patrick.net

To many facts, and too much truth.

You don't have to look any further than most the comments from right wingers on Patrick.net. They don't mind lying at all. The concept of that particular form of integrity (honesty) is meaningless to them. It's all about how believing the lies makes them feel.

Does this make them sociopaths who truly don't care what's true ? Or are they just lacking the intellectual skills required to discern fact from fiction?

I honestly can't answer that. But I have seen plenty of proof right here in this forum that sharing facts and logic that contradicts their lies, has absolutely no impact.

MAny of them at least seem to be selling lies that they know are lies.

Congrats Marcus, not only are you a racist, but now you are approaching bg's level of nuttiness as well.

Good job.

I must agree with Marcus, popular or not.

A right winger told me himself. They simply 'project' and blame their mistakes on their opponent. Amazingly effective.

Yeah, happens all the time on this site.

I blame Obama for giving right wingers no choice but to become liars.

marcus says

To many facts, and too much truth.

You don't have to look any further than most the comments from right wingers on Patrick.net. They don't mind lying at all. The concept of that particular form of integrity (honesty) is meaningless to them. It's all about how believing the lies makes them feel.

Does this make them sociopaths who truly don't care what's true ? Or are they just lacking the intellectual skills required to discern fact from fiction?

I honestly can't answer that. But I have seen plenty of proof right here in this forum that sharing facts and logic that contradicts their lies, has absolutely no impact.

MAny of them at least seem to be selling lies that they know are lies.

Many have beliefs that they will bend reality to. They are looking for support of their beliefs and will not hesitate to provide anecdotal stories that match their beliefs irrespective of their basis in reality. Basically ignorant and shallow people, too scarred or too lazy to explore and learn.

Both Reps and Dems are neck-deep in the Keynsian Blame Pool.

But if pushed for names of politicians who both stoked the fires and subsequently did their best to revise the history for their own salvation, Barney Frank comes squarely to mind. I can't think of a figurehead on the tube at whom I screamed at more often in the years leading up to the RE dip than that man. He did everything in his power to push low income people into mortgages they shouldnt have been encouraged to take on.

In fact, you can try to put all of the blame on private enterprise vs federal government vs political parties, but I frankly blame the common over-extended home buyer. In other words, many of YOU guys.

You may still be doing it...taking on mortgages that exceed your full-time job's pay.

As far as government fueling the fire however, it started far in advance of 2000, let alone 2003+. The low interest rates under Greenspan clearly drove an unholy run-up in tech stocks. When they crashed, you can track whole categories of investment as they move nearly instantly into real estate. I can't imagine anyone making a strong argument that would refute that. The interest rates were gasoline on the bonfire.

The bubble going back to Greenspan hasn't even popped yet, but we are right at the precipice now. These little down turns in the 2000's are nothing. The big one is dead ahead.

CaptainShuddup says

I don't there's an American that would flat out refuse $56K per household tax payer, instead of it being spent on the recovery that Obama spent on it.

Perfect example of what I was talking about. That comparison has been well refuted. What the fed has done with QE, which is independent of Obama, was not the same as giving money to the banks or the rich. And it's possible that the captain knows it and is trolling or selling the lies, again.

CaptainShuddup says

That when if the GOP did cause the bubble.

By the way bubba, nobody is saying that republicans caused the bubble. IT's true that the greedy low integrity types at banks and mortgage companies that knew those mortgage backed securities were garbage probably were more often republicans than not. But I've never tried to say republicans or republican policies caused the bubble.

I am denying that financing for low income people, designed to increase home ownership caused it, which is the accusation the right wing keeps coming back to. IT was a small factor, but the freddie and fannie loans were not the subprime balloons loan or the liar loans, or at least that was not the intention of the legislation. And it wasn't congress that convinced S&P that they needed to rate complex garbage mortgage backed securities as triple A.

Bigsby says

Seriously, who taught you English?

I was thinking the same thing, WTF...

They are all fucking liars. Neither side gives a flying fuck about any of us. They don't represent us, they represent themselves. Keep the nation divided, they love it. People bitching back and forth like fucking children.

Buying toxic securities at face value is giving money to the banks, and thereby, to the bank executives.

Well, I choose not to vote for evil.

Dem controlled, Rep controlled, they are all self serving. The only goal a politician has once elected is to get re-elected. Both sides use money to buy votes. Buying votes from the rich, buying votes from the poor ALL through handouts. Neither side gives a fuck about the poor. Using welfare as a guise "we are helping the poor" when in reality, they are buying a votes. Remember, it's all about getting re-elected. Welfare is slavery.

siklidkid says

Well, I choose not to vote for evil.

that's not our elections are presently structured. You've got to pick the lesser evil, or the greater evil will take the office.

Unless you're OK with that, then go right ahead with that strategy. It's a free country, for now.

One thing the Tea Party is doing right is terrorizing all politicians to the left of them at the primary level, where not many people bother to vote at all.

This has resulted in a marked shift to the (far) right since 2010.

Leftists lack the numbers, media connections, and rich benefactors to organize similarly, alas.

Looking at the polls, we're pretty much fucked, and it's going to get worse this decade and next.

Politicians are just a mirror of the people who elected them. This is a profoundly flawed country by that measure.

siklidkid says

Welfare is slavery.

now that's a (right-winger) Thought-terminating cliché if I ever saw one.

I'm not a big fan of the welfare state, but if it's all we've got to buffer the masses from the predations of the parasitic wealthy, I'll take it.

There are better arrangements, but we're not going to get there from here.

siklidkid says

People bitching back and forth like fucking children.

There is indeed differences of opinion in this country. Millions want direction A, millions want direction B, and we're not going to change each other's minds on this.

