the Punch Bowl - verb - Committing an unexpected and underhanded political act intended to "spoil the party."

            by TooFolkGR on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 08:54:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  This one has links and info to back it up (4+ / 0-)

              Again, not your thing; one who derails Medicare diaries and courageously refuses to read and boast about it.

              ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

              by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 08:56:22 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Heads up (12+ / 0-)

                I'm guessing that nobody reads your links besides your 6 or so true believers.  You and yours have written the same diary for years.  Speaking for myself; since there is nothing new to offer and we know your position, it saves time.  

                Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:01:08 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I don't need anything from you (4+ / 0-)

                  yyeah, you are speaking for yourself and that's all I need to know.

                  ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                  by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:14:02 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  well, judging by primary victories (5+ / 0-)

                    I think I might be closer to the pulse of the party than you.

                    Nothing personal (that's a key difference here, there seems to be a lot of personalization from your side while I want results).

                    Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                    by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:33:05 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I'm sure following me around trolling isn't... (3+ / 0-)

                      personal. Really, the Democratic Primary? You think you predicted that? lol. Whatevah.

                      ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                      by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:35:41 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Name one"progressive" primary victory (4+ / 0-)

                        I'll wait.

                        Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                        by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:37:03 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Huey Long (4+ / 0-)

                          http://en.wikipedia.org/...

                          Huey Long won in 1928 by tapping into the class resentment of rural Louisianans. He proposed government services far more expansive than anything in Louisiana history. Long won the Democratic Primary election on January 17, 1928, with less than a majority of the vote, 43.9 percent (126,842 votes), as his opponents split the anti-Long vote with Riley J. Wilson earning 28.3 percent (81,747) and Oramel H. Simpson garnering 27.8 percent (80,326). At the time, Long's margin was the largest in state history, and neither opponent chose to face him in a run-off election. He won the General Election on April 17, 1928, with 96.1 percent (92,941) of the vote.
                          But perhaps you are trying the end justifies the means stupifying BS on President. Nixon only won in 1968 because Robert Kennedy was shot and barely at that as had Humphrey criticized the Vietnam war earlier, he would have won. Truman won using a populist campaign in 1948. Your bizarre theories on primaries and facts in general are not something I care one iota about and I'm certainly not going to hold your hand and read facts to you because you don't have the intellectual curiosity to think about any of them(For instance I go through why Carter really lost and it had 0 to do with Ted Kennedy who would have won if he was better prepared to answer why he would run. You see, there is always the missing nuance).

                          ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                          by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:08:56 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh (3+ / 0-)

                            you mean the man who was responsible for the "suspension of all constitutional guarantees in the state of Louisiana?" (1)  The man who confided to his biographer that "he intended to outlaw the Democratic and Republican parties and serve four terms 'as dictator of the country'" (2)

                            Nice example.  Not exactly what I call progressive.  In fact, it seems like something I would go out into the street and fight against.  

                            (1) Manchester, William: "A Narrative History of America, 1932-1972" p. 133.  Little, Brown and Company, 1975.

                            (2) Ibid, p. 138.

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:25:50 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  cite fix (3+ / 0-)

                            Manchester, William:  The Glory and the Dream: A Narrative History of America, 1932-1972" p. 133.  Little, Brown and Company, 1975.

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:28:19 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  How ... inconvenient nt (4+ / 0-)

                            Next thing you'll claim is that intending to be Dictator of the United States is somehow a bad thing.

                            Zen and the Art of Penis Truck Maintenance

                            by virginislandsguy on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:02:30 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well (3+ / 0-)

                            there are "neoliberal" threats to this country that require direct action. /snark

                            Really, before this gets out of hand, I'm willing to give Priceman the benefit of the doubt and just think him ignorant.  

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:20:34 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  He gave you FDIC insuarnce (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            aliasalias, poligirl, Words In Action

                            by filibustering the New Deal which were part of many of his programs(the reason you still have money in your accoutn after 2008). His rhetoric could go over the top, but your reference doesn't coincide with how he called FDR's NRA an abuse of power he was glad was over.

                            FDR also wanted to steal his thunder. The party he created along with Dr. Townsend was responsible for the first SS platform. I know you don' care about old people or SS though.

                            ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                            by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:11:50 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And he also built roads too, (2+ / 0-)

                            I'd rather have inefficient democracy than an efficient dictatorship, thank you very much.  

                            Now that I get a chilling feeling that you aren't so warm and fuzzy with the concept of constitutional governance (just as long as your side is calling the shots), I feel that there is no value to be had in communicating with you.  

                            Have a nice day.  

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:18:49 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Says someone who excuses the NDAA (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            poligirl, Words In Action

                            He was elected as Governor and that is just one account, most likely inaccurate. Dictatorships aren't won at the ballot box.

                            ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                            by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:23:41 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh really? (2+ / 0-)

                            Tell that to the Weimar republic.

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:27:21 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Myth: Democracy elected Hitler to power. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            poligirl, Words In Action

                            ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                            by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 12:54:03 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh wait (2+ / 0-)

                            the NSDAP/DNVP coalition didn't exist in your eyes, or the intimidation of the other parties (Zentrum, particularly) to pass the Enabling Act?

                            Just admit that you made a mistake in your comparison based on anger at me and being ill-informed in general.  It's what I think you did anyway.  

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 01:00:44 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  LOL. Well Mussolini made the trains (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Deep Texan

                            run on time and Hitler built the Autobahn.  You really need to study up on the first rule of holes.   You placed yourself directly in one when you decided to cite Huey Long as a "progressive".

                            Ultimately, the only thing that matters with respect to preserving choice is who will be nominating the next Supreme Court Justices.

                            by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 06:49:23 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, I didn't out myself in a hole... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Words In Action

                            or make lazy conflations based upon one quote from one guy who is not really even the main authority on Long. Comparing Huey Long, Mussolini, and Hitler? Now that's lazy BS.

                            ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                            by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 07:28:49 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You are the one who called demogogue Long (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Deep Texan

                            a "progressive".  Yeah.  Progressives really join together with Father Coughlin (the Rush Limbaugh of his age).  So, keep digging there.  

                            Ultimately, the only thing that matters with respect to preserving choice is who will be nominating the next Supreme Court Justices.

                            by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:55:54 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  He heavily influenced the New Deal... (0+ / 0-)

                            and fought against Standard Oil and the robber barons in hi state. Father Coughlin was also a supporter of FDR in 1992(Oh no! Everyone abandon unemployment insurance!). He didn't really turn anti-semitic until Long's death but he was just one member of the Union party; a party that influenced pretty much most of the New Deal; like Dr. Pete Towsend and Social Security. Maybe all seniors are sellouts for being involved with SS? Mybe you should leave the party because some dude rote something unsubstantiated about Long once?

                            Teddy Roosveelt was a progressive despite his imperialistic tendencies and Long was also a progressive because of his contributions to working people despite what is written about him that is both exaggerated and not accurate for the most part.

                            You see, picking and choosing what you want to be reality because you worship a politician won't help you understand the nuances of history.

                            ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                            by priceman on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 12:26:16 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh, and by the way, (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Deep Texan

                            go tothis pdf of the NYTimes, March 5, 1935, a speach by General Hugh Johnson,  the head of FDR's NRA.

                            In the speech he says:, amongst many other quotes regarding Long and Fr. Coughlin:

                            At least there is no such running with the hare and hunting with hounds about his little playmate, Huey Long.  You know just where he stands and how, given power, he will act; because you know how he has acted in the state of Louisiana.  There Huey is a dictator by force of arms and Adolf Hitler has nothing on him any way you care to look at them both.  In fact, Huey is the Hitler of one of our sovereign States - not in the forcible seizure of absolute and arbitrary powers alone but in the curious mixture of incredible mumbo-jumbo, the surface plausibility and undoubted personal magnetism that cause people to put their emotions before their reason and go stampeding off to nothing like a frightened sheep.
                            This speech is widely regarded to have been personally approved by FDR.  So, it is hardly a wild comparison.  It was being made 77 years ago.

                            Ultimately, the only thing that matters with respect to preserving choice is who will be nominating the next Supreme Court Justices.

                            by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 12:17:56 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The NRA was struck down by the SCOTUS... (0+ / 0-)

                            and is a blight on FDR's legacy. Just because General Hugh Johnson said it doesn't make it true. There was no genocide in LA.

