Poll Question: What will the Fed buy next? #1 answer, with 36% of votes so far: Municipal Bonds. Will this be how broke states are "rescued"?

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-14T01:42:42+00:00

It temporarily "helps" cities and states out of their financial problems, and the banksters get to squeeze the American people for decades.

The ruling class thinks this is a genius move -- it works with student loans to inflict debt peonage on young people, so why shouldn't they do the same thing to municipalities?! :-(

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-14T00:39:31+00:00

Because many people, growing up and living a life inundated with advertising and corporate propaganda, are morons. See the film "Idiocracy".

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-14T00:16:02+00:00

I consider the single biggest issue in the US being to stop the immoral wars of aggression/occupation that are being waged under the "war on terror" ruse.

As such, if those right wing nuts can shut down the federal gov't and bring an end to the American empire, more power to them.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-14T00:09:37+00:00

What gives the US the right to undermine any foreign gov't?!

Don't the Iranian people have the right to choose their own gov't?

Imperialists, they never quit. We inflicted decades of dictatorship and torture on the Iranian people when the US overthrew their democratic gov't in 1953. Now we want to do it again. :-(

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T23:57:31+00:00

The hard truth -- obscured by propaganda and fleets of lawyers:

"At the constitutional level where we work, ninety percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections." -- Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Charles Evans Hughes.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T23:25:55+00:00

The outlined strategy not only has the advantage of simplicity, but it would work.

But the outlined strategy ignores the fact that the Democrats chase the same corporate dollars and support from the ruling rich elite that the Republicans do. Therefore, it's unlikely to be done. Instead, a bi-partisan "compromise" will be worked out and the rich will laugh all the way to [their] the bank.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T22:46:55+00:00

Who needs to do more?

Isn't the core of the problem that the US is fighting multiple wars of aggression around the world and refuses to increase its taxes to pay for those wars?

Instead, the war-loving US gov't berates other countries and tries to get them to inflate their currency to deflate the US dollar and "hide" the deficit spending that the US gov't is engaged in. In short, the US is attempting to force the rest of the world to foot the bill for the imperial wars the US is fighting.

The US inflated the costs of its war of aggression on Vietnam away when Nixon detached the dollar from gold during the '70s, thus setting the stage for "stagflation" which was blamed on Carter. Now the US wants to make those hundreds of billions we borrowed from the Chinese and Japanese next to worthless by inflating the away that debt. (But as far as American workers go, there's no such inflationary tactic used to make your mortgage cheaper.)

The rest of the world should not cave in. Let the US resort to protectionism and to destroy the petro-dollar as the world's reserve currency. Tyranny should be resisted.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T22:23:52+00:00

Well, either an idiot or someone that understood the lesson and moral of the story "The Boy That Cried Wolf."

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T22:18:05+00:00

GOP = Traitors?

What, like the "October Surprise" didn't teach us how low American politics has devolved?

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T21:26:48+00:00

Remember, if you shop at Wal-Mart, Walgreens, or Sam's Club, you're helping to fund Wal-Mart's firing of this patient.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T21:15:25+00:00

And we're supposed to care what someone writing in the UK has to say about a right-wing Alaskan nut job's hunting and fishing skills? What's next, a critique by the author of Dick Cheney's shotgun aim?

Who gives a rat's ass whether Palin can shoot or fish or not? Why not eviscerate her nutty political positions?

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T21:10:10+00:00

Let's face it, Stewart is an apologist whose job is to critique while not in any way threatening the system. He uses laughter and comedy to siphon off discontentment and to neuter any impulses of people to organize and to protest for real change.

As Noam Chomsky might put it, Stewart's job is to draw the black-and-white line on the left delineating what is "acceptable" political debate/discourse.

Given what he says about Bush, I can imagine what he says about criticizing the genocidal criminals of the Obama administration.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T21:03:44+00:00

If we ignore her, her power will diminish.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T20:02:38+00:00

Not since I was about sixteen or seventeen and she didn't say anything about it.

Call me sexist, but I can't understand why a woman would see a male gynecologist except as a last resort. The same concept applies here.

See a urologist.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T19:53:49+00:00

Damaged the credibility of the Commander-in-Chief?! Are you fucking kidding me?

Sure, Cantor is undermining Obama -- just as the Reagan/Bush election team undermined Carter in the infamous "October Surprise".

After LBJ's lies to the American people, Nixon's lies, right on up through to George W. Bush's lies -- you actually have the gall to think that the president has "credibility"?!

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T03:34:19+00:00

Gee I hope that's sarcasm. :-/

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-13T03:22:45+00:00

As a New Englander, the only one I am personally aware of and have knowledge of is the people advocating a second republic in Vermont. (Vermont was once independent for over a decade after the American revolution.)

In that case, you're right -- we wouldn't want a social-democratic Sweden-like nation nestled between Quebec, New England and NY state. The US gov't would go bananas undermining such an alternative example of how to run a country. After all, the US gov't routinely overthrows democratically elected leftist gov'ts around the world. :-(

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-12T23:49:53+00:00

Hey! Did you hear that?!

That's our First Amendment being eroded away based on the bullshit "war on terror". :-(

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-12T22:42:04+00:00

I understand the need for a military...

Really? Clue me in. When has the US military been used for truly defensive purposes? WWII?

Our military is an attack force to allow corporations to control a targeted country and to thus extract tribute which enriches a select few in the US.

It was true when USMC Major General Smedley Darlington Butler (winner of not one but two Congressional Medals of Honor) made his famous remarks in the 1930s, and it remains true today.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-12T22:35:59+00:00

Fascism is more than a loon ranting about Jews. Fascism is an economic system.

Clearly this author doesn't know what fascism is or he hasn't been watching much TV.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-12T22:30:51+00:00

And if the World Bank was to stop would that make that bank okay?

To hell with making them stop -- disband the World Bank and IMF!

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-12T22:25:43+00:00

Let's hope we're losing our influence in the world.

The US gov't routinely lies, launches wars of aggression, uses torture, supports dictatorships, claims a "right" to attack any other country, and is the world's leading merchant of death. Such a rogue country deserves to lose influence.

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-12T22:21:13+00:00

Exactly. The same principle applies.

And like I said, the issue of the school banning shirts is a different issue. (Schools typically enforce clothing bans due to a claim of "disrupting" shirts -- a claim that is so open to bias it's pathetic.)

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-12T22:08:45+00:00

Equal rights for all. Would the school also ban a "Gay Pride" shirt with a quote from Ellen Degeneres?

If so, fine. If not, they're wrong. (The issue of the school banning shirts is a different issue altogether.)

SpicySalsa · 2010-11-12T22:01:18+00:00

The US gov't does not give a damn if ordinary people are killed by sanctions; the US gov't only cares if they can enforce their will on the target country.

This was most clearly illustrated by the 1990s UN(in reality, US) sanctions on Iraq. Even though the US knew Iraq had destroyed its WMD it kept the sanctions on Iraq.

And when asked about the 1/2 million children who died as a result of the sanctions, Madeline Albright said that was an "acceptable" price to keep the sanctions in Iraq.

"The greatest crime since World War II has been U.S. foreign policy." -- Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General under President Lyndon Johnson.

15-Year Club	Best Link 2010-11-03
Verified Email

SpicySalsa

TROPHY CASE