On dozens of important issues where the electorate (that bothers to vote) is more or less evenly divided. Thus the bullshit.

jazz music says

clouding the count of the votes.

and also propagate the lies that voting doesn't matter and/or there's no difference between the two parties.

jazz music says

The deep South is lousy with right wing, Baptist churches, and gun stores. They are obedient cretins high-fiving their bosses.

They come gladly to the call of dog whistle politics. They are the product of hundreds of millions of dollars invested in media every year by the rich in television and radio broadcasting just the right lies at just the right time, synchronized memes from coast-to-coast for Joe sixpack to repeat hoping to sound sophisticated and uppity in the process.

They are the poor looking to crucify the poor, same as it always was,

they are absolutely essential because there aren’t enough rich to elect shit!

jazz music says

And they're broadcasting their lies blaming the democrats because we are 45 days away from the next general election and there aren't enough rich assholes to elect shit!

jazz music says

If the incumbents feel like we are ALWAYS going to vote them out they will become interested in our requirements, not just the wealthy who promise to neutralize us with TV and radio.

The self-serving can be attacked with policy reforms. You are not likely to see public-friendly policy reform coming from the right-wing because their PLATFORM is EXPLICITLY geared toward serving centralized wealth. If you show the Dems and interested public you just might see them building their careers on issues to please the populace.

If not, then we need to make it clear that their careers will be short.

There are not enough rich to successfully vote for ANYTHING.

A third party is fine too AS LONG AS THEY WIN!!!!

jazz music says

The more people vote the more GOP loses. They know that. They invest heavy in making it hard to vote, neutralizing voters by gerrymandering, throwing vote certain voters on suspicious premises, clouding the count of the votes.

Prime example today is the way Obama was elected in an unanticipated voter turn out.

We MUST drive our government or suffer, REALLY suffer. OCCUPY IT OR ELSE!

The FBI needs to keep an eye on this guy.

Bellingham Bill says

siklidkid says

Well, I choose not to vote for evil.

that's not our elections are presently structured. You've got to pick the lesser evil, or the greater evil will take the office.

Unless you're OK with that, then go right ahead with that strategy. It's a free country, for now.

So you vote for evil and are OK with it. Got it.

Bellingham Bill says

siklidkid says

Welfare is slavery.

now that's a (right-winger) Thought-terminating cliché if I ever saw one.

I'm not a big fan of the welfare state, but if it's all we've got to buffer the masses from the predations of the parasitic wealthy, I'll take it.

There are better arrangements, but we're not going to get there from here.

Label it however you want but I find truth in that statement.

How about "welfare has the propensity to encourage a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one's course of action or way of life." is that better?

Have good day Bill.

siklidkid says

welfare has the propensity to encourage a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one's course of action or way of life." is that better?

defend that. I can read the words but don't see the causality.

the one feedback dynamic that supports this viewpoint is the rise of single-mother households, and, probably more significantly, the rise of single mothers having way too many kids, starting at a very young age at that.

In this case the welfare state does set up a feedback loop of dependency, in that the children lack the ubringing and familial resources -- social capital especially -- to move up in life.

But I don't see any "lack of liberty" here. Not having to work for The Man in some shit job is pretty freeing, actually.

siklidkid says

So you vote for evil and are OK with it. Got it.

Yes, since the lesser evil is, in fact, a lesser evil.

In 2012 there was only two actual choices for president, Obama or Romney. No third candidate was going to win, given the constitutional structure of presidential elections.

You could sit home, or vote some third party, but all that results in is the heightened possibility of the greater evil winning.

We saw first-hand this dynamic in 2000, when 538 Nader voters (of ~100,000) in FL, (and 7,000 of 23,000 in NH) threw the entire election to Bush.

Same thing in 2004 when Kerry needed just 18,000 more voters in OH to win the entire election.

Now, in 2014 if you can't see the difference between Gore or Kerry vs. Bush being president in 2001-2009, you lack the mental wattage for me to waste any more of my day on you and your tired bullshit here.

bgamall4 says

I vote for the lesser evil if I think we will have less war and less aggressiveness in policy towards Russia.

And yet you support Islamic terrorists over Zionists.

bgamall4 says

Strategist says

bgamall4 says

I vote for the lesser evil if I think we will have less war and less aggressiveness in policy towards Russia.

And yet you support Islamic terrorists over Zionists.

No I do not. The Zionists just have a lot more power in the world. Islamic Terrorists will not lead us to WW3. Zionists could. And btw, racist, Zionists are multiracial.

You say "No I do not" and then give reasons why you do.
And then you call me "racist" for supporting Zionist who you say are "multiracial"

I find that when someone promotes "a pox on both houses", they are usually disillusioned Republicans that finally realized the GOP sucks balls. But since they've spend the last decade or 3 criticizing Democrats, largely baselessly, they are left only with the disillusionment rhetoric and no party to call home.

There's always libertardianism!! Watch Rand run (away from his father, his earlier rhetoric, his previous and current positions...in the end he'll be a Republican, but with some liberal positions thrown in!). Or stay home! Vote with your feet. Who tallies those votes, anyway? Who cares about the non-voter?

The Professor says

jazz music says

Prime example today is the way Obama was elected in an unanticipated voter turn out.

The puppet masters were shocked that we embraced him instead of Hilary. They were certain that the reverend Wright revelations, his questionable upbringing, and lack of experience would alienate the electorate and shoe in Hilary; it was her turn. It doesn't matter. If they are on the ballot it is because the oligarchy approves of them.

We, the people, were so ready for change that we fell hook, line, and sinker. Obama was going to stop the wars, close Gitmo, and restore the American dream. We voted for hope, and change.

War, Gitmo, and the dream are still here, but nothing has changed.

Isn't that the same with all politicians? They make promises to get elected, and once elected, they realize they cannot keep their promises.