Are we headed for Socialism?

[Mugsy]

very interesting reading.

[Lewholt]

mike wrote:

It's always amazed me how many people are enamored with the socialism in other countries but live here in the good old United States and have no intention to move to any one of those nations. Instead, they prefer trashing capitalism in this nation-- the same capitalism that has given them the highest standard of living in the world. Instead of moving they want the Consitution of this nation ignored and used as butt-wipe-- the same constitution that protects their right to trash their own home.
Some people never cease to amaze me with their oxymoronic life in this nation of freedom.

Well, Mike, you could turn that around and say why do conservatives live here in the worst socialist government in the world? Its probably best to ask the question"who has a better government in the world"? Nobody does. Nobody lives in a better country. We just have some major problems that need to be fixed. So do most other countries. I read the other day that our national debt problem is not unique. Most other countries are living with the same ticking timebomb we are(then you throw in the credit default swaps that are around 70 trillion with next to nothing in equity backing them up). Scary, scary stuff and all we hear is slogans, insults and not much in the way of ideas and solutions.

[Lewholt]

I have a lot of ideas and solutions and I would love to hear yours.

[Puddleglum]

Mike wrote:

That was pretty much my next move- the history. I'd like to see how often this happens. I have a feeling, unlike the vast majority wants to believe, this is not a "party" action, but pretty much has nothing to do with political party affiliation. Note: it was President Kennedy who vetoed the Northwoods, or Cuban, project.
Puddlegum, no details needed, but do you have some sort of background that privvys you to some information, or did you just do research?
Googled the "Neocon new pearl harbor". Can't find anything that is even close to unbiased.

Mike wrote:

That was pretty much my next move- the history. I'd like to see how often this happens. I have a feeling, unlike the vast majority wants to believe, this is not a "party" action, but pretty much has nothing to do with political party affiliation. Note: it was President Kennedy who vetoed the Northwoods, or Cuban, project.
Puddlegum, no details needed, but do you have some sort of background that privvys you to some information, or did you just do research?
Googled the "Neocon new pearl harbor". Can't find anything that is even close to unbiased.

Mike wrote:

That was pretty much my next move- the history. I'd like to see how often this happens..

You will find that it has happened before.

Mike wrote:

Note: it was President Kennedy who vetoed the Northwoods, or Cuban, project.

That is interesting ,isn't it?

Mike wrote:

Puddlegum, no details needed, but do you have some sort of background that privvys you to some information, or did you just do research?.

I just do research. There are many people with inside information on the Internet. I have always felt the explosives in the World Trade Center were already in place and were just utilized on 911. I read a leaked e-mail the other day that confirmed this. They were there, supposedly, to control the collapse of the buildings in the event of a catastrophe. The buildings were powered down in the days before 911 probably to test the system. You can verify this by research. This kind of operation is highly compartmentalized so that they can keep as many people as they can out of the loop.

Mike wrote:

Googled the "Neocon new pearl harbor". Can't find anything that is even close to unbiased.

I am not sure what you mean by biased but what I was pointing you to is the Project for a New American Century. Their supposed goal is to spread democracy all over the world. It is more like lining the pockets of companies like Haliberton and others in the military industry. They said their plans would be hard to sell to the people unless they had " a new Pearl Harbor". The got it on 911.You know there is evidence that Roosevelt allowed the attack on Pearl Harbor because he wanted us to get us involved in WW 2. The American people were absolutely opposed to this until Pearl Harbor.

[Lewholt]

I heard something new the other day. The government grants $255 billion in tax cuts(yearly) to companies that have employee medical insurance. Kinda sounds like we have a public option already. Second, the Hyde Amendment passed in 1977 I believe states that the government cannot directly subsidize abortion payments. They don't. They just give corporations $255 billion in tax cuts a year for medical insurance and abortion is covered by most employers policies. Now, that pretty underhanded even by my standards.

[Puddleglum]

Let me try this again.

Mike wrote:

That was pretty much my next move- the history. I'd like to see how often this happens. I have a feeling, unlike the vast majority wants to believe, this is not a "party" action, but pretty much has nothing to do with political party affiliation. Note: it was President Kennedy who vetoed the Northwoods, or Cuban, project.
Puddlegum, no details needed, but do you have some sort of background that privvys you to some information, or did you just do research?
Googled the "Neocon new pearl harbor". Can't find anything that is even close to unbiased.

Mike wrote:

That was pretty much my next move- the history. I'd like to see how often this happens..

You will find that it has happened before.

Mike wrote:

Note: it was President Kennedy who vetoed the Northwoods, or Cuban, project.

That is interesting ,isn't it?

Mike wrote:

Puddlegum, no details needed, but do you have some sort of background that privvys you to some information, or did you just do research?.

I just do research. There are many people with inside information on the internet. I have always felt the explosives in the World Trade Center were already in place and were just utilized on 911. I read a leaked e-mail the other day that confirmed this. They were there, supposedly, to control the collapse of the buildings in the event of a cotastrophy. The buildings were powered down in the days before 911 probably to test the system. You can verify this by research. This kind of operation is highly compartmentalized so that they can keep as many people as they can out of the loop.

Mike wrote:

Googled the "Neocon new pearl harbor". Can't find anything that is even close to unbiased.

I am not sure what you mean by biased but what I was pointing you to is the Project for a New American Century. Their supposed goal is to spread democracy all over the world. It is more like lining the pockets of companies like Haliberton and others in the military industry. They said there plans would be hard to sell to the people unless they had " a new Pearl Harbor". The got it on 911.

[Polemics]

Puddleglum wrote:

Let me try this again.
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
You will find that it has happened before.
<quoted text>
That is interesting ,isn't it?
<quoted text>
I just do research. There are many people with inside information on the internet. I have always felt the explosives in the World Trade Center were already in place and were just utilized on 911. I read a leaked e-mail the other day that confirmed this. They were there, supposedly, to control the collapse of the buildings in the event of a cotastrophy. The buildings were powered down in the days before 911 probably to test the system. You can verify this by research. This kind of operation is highly compartmentalized so that they can keep as many people as they can out of the loop.
<quoted text>
I am not sure what you mean by biased but what I was pointing you to is the Project for a New American Century. Their supposed goal is to spread democracy all over the world. It is more like lining the pockets of companies like Haliberton and others in the military industry. They said there plans would be hard to sell to the people unless they had " a new Pearl Harbor". The got it on 911.

I thought to begin with you were serious.

[Mike]

Lewholt wrote:

I have a lot of ideas and solutions and I would love to hear yours.

Before we can formulate solutions, we have to agree on the problems. My thought of what the biggest problems are:

1. We created a constitution, which created a national government and almost from day one, we did everything to circumvent that contract. Today, we all but ignore it, and WE AS AN ELECTORATE ARