See complete forecast
Copy and paste the link:
There goes that "extremist" talk again from another left-winger.
There are extremists in the U.S. Congress in the form of the 80 or so members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which is aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America. DSA is part of the Socialist International, whose roots go back to Karl Marx. Of course, Marxism is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, which CPC members took an oath to serve and protect.
The Tea Party members stand up against socialism, which is foreign to our political system and culture, and should be applauded for taking their oaths to the Constitution seriously.
The Tea Party members just cost our government around $20-24 billion with their shutdown. I'm sorry, but I don't applaud this wasteful spending debacle they deliberately created in efforts to stop a law that was upheld by the Supreme Court.
You can throw around Limbaugh/Beck conspiracy terms like "Socialism" all you like, and please kindly turn in your Social Security payments while you're at it, it does very little to draw anyone who doesn't have a Right Wing extremist, tin foil hat to your cause. The majority of Americans correctly saw who was truly damaging our country as of late (and here's a big hint: it wasn't those darn, crazy "Socialists").
How is it a conspiracy term? Chris Riddiough, the DSA political director in 1997, clearly noted that the CPC is a "socialist caucus": "DSA goals by 2017 include: a U.S. President from the Progressive Caucus, a 50 member socialist caucus in Congress, successful programs of the likes of universal health care, progressive taxation, social provision and campaign finance reform."
DSA also includes this Q & A on its website:
Q: Aren't you a party that's in competition with the Democratic Party for votes and support?
No, we are not a separate party. Like our friends and allies in the feminist, labor, civil rights, religious, and community organizing movements, many of us have been active in the Democratic Party. We work with those movements to strengthen the party’s left wing, represented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Note that CPC's webpage was originally hosted by DSA until the late Balint Vazsonyi exposed that fact 15 years ago.
Riddiough continues to serve as a DSA official. She was an initial signer of Progressives for Obama (now Progressive America Rising).
There is also a photo of Riddiough on Photobucket celebrating Obama’s inauguration in 2009.
As far as the $20-24 billion figure, it's largely bogus. Even if true, it would be a fraction of what the Obama admin wasted on the Obamacare website.
I don't receive Social Security and you're violating the spirit of the J-W's new rules concerning commenting here.
Think maybe some people really are violating the posting rules, just not sure that he is.
And, of course, Marley Schauzer is an actual person's name.
And of course, you have actual thoughts, not just rhetorical conspiracy-based talking points without any foundation in reality
Fortunately I don't have to do much else to maintain the same level of discourse you use. Many posters, myself included, have repeatedly pointed out misinformation you provide, corrected your data, explained where you have been wrong on some issues and ignore the lot.
The next thread along and you're parroting the same swill again. Pointing out that you do this isn't an insult, it's an observation.
Let's not forget you generally don't post 'facts', but your opinions and misinformation for example, your first post from your first comment here is:
"There goes that "extremist" talk again from another left-winger."
No facts, no information, just another insult and snarky comment from someone who glances at talking points. Clearly you don't think about anything you say and you have zero interest in learning. You're here to troll, and should be treated as such. You're claims about my comments, like your claims about so many others is pure projection on your part.
So many have pointed out this irony, and have referred to your double standard on a daily basis that there is no reason for any of us to take you seriously or comment with anything that can be taken seriously, because you shouldn't be.
I would have you read through the comments above and below - this has been done no less that 5 times in this thread alone.
Kevin, can you or would you for once provide links or proof that is not from total fringe groups sites. You know, real verifiable backup data? From legitimate non-partisan sources?
No, he won't. This is why he should be ignored.
. . . and the irony ring wraps itself a little tighter. Absence of proof, proving the false, feeding the self-delusion, verifying the fake-reality that is the truth and no one else sees. (obviously, because they can't).
Political parties are not mentioned at all in the Constitution, and are certainly not necessary for the government to function.
"However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."
Five regional open primary dates should do it. Run one each month. Cancel all TV debates as they are worthless.
The Shutdown Kabuki Theatre merely closed a few parks and gave some White House gardeners a (paid) vacation. NSA was still taking your calls, we were still bombing Asia and Africa, and the Congressional gym was still open. Nor was there any danger of default, as the government takes in 10x in taxes what it needs to pay interest. Default then, just like today, is purely voluntary.
The author is correct about one thing: the problem was merely kicked forward. But the problem is not the debt ceiling, it's the debt. As Washington also wrote, "To contract new debts is not the way to pay old ones," and that we should avoid "ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burthen [of debt], which we ourselves ought to bear."
So long as we are borrowing to pay our debts, ungenerously throwing upon the next generation what we ought to pay today, we are not dealing with the problem. We are still looting our children, no matter how smoothly the politicians get along.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
Find more businesses on Marketplace
Arts & Entertainment ·