                            FDR stole Huey's thunder and didn't like being criticized like when Huey Long marched up to the capitol with an army of unemployed veterans once FDR canceled veteran's benefits. Long made FDR better despite their enmity.

                            ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                            by priceman on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 12:30:45 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  LOL. Your knowledge of history is underwhelming. (0+ / 0-)

                            There had been no genocide in Germany in 1935, but the comparison of Hitler to Long was (and still is) apt, AT THAT POINT in time.

                            Your silly attempts to portray a demgogic fascist who sided with an anti-Semitic Nazi sympathizer as the "true progressive" of the thirties is so patently ridiculous as to nullify the whole premise of this absurd diary.    Good day to you..  

                            Ultimately, the only thing that matters with respect to preserving choice is who will be nominating the next Supreme Court Justices.

                            by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 07:32:27 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  Why do you want results? (5+ / 0-)

                      Any particular goals in mind?

                      "The Global War on Terror is a justification for U.S. Imperialism. It must be stopped."

                      by BigAlinWashSt on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:36:25 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  judging by primary victories is what you... (7+ / 0-)

                      base your being closer to the pulse of the party?

                      come on....

                      the only people who show up in a primary that is uncontested (for the most part) are the people who are die hard supporters of whomever the sole person on the ballot is...  of course that person will win...

                      hardly something to gauge the pulse of the party on, lol... but you go guy!  

                      A) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12 B) "Stoking the base’s enthusiasm is part of a campaign’s job, whether or not it thinks it should have to do it." ~Michelle Goldberg

                      by poligirl on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 07:24:09 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Logical fallacy alert (7+ / 0-)
                  I'm guessing that nobody reads your links besides your 6 or so true believers.
                  Popularity, or the lack thereof, does not prove anything. This is known as argumentum ad populum, in which it is argued a position is either right or wrong based on the numbers of supporters. Think about history, in which atrocities of every conceivable horror had popular appeal.  

                  Off topic, but hey, check out this:

                  http://sdnyblog.com/...

                  I'm fairly certain the names of the plaintiffs on this law suit that just won an injunction against NDAA aren't popular with your crowd, but the judge disagrees on the merits of the group-think.

                   

                  "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                  by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:33:21 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  But we're not trying (4+ / 0-)

                    to win an argument, we are trying to win an election and push back against a barbarous agenda.

                    Remember, Democracy is a numbers game, so no need to cite fallacies.  Of course, the diarist looks to the checks and balances of Huey Long as an example of progressive governance, so I'm not sure what to think here.  

                    Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                    by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:43:29 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  If you're not trying to win an argument (7+ / 0-)

                      based on facts and truth, but rather trying to invalidate, harass, and discourage discussion, basing your approach on your electoral political goals, as if that trumps all other concerns, then you're attacking honest dissent, and that you care little about real issues.

                      You're basically admitting that suppressing speech serves your interests.

                      People who take this sort of approach are rather chilling. When truth is thrown under the bus by people who claim to be advancing truthful policies, it suggests that their agenda has nothing at all to do with truth.

                      "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                      by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:58:56 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Meant to write: (4+ / 0-)

                        "and you're revealing that you care little about real issues."

                        "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                        by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:01:37 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  Not as chilling (2+ / 0-)

                        as someone who holds up a borderline (and maybe not borderline) fascist like Huey Long as a progressive hero.  

                        Now, I'm willing to bet that the diarist is just ignorant and relies on wiki-history to fit his narrative.  I don't ascribe malice where stupidity would be more apt.  

                        Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                        by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:08:06 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Fascism? (6+ / 0-)

                          We don't need to go to Huey Long for any of that.

                          Just look at our present day security state, largely supported by Democrats, to find some troubling "borderline" trends in that direction.

                          "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                          by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:13:06 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  Hard to pin fascism on Long (4+ / 0-)

                          Fascists aren't exactly known for supporting egalitarianism.

                          Fascists, historically, have been known for protection of the corporate and landowning wealthy class and for preservation of class systems.

                          That doesn't sound like Long at all, and it certainly doesn't match anything written by Price.

                          You're out of line here for alluding to fascism in this discussion.

                          Long was good at the political game. He was to the left of FDR, and thus he earned dislike from many corners. He used the heavy hand of power (and I'm not defending that, necessarily), but this element alone does not distinguish him from most other successful politicians. He simply may have been better at it.

                          Who else, may I ask, is also known, viz-a-viz this discussion, as being very good at the political game?

                          And who is known for enacting authoritarian measures, having kill lists, allowing spying on Americans, engaging in drone strikes against civilians, and enabling the wealthy class?

                          Do you really want to go down this road in this discussion?

                          "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                          by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:42:28 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Wait (2+ / 0-)

                            so the phrase "dictatorship of the proletariat" wasn't a call for egalitarian solidarity?  Given that one of my degrees was in 20th Century History, I can probably hold my own in this conversation.  

                            It's an established fact that Huey Long had strong authoritarian and fascistic tendencies.  I would have fought to marginalize him in 1936, like Franklin Roosevelt did.  

                            And for those that complain about a "rightward tilt" in the last few decades in the party, I ask you: Do you want to go back to the days of James Eastland, Bull Connor, and George Wallace?

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:49:32 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Did long use the phrase (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            priceman, poligirl, Words In Action

                            "dictatorship of the proletariat'?

                            I recall that he claimed not to be communist. If he said this, I'd want to see the complete context. Links, please.

                            "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                            by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:52:12 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Please explain (2+ / 0-)

                            the real differences between authoritarian fascism and communist bureaucratic centralism in practice throughout the 20th century, beyond rhetoric and which precise groups of people were to be slaughtered?

                            Once again, I'll wait

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:54:48 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Fascism (4+ / 0-)

                            has a lot of varied definitions and scholars are not in universal agreement, but I don't recall any experts including the soviet union in this. Authoritarian, certainly, but fascist? I think you're making the common error of confusing authoritarianism and fascism. Authoritarianism is a component of fascism, but without the other elements, is not fascism as a single factor.

                            But you ignored my question. Are you taking the time to think before responding? I asked if Long had EVER supported the Marxist concept of "dictatorship of the proletariat." If he used that term, I want context. Please provide links. I do agree that the Marxist concept is authoritarian, which I don't support. I'm not a Marxist. But I doubt that Long used that term, and if he did, the context would be important, since he asserted that he was not a communist. And yet that one comment alone is not evidence of fascism.

                            As to being an authoritarian, that assertion may well have some truth behind it. But in that, he wouldn't be alone in America politics. Most Democrats are authoritarian.

                            Where would you put Long on the chart at the link?:

                            http://www.politicalcompass.org/...

                            If Long would be placed on the left of the spectrum, his authoritarianism would simply be to the left of Obama's authoritarianism, but Obama could still be said to be as authoritarian as anyone. What's the difference between authoritarianism used on a state level and authoritarianism used on a national and international level. Well, for one thing, there is the weaponry and the enormous power of the national security apparatus that Long didn't have. Long's abuse of power is puny compared to that of Obama's. Long didn't have a kill list. He didn't use indefinite detention. He didn't look the other way on torture, or allow inhumane treatment under his authority. He didn't turn detainees over to other states to torture by proxy. He didn't take away the right to habeus corpus as Obama has done with NDAA.

                            Here's one concise definition of fascism from Webster's:
                            http://www.merriam-webster.com/...

                            See the areas I put in bold.

                            Philosophy of government that stresses the primacy and glory of the state, unquestioning obedience to its leader, subordination of the individual will to the state's authority, and harsh suppression of dissent. Martial virtues are celebrated, while liberal and democratic values are disparaged. Fascism arose during the 1920s and '30s partly out of fear of the rising power of the working classes; it differed from contemporary communism (as practiced under Joseph Stalin) by its protection of business and landowning elites and its preservation of class systems. The leaders of the fascist governments of Italy (1922–43), Germany (1933–45), and Spain (1939–75)—Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, and Francisco Franco—were portrayed to their publics as embodiments of the strength and resolve necessary to rescue their nations from political and economic chaos. Japanese fascists (1936–45) fostered belief in the uniqueness of the Japanese spirit and taught subordination to the state and personal sacrifice. See also totalitarianism; neofascism.

