patrick.net

I'd go with evangelical Christianity. They're the ones who got Prohibition into the Constitution 100 years ago, and they're still around, trying to control peoples' lives.

SPENDING AND DEFICITS is just ginned-up BS from the right. They had no problem with it when they were the ones doing the spending, 2001-2006 -- Afghanistan & Iraq ($1.2T), Bush tax cuts ($3T), Medicare Part D ($70B/yr now) . . .

funny how all those pro-war republicans from 2001-2002 now don't want to pay for the war. Idiots.

bondage

Honest Abe says

According to a recent poll

Would this be a recent poll you pulled out of an orifice?

Bap33 says

bondage

I agree with the bapster - either that, or jail.

elliemae says

Would this be a recent poll you pulled out of an orifice?

almost, some rightwing crank blog on us news and world report, AFAIK which itself is still a Zuckerman crank media property.

Zuckerman is the 147th richest person in the US, which correlates with the media pushback on government spending.

The wealthy of this country are rightfully deathly afraid of any European-style* high-tax "socialism" getting traction here.

Zuckerman was all pro-war in 2002:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/mort/zuckerman082002.asp

but now when the bill is due, Zuckerman says we have no money.

*Sweden/Norway/Denmark/Germany

tyranny

debt, unsustainable debt. and big government that is out of control.

The idea that the government can and should curtail freedom over the odd of dumb terrorists. That government can stop people from getting high, stumbling around drunk, or paying for sex, and it's worth sending people to prison for years over routine human nature that has and will be with us for ever and ever, no matter what the punishment is. To satisfy the Puritans of both political stripes.

Elections that are financed by special interest money. The out of control outright ownership of our government.

Personal bottom-up freedom is what this country was founded upon and what made America great. Politicians have corrupted that ideal with coercive, violent top-down social "justice". The promise of Robin Hood charity, excess spending and deficit spending has bankrupted this country. The most probable outcome is collective starvation for the masses.

Honest Abe says

Personal bottom-up freedom is what this country was founded upon and what made America great. Politicians have corrupted that ideal with coercive, violent top-down social “justice”. The promise of Robin Hood charity, excess spending and deficit spending has bankrupted this country. The most probable outcome is collective starvation for the masses.

Amen

Troy says

but now when the bill is due, Zuckerman says we have no money.

Greenspan took the same tack with Clinton back in 1993 when the then-President wanted to implement some of Rob Reich's ideas.

Funny, Greenspan had no deficit concerns with the endless GWOT, the Bush Tax Cuts, or the end of the Rich Brat Inheritance Tax.

when my vote that passed Prop 187 was turned to poop I knew we were headed for trouble.

then I had to vote down the legal coupling sexual deviants TWICE, and it still keeps coming back ....

and dope keeps getting back on the ballot after getting beat over and over ...

seeing voter-voice halted when it was not leftist/liberal/progressive enough was a sign of trouble in my opinion. Would you agree?

Bap33 says

then I had to vote down the legal coupling sexual deviants TWICE, and it still keeps coming back ….

It's 2011. ;)

Whats the biggest threat to freedom?

wormwood said: Not in a pissing match...you called me a Troll, prove it.

a troll is someone who posts inflammatory[citation needed], extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion

You want the topic to be you now, which is the m.o. of a troll.

Happy?

Honest Abe says

Personal bottom-up freedom is what this country was founded upon and what made America great.

No, this country started out as a plutocracy and it's headed there again (or rather we're there but most people don't realize it yet).

The Founding Fathers ensured that only white male land owners could vote when they founded our republic. Government was only for white male land owners, in other words "capitalist white supremists."

The rest of us have had to fight like pit bulls to get included so that we can engage in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that the white male land owners could only enjoy at the founding of our country.

These days people talk about returning to the "good old days." What they often forget is that in the "good old days" all women, landless white men, and men of color had no vote or say in their own governance. It might as well have been a dictatorship for anyone who wasn't a white male land owner.

Let's be honest about "the good old days" when this country was founded. Sure, the ideas and the way our government was set up were revolutionary for the 18th century. Here in the 21st century we have evolved to a point where all people expect to have a role in their own governance.

Also, we have had some leveling of the playing field in keeping the capitalists in check since the end of the 19th and dawning of the 20th centuries. But alas, since 1980 we have been very busy dismantling all of that so that we are going back to the era of the wealthy robber barons of the 19th century.

The biggest threats to our freedom are as follows:

1. The continued assault on our public school system ensuring that the "unwashed masses" remain ignorant and easily controlled.

2. The wealth of our country being held by so few at the expense of so many and the dismantling of all protections "the little people" had to ensure that they aren't being exploited as cheap and disposable labor.

3. The sacrificing of liberty for perceived security. The Patriot Act has been taking our liberty away from its very inception. And it provides no extra security.

4. Radical fundamentalism removing any reason and freedom in religious settings. Fundamentalism of every stripe is dangerous whether it be Christian, Jewish, Islamic, etc. It has encouraged religion's encroachment into our secular government so that religious fundamentalists can dictate law based on their own brand of "radical religious fundamentalist morality."

Troy says

I'd go with evangelical Christianity. They're the ones who got Prohibition into the Constitution 100 years ago, and they're still around, trying to control peoples' lives.
SPENDING AND DEFICITS is just ginned-up BS from the right. They had no problem with it when they were the ones doing the spending, 2001-2006 -- Afghanistan & Iraq ($1.2T), Bush tax cuts ($3T), Medicare Part D ($70B/yr now) . . .
funny how all those pro-war republicans from 2001-2002 now don't want to pay for the war. Idiots.

“Nessuna soluzione . . . nessun problema!„

Not to derail, but I think Prohibition passed in an unusual alliance between conservative Christians and Progressives.

That said, the debt is also largely owed to Reagan and Bush too, who drove the debt from billions to 4 trillion. Given W.'s additional debt, I'd say that those administrations account for the majority of the accumulated debt on the books.

wormwood says

Troy, christian churches were behind ending slavery, the women's right to vote and the civil rights movement.

*SOME* churches were opposed to slavery, others correctly defended it as in tune with the Bible. Slavery is A-OK in the Bible. At no point did Jesus or any OT Prophet condemn slaveholding or slavery, and spent as much or more real estate reminding slaves to be obedient to their Masters than they did Masters being "just" to slaves.

How many Southern Baptists (America's second largest denomination) supported civil rights and women's voting? In fact it was the slavery issue that created the Southern Baptist Convention in 1845.

thunderlips11 says

*SOME* churches were opposed to slavery

yeah I wasn't slagging on Christianity in general, just the strain of Christianists that gave us George Bush -- basically the Southern Baptists and all their modern evangelical spin-offs.

"Finally, in 1896, the Southern Baptist Convention officially denounced alcohol and asked that churches excommunicate anyone who sold or drank alcohol. "

http://www.brucesabin.com/alcohol.html

I was recently dragged to a "non-denominational" church -- it didn't seem at all "Baptist" on the outside but the mission, catechism, and operation of the church was obviously 100% SBC behind the scenes. Very clever I thought -- most megachurches like Warren's Saddleback Church operate the same I guess (I've been to a couple).

It was the evangelicals who pushed Proposition 8 over the line -- just look at bap here for how that works. These morons are very anti-libertarian.

It's a miracle the Republican coalition has lasted as long as it has. The libertarians mostly care about their money though, so as long as the neanderthal religionists in the party can stay away from any "social justice" teachings of the religious left, things will continue to be OK.

http://www.abpnews.com/content/view/4938/104/

from the above:

"That is because the denomination's official confessional statement, the Baptist Faith and Message, includes an article titled "The Christian and the Social Order" that challenges Southern Baptists "to seek to make the will of Christ supreme in our own lives and in human society."

yeah, that's what I'm talking about.

Troy says

I was recently dragged to a "non-denominational" church -- it didn't seem at all "Baptist" on the outside but the mission, catechism, and operation of the church was obviously 100% SBC behind the scenes. Very clever I thought -- most megachurches like Warren's Saddleback Church operate the same I guess (I've been to a couple).

Rick Warren, there's a mighty Toad. Joel Oilsheen is a creepy one too. If they make Robert Kiyosaki a reverend, and then they'll have the entire self-help brigade on the team.

I heard that some Calvinists masquerade as Baptists or non-denominational pastors, then give the "Truth" once they are in command of a Church. So they can give the whole OT Fickle Abusive Daddy Yahweh/Bitter Germanic fatalistic twist to the Bible.

wormwood says

Sim writes,
1. The continued assault on our public school system ensuring that the "unwashed masses" remain ignorant and easily controlled.
Who do you think controls the public school systems?

Certainly not the teachers, principals, or the unions, contrary to your belief.

Benevolent government always declares its purpose to be the protection of citizens rights and the maintenance of economic and social order.

However, even with the best intentions, governments routinely violate the rights of people and disorganize the social and economic order they are assigned to protect. You know, like "Social Security" which is really more like Socialized Insecurity.

Liberals either don't notice those things - or - they downright support it.

Quote: According to a recent poll the biggest threat to freedom is SPENDING AND DEFICITS

Polls measure opinions not facts. If a poll shows that 87% of the people think the world is flat, it does not make it so.

Far greater threats to freedom include the concentration of power, the lack of accountability for abuse of power, and the lack of transparency in the actions taken by government officials.

In other words,
1. Don't give people excessive power.
2. If you do give people power, watch them closely.
3. When they abuse the power, punish them quickly.

Quote: Better to have total freedom like in Somalia. The standard of living is much higher there.

Lack of government or "law and order" does not imply freedom. A person's freedom can be violated by criminals as well as governments.

Also, although freedom is not the only condition that affects quality of life, it is an important one.

A 100% lack of freedom is Slavery. A slave is not entitled any of the fruits of his labor. Put in other words, the "tax" on their labor is 100%.

What is the total of our Federal tax, State tax, excise tax, phone tax, sales tax, inheritance tax, gasoline tax, as well as a blizzard of "fees" and other government charges??? 60%?? That would imply we are 60% Slave and 40% free.

"Liberalism encourages the collectivized man, the self-effacing, government dependent and government supervised man. It seeks a government administered welfare state regulated by the ruling elites and supported by the indentured workers. Liberalism devalues individual lives by violating individual rights and treating citizens as pawns of the economic, social or political classes" L.H. Rossiter, M.D.

bob,
in you list the only things that are not directly consumer paid are police and fire. I understand that productive taxpayers are forced to susidize the non-productive D-voters to access all of the items on your list, but for the productive supply side folks, that list is pay-as-you-go other than public safety. The public safety is paid by the supply side people also, but indirctly. So, why not END the welfare-forced wealth transfer- to the non-productive D-voters and see how much better everything gets.

Freedom implies personal responsibility, which is why liberals dread it.

Bap33 says

So, why not END the welfare-forced wealth transfer- to the non-productive D-voters and see how much better everything gets.

LOL. Yes, yes, let's end welfare and see how well your new place off 99 survives as a doomstead.

bob2356 says

move to Somolia or Nigeria, or Zimbabwe and be 100% free.

You can add Sudan to this list.

Where do I sign up to emigrate to one of these Libertarian paradises? I would think that all the "starve the beast," "small government," and "Libertarians" around here would salivate at the chance to go to any of these paradises to experience what total freedom is like.

Bap33 says

So, why not END the welfare-forced wealth transfer- to the non-productive D-voters and see how much better everything gets.

Since when do disenfranchised people vote? I work with these people. Most have given up on voting because they know that our government and our society doesn't just take away their voices but it shuns them and works actively against them.

All of you wingnuts should provide proof that most "D voters," as you are all calling them, are "unproductive" and only out to have the wealth transfered back to them.

We actually have proof that the government and our society is rigged so that there is a massive sucking sound. That sucking sound is the super rich elite sucking up all of the wealth out of the working middle classes and working poor classes. The statistics prove this but you all will continue to deny it because most of you don't understand the difference between opinion and fact anyway.

We have the largest income disparity since the Great Depression. It's on par with other Third World countries.

Decent first world countries pay for infrastructure that is needed for any type of economic activity within their borders, governmental services that ensure public safety and help order society so that it's productive and beneficial for everyone, education that allows all citizens to understand their government and actively participate in it, and health care to ensure that the work force remains as productive as possible while preventing expensive catastrophic illnesses that could be avoided if only every person had access to adequate preventative medicine.

This country doesn't.

We all know that the super rich don't pay their fair share. They are too busy dodging taxes to create decent paying jobs with benefits that keep the economic engine of this country going. They prefer to invest their money in foreign countries where they can legally pay slave wages offering no benefits where they can hide their profits to avoid taxation in the USA. They are parasites, pure and simple. The working classes pay more as a percentage of their income in taxes than the super rich do. That is a fact. The super rich use government and all other services more than the working classes. They buy and sell politicians. They spend years on lawsuits to remove regulations and to "protect" patents for common words in the English language, etc.

No, one of the biggest threats to freedom in this republic is that the super rich are allowed free reign to do whatever they want without having to pay for anything. They don't have to bother to reinvest profits because taxes are so low (through their tax dodging schemes through the giant holes in our tax laws that favor them) that it's not necessary to grow their businesses domestically through reinvestment. If the holes in our tax law were patched, then these "capitalists" would be compelled to reinvest in their businesses to avoid being taxed on profits.

You "libertarian," "starve the beast," "small government," wingnut types constantly moan and bitch about the alleged "class war" against the rich of this country.

The absolute fact is that for the past 30 years, at least, there has been a constant class war. The facts prove that it is the super rich that declared war on the working classes. And they are winning. It's easily seen in the income disparity, crumbling infrastructure, dismantling of public education system, the constant assault on our social safety nets, the destruction of any worker rights (especially the right to collectively bargain or unionize), removal of health benefits (which "Obamacare" won't fix because the super rich bought enough power over the process to screw it up and ensure that we must buy "insurance" from the crooks who have been screwing all of us all along), and falling real wages for the working classes.

No, the class war wasn't started by Liberals or the working poor. The Liberals and working poor have rolled over and allowed the super rich to stomp out any opposition to the massive concentration of wealth in the hands of a mere 1% in "the club."

That is one of the biggest threats to freedom period. It's the class war that was started by the super rich against the working classes that continues because the super rich own all the keys to power.

But I'm sure I'll still read insane comments about how the working classes are somehow "thuggish" for demanding their rights, living wages, benefits, and a more equitable distribution of wealth that would ensure that our economy remains competitive because it is the working classes that keep the economic engine going through consuming goods and services and creating the very goods and services that enrich the capitalists through the ability to sell them to the masses. The super rich need the working class as labor and as consumers to keep the economy running. The idle super rich produce nothing, not even their own food, so it would behoove them to be more generous to keep the economy going.

Basically, this economy has become a one-way closed system with all the wealth going up to the top removing the chance that there will be an efficient distribution of goods and services.

bob2356 says

in you list the only things that are not directly consumer paid are police and fire.

They are all paid by taxes (not in very place or every circumstance so don't nitpick), but not everyone uses them. Someone who never flies pays for the air traffic control system also. Is that welfare or not? I've never had the fire department to my house, so am I giving welfare to anyone who has? What is welfare?

What the hell does it mean the productive taxpayers subsidize the non productive D-voters for the items on my list. Democrats are the only ones who vote to have schools? or roads? D-voters don't pay school taxes or road taxes some how? Have you been drinking?

Honest Abe says

Freedom implies personal responsibility, which is why liberals dread it.

So honestly abe what percentage of your income are you willing to give up to have police, roads, schools etc.? Where do you stand? Or do you just spout platitudes.

Federal Reserve.

bob2356 says

Or do you just spout platitudes.

Honest Abe and others mainly deal in thought-terminating cliches, actually.

I'll add this...

An economy is a system created for the distribution of goods and services.

An efficient and healthy economy distributes goods and services in a consistent way allowing for all participants to benefit, if not equally, enough that the economy remains active so that enough goods and services keep moving to where they are needed.

Our economy is one of the most inefficient economies in history. The health of the economy is deteriorating rapidly. Goods and services aren't being distributed in the most useful way to keep the economy moving efficiently or adequately.

When an economy has resources that constantly get pulled out of it and are not allowed re-enter the economic cycle, the economy becomes increasingly inefficient to the point that it will break down. The Great Depression is the most extreme example, so far, of what it looks like to constantly remove resources preventing them from re-entering the economic cycle. The most obvious symptoms present when an economy breaks down are that a large income disparity develops and wealth becomes highly concentrated among a very small minority of participants in the economy.

This is how macro-economics works in a purely capitalist economic system. Eventually resources are amassed in such a great concentration in the hands of the very few such that the economic system is unable to function.

If no one intervenes in a pure capitalist economic system to prevent the resources from being removed from an economic system completely, you have a complete break down of the economy - a depression (which is a halt in the movement of goods and services within an economy).

The role of government has been to ensure that the economic system of our county continues to function adequately enough that there is enough movement in it to prevent recessions (a major slowing of the economic movement within an economy) and depressions. The danger of removing regulation of the economy completely to create a pure capitalist economic system is that you have major recessions and depressions due to the very nature of the pure capitalist economic system.

If you have ever studied economics and you were paying attention to your studies, you understand what I've written. If not, you haven't been paying attention, haven't bothered to study economics, and/or you choose to ignore the way economies function at your peril.

Which of the two groups, Liberals or conservatives, favors and encourages coercive collectivism, entitlement, welfare dependency, inflation, excess spending, a fiat currency, state regulation, infanticide, moral relativism, and the socialization of the major categories of human action?

Its the Liberals, isn't it? And its kinda ugly.

And in a pure capitalist system, freedom as antithetical. The very few hold all the capital and the power. The rest of the people are forced to do whatever the few who hold and the capital and the power demand in order to be given the privelege of moving goods and services. It is a system where the roles of master (capital and power holder) and servant (laborer) are rigid. There is no chance for social mobility.

simchaland says

No, the class war wasn't started by Liberals or the working poor. The Liberals and working poor have rolled over and allowed the super rich to stomp out any opposition to the massive concentration of wealth in the hands of a mere 1% in "the club."

As I've mentioned before, a much better example of who engages in class warfare is best explained by this sad but true joke:

A union worker, a member of the Tea Party, and a CEO are sitting at a table.
In the middle of the table there is a plate with a dozen cookies on it.
The CEO reaches across the table, takes 11 cookies, looks at the Tea Partier and says:
"Look out for that union guy, he wants a piece of your cookie."

Gee, why is it when communities, municipalities, and cities are desperately trying to balance the budget they've got to go to the unions to beg for concessions?

And why is it that cities are privatizing services to help balance the budget? Could it be because "government" is the least efficient way to run anything??? (Pay increases don't matter, running over budget doesn't matter, lavish retirement doesn't matter, etc, etc, etc. Thats because its not their money and they don't care. Again, they don't care).

Government has no skin in the game and THERE IS NO UNION REPRESENTING THE TAXPAYER.

Honest Abe says

Which of the two groups, Liberals or conservatives, favors and encourages coercive collectivism, entitlement, welfare dependency, inflation, excess spending, a fiat currency, state regulation, infanticide, moral relativism, and the socialization of the major categories of human action?
Its the Liberals, isn't it? And its kinda ugly.

That's not completely honest. But "talking points" used to promote propaganda rarely deal in truth.

Coercive collectivism: Conservatives allow the super wealthy power holders to force the rest of the populace to do whatever they demand in order to survive. They encourage the super wealthy to continue to collect the wealth of the country and lock it away.

Entitlement: Conservatives remove regulations on the super rich to allow them to maintain their total control over goods and services (and by extention, the people). The super rich are entitled to this role according to conservatives.

Welfare dependency: Conservatives aggressively push for government subsidies to big business which fuels the entrenchment of the entitled super rich class by distributing all capital only to the super rich.

Inflation: Conservatives do shun this. They create a massive economic depression by fascilitating the massive concentration of wealth held by the few. You don't have inflation anymore. You have deflation because no one can afford to pay for anything, except the super rich who hold all wealth. Are you trying to tell us that deflation is the answer to all of our economic woes?

Excess spending: Reagan and Bush II presided over the largest expansions of debt in US history. Aren't they conservative heros, especially St. Reagan?

A fiat currency: Conservatives clamor for the death of a fiat currency because it's hard work to continue to ensure that you have control over all the wealth of a country when a currency fluctuates. If we go back to the gold standard, it's much easier. You just lock everything away in vaults.

State regulation: Hmmm... Conservatives are for complete state regulation of people's personal lives, morals, religion, and freedom of travel (they created the Department of Homeland Security who restricts the freedom of travel). They are against regulating the economy so that it efficiently continues to distribute goods and services and prevents hoarding by the super rich. Liberals are for complete freedom in people's personal lives, moral decisions, religious expression and the ability to travel without hassle. Liberals are for regulation of the economy to ensure that the economy works efficiently to distribute goods and services to the greatest number of people ensuring that the economy continues to function efficiently.

Infanticide: Conservatives fight any program that helps mothers to take care of the children they bring into the world. Liberals fight for the right of a woman to have dominion over her own body ensuring that they can choose to have children when they can support them on their own instead of being forced to give birth to unwanted children into poverty.

Moral relativism: Conservatives talk a good game when it comes to adhering to a rigid set of moral codes. When it comes to practice they are the biggest hypocrites as evidenced by the many scandals their leaders create. Liberals support the freedom of the individual to discover for him or herself what moral code he or she should follow. There is less hypocrisy when people are allowed to discover morality for themselves and to develop as fully actualized beings who remain true to their highest selves. It's called individualism.

The socialization of the major categories of human action: Conservatives continue to advocate for government to reach into the personal lives of every citizen to ensure that all follow whatever rigid moral system they choose for the populace. They socialize losses and privatize profits. Liberals simply like to socialize. Life is happier when you enjoy it with others.

What a pathetic, twisted rant.

"Modern liberalism's irrationality can only be understood as the product of psychopathology. So extravagant are the patterns of thinking, behaving and relating that characterize the liberal mind that its relentless protests and demands become understood only as disorders of the psyche".

Lyle Rossiter M.D.

Dr. Rossiter has diagnosed and treated mental disorders for more than forty years and has consulted in more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases in both state and federal jurisdictions.