                            "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                            by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 12:46:10 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh please (2+ / 0-)

                            the very book in your sig line takes pains to show that Russian Communism and National Socialism were basically the same, and that one form of authoritarianism is indistinguishable from each other despite the rhetoric. Have you even read 1984 or just watched the movie?

                            So, when Huey Long rules without checks and balances, with brutish intimidation and outright extra constitutionality all in the name of "Every man a king,"  how is that different than the red guards trying to achieve the dictatorship of the proletariat.  I'm talking in real terms to the real people crushed by the boot, not in the speeches of the pious.  

                            Oh, and by the way, Italian Fascism was formed from the pro war breakaway faction of the Italian Socialist Party.  

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 12:57:53 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  *formed in part by (2+ / 0-)

                            Along with a those who felt displaced by postwar economic society as well as those who thought that the liberal royalist government had betrayed Italy at Versailles.  

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 01:07:49 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Orwell seemed to think that fascism (5+ / 0-)

                            and communist authoritarianism were different, but that they both led to totalitarianism, and thus the same end result.

                            You are aware he was a socialist and he fought on the side of anarchists and socialists in the Spanish Civil War?

                            Anyway, are you suggesting now that Long was in favor of full blown totalitarianism? (heh, this is getting wild)

                            And you haven't answered my assertion that Obama has very strong steaks of authoritarianism.

                            In fact, you've wavered all over the place and haven't really answered anything I've written.

                            "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                            by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 01:55:57 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  I was evicted from three Occupy parks (6+ / 0-)

                          all by a rather mainstream democratic mayor. And other Democratic mayors did the same in other cities.

                          Yes, I know all about intimidation by those in power. Long isn't alone in using authoritarianism while in office. He simply earned the ire of the establishment by doing it from the left... something that hasn't happened very often in this country. But other Democrats, Obama included, have been some of the most violent users of state authority in American history.

                          "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                          by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:50:37 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  You know what (0+ / 0-)

                            Since you and yours didn't and don't really care about the auto industry, I really don't give a fuck about occupy(!!!)

                            You didn't expect be to be compassionate to the people that wanted my state to die, did you?

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:57:03 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  *me to be nt (0+ / 0-)

                            Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

                            by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:57:20 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What? (7+ / 0-)

                            Try sticking to the topic, for fuck's sake. And who said I don't care about auto jobs?

                            Considering my current state of severe underemployment, I know full well the consequences of the economy. I don't begrudge people for being glad their jobs were protected. There are times, in my circumstances, I think quite rationally of just pulling the plug and ending the misery. I loath my environment.

                            The criticism of Obama's handling of the economy is he engaged in the usual practice of protecting elites at the expense of the rest of us. Even when people were helped, the elites in those particular circumstances were helped infinitely more. THAT is the criticism.

                            I'm glad people in your state were helped. I just wish much more was done to help real people, and less done with the motive of bailing out the incompetence of the wealthy class.

                            "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                            by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 01:38:19 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  This^ is the definition of hrable (3+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          poligirl, priceman, Words In Action

                          There are no sacred cows.

                          by LaEscapee on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 06:41:36 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  LOL Talk About Logical Fallacy Alert (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Rustbelt Dem, kefauver, Deep Texan
                        based on facts and truth, but rather trying to invalidate, harass, and discourage discussion, basing your approach on your electoral political goals, as if that trumps all other concerns, then you're attacking honest dissent, and that you care little about real issues.
                        The tactics one employes has zero reflection on whether or not they care about the actual issues.

                        Too Folk For You. - Schmidting in the Punch Bowl - verb - Committing an unexpected and underhanded political act intended to "spoil the party."

                        by TooFolkGR on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 12:28:29 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Nonsense (3+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          poligirl, priceman, Words In Action

                          Tactics, when they contradict one's proclaimed values and lead to the opposite, do reflect on basic outlook of the person.

                          Otherwise, the ends truly would justify the means.

                          You're lost in the woods if you don't understand this. This is why I can't jump on your bandwagon. The tune it plays is out of sink with the purported message, all in the name of winning at any expense.

                          "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act". -George Orwell

                          by ZhenRen on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 02:21:34 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  that's NOT really ot, it's important and earlier (7+ / 0-)

                    I posted on Facebook a story on it.
                    I wonder how supporters will defend any appeal of that decision by this administration, I don't know of any arguing against the first appeal so I imagine it will just be another IOIODI (it's ok if Obama does it).

                    without the ants the rainforest dies

                    by aliasalias on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:10:03 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  lol. (6+ / 0-)

            BS as an illegitimate presidential commission. And presidential commissions, by and large, are just political posturing. Can you name one that resulted in an economic policy change?

            Lo que separa la civilizacion de la anarquia son solo siete comidas.

            by psilocynic on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 08:56:54 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The Greenspan commission (10+ / 0-)

              While you're laughing, the SS age went up to 67.

              I don't think it's funny, though, just pathetic you don't know that.

              ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

              by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 09:15:35 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  You had to go all the way back to 1981 (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Rustbelt Dem, Deep Texan

                AND that commission was one of the most politically charged of our time. The outcome was concluded before the commission began if I remember correctly. Not a really good example for you argument if you ask me and it kind of highlights a point I was trying to make. You and your ilk are unwilling to cede the FACTUAL point that BS was not a legitimate commission and your one example proves the political nature of presidential commissions.

                Lo que separa la civilizacion de la anarquia son solo siete comidas.

                by psilocynic on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:37:14 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  I have to add, you have proven time and again how (3+ / 0-)

                little you know of politics when you make snide comments like that. Greenspan was given the report he submitted to congress and the president. It was already prepared in advance. There was no debate in the "commission". It was a foregone conclusion what was going to happen and that's because of what presidential commissions are by nature. They do one (sometimes both) of two things; provide cover for a president to do something that may be unpopular (your example) or allow a president to push a decision down the road knowing it will go nowhere (Simpson Bowles). That you don't understand that and you keep repeating misinformation and while treating Simpson Bowles as if it were a legitimate commission (unlike 1981) is what's truly pathetic.

                Lo que separa la civilizacion de la anarquia son solo siete comidas.

                by psilocynic on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:47:56 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Wow Nancy Altman of SS works would differ with you (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  poligirl, Words In Action, pot

                  that there wasn't a debate, because there was a debate in the Commission and Nancy Altman developed the amendments for the program as Greenspan's assistant. So basically you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

                  ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                  by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:08:19 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yeaaaah. Half true. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Deep Texan
                    Mr. Greenspan and his fellow commissioners had met for months and were secretly deadlocked, despite optimistic public statements. Members of Congress were uniformly terrified of raising payroll taxes or cutting benefits, both of which obviously had to be part of any real solution. Then, one late afternoon, Pat Moynihan (D-NY) walked across the floor to talk to Senate Finance Committee Chair Bob Dole (R-KS). I couldn't hear what they were saying, but it didn't take a rocket scientist to realize the topic was Social Security. They cut the deal in broad outline right there, fed it to Mr. Greenspan, and left the details to his Commission.

                    So at the last minute, Republicans and Democrats locked arms around a plan "to save Social Security" by raising the payroll tax, to shave benefits, and to very gradually raise the retirement age on future retirees. President Reagan endorsed it, and the rest was history. Like a lot of bad economic theory, the idea that the Greenspan Commission solved the 1983 Social Security crisis has the causality backwards. Dole and Moynihan fed the deal to the Commission, not the other way around.

                    From Mother Jones

                    Great blog post on how the 1983 commission was a cover. But even this post, I'm afraid, perpetuates some of the myth.

                    As of the beginning on 1983, the commission was all but dissolved. Understanding the dire political importance of not letting the trust fund run out of money, the White House then began a series of secret negotiations with Pat Moynihan and Former SSA Director Robert Ball (who was basically representing Tip O'Neill). I believe the White House representatives were David Stockman, Dick Darman, sometimes Kenneth Duberstein, and a fourth person.

                    Once they had agreed to a basic framework, then Dole was brought in, along with Alan Greenspan, James Baker, and Barber Conable. That group of nine or ten was eventually expanded further, to make sure they'd have the support of the leadership, organized labor, and enough commissioners.

                    Only then were the recommendations brought back to the commission to pass.

                    Like I said. You don't understand this as well as you think you do.

                    Lo que separa la civilizacion de la anarquia son solo siete comidas.

                    by psilocynic on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:22:36 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I don't care what Kevin Drum says (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      aliasalias, poligirl, Words In Action

                      or his source. I rust Robert M. Ball and Nancy Altman who was there.

                      I'm not impressed with Kevin Drum's resources on this.

                      The Bipartisan Panel: Did It Really Work?

                      But just in time for the latest debate, the unpublished posthumous memoir of a central figure on the Greenspan panel, Robert M. Ball, a former Social Security commissioner, has emerged to challenge the conventional wisdom about its achievement.

                      In a sprightly account promoted by former staff members from both parties, Mr. Ball calls the Greenspan Commission a failure. As he tells it, only a willingness to compromise by the two principal antagonists of the time — Ronald Reagan, the Republican president, and Representative Thomas P. O’Neill, the Democratic House speaker — made it possible for Mr. Ball and a few others to salvage from the deadlocked panel a deal that raised payroll taxes and trimmed benefits enough to keep Social Security solvent.

                      “A commission is no substitute for principled commitment,” wrote Mr. Ball, who died two years ago at 93. He expected that growing deficits soon would spur talk of another such panel. “Above all,” he added, “we should not allow ourselves to fall into the trap of expecting miracles from another Greenspan Commission — by deluding ourselves into believing, mistakenly, that the first one was a great success.”

                      [........]

                      The commission met roughly monthly from February to November of 1982 without progress. Democrats remained opposed to benefit cuts and Republicans to payroll tax increases. In the futile hope that getting away from Capitol Hill might help, the panel met in November at a Virginia hotel. December’s session lasted only minutes, though the panel’s deadline was Dec. 31.

                      [........]

                      Mr. Reagan extended the commission’s life by two weeks to Jan. 15, but it “was no longer functioning,” Mr. Ball wrote. “Some of its members didn’t know we were meeting.” When word leaked and reporters staked out his house before one session, Mr. Ball sneaked out the rear and slid down a hill to a car sent by the White House.

                      The group reached agreement late on Jan. 15, a Saturday, and secured support from a commission majority only with White House arm-twisting.

                      Wow, they met all that time with no debate at all. They just rushed through Greenspan's recommendations. BS. No one should care about what you or Kevin Drum think happened. We know from those that were there.

                      ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

                      by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 12:57:45 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  And again, you are dodging the (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Rustbelt Dem, Deep Texan

                    actual point of my original post. Simpson Bowles was not an sanction commission. They didn't have the amount of member they would need to make it a legitimate commission. You can dance around that as much as you want, but its a fact. Aren't we supposed to be fact based here? Why do you keep spreading misinformation?

                    Lo que separa la civilizacion de la anarquia son solo siete comidas.

                    by psilocynic on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 11:25:43 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  The commission doesn't have to lead directly (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              priceman

              to policy change. It can move the Overton Window. It can confer legitimacy on radical ideas and make them seem middle-of-the-road. I think Simpson-Bowles has already succeeded in doing that.

              Who would have thought a few years ago that a Democratic president would be willing without a fight to raise the Medicare eligibility age and cut SS COLAs - two atrocious things?

              We decided to move the center farther to the right by starting the whole debate from a far-right position to begin with. - Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay

              by denise b on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:17:08 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Shh, facts spoil an echo chamber narrative nt (7+ / 0-)

          Note to self, stop before I emulate the habits described in this diary.

          by Rustbelt Dem on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 08:53:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Without Medicaid+programs forcing them to (6+ / 0-)

      Obama mentioned it once. It's not really a consistent theme as with Cuomo's though Clinton mentioned it more than Obama but ti wasn't really much of a theme.

      Nah, I've seen plenty. Plus you lose poor points as soon as you bring up the deficit or free trade. Medicaid is on the chopping block because of deficit terrorism. Cuomo talked about subsidizing foreign steel when there are unemployed wokrers here.

      ‎A) "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin B) "The administration should be worried about the level of despair here." ~Markos Moulitsas at NN12

      by priceman on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 08:45:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Evidence please. (nmi) (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      priceman, poligirl, Words In Action

      "Once the Lords of Capital are no longer the lords of anything, humanity gets another shot at rational development of the species and the planet." - Glen Ford

      by Cassiodorus on Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 10:36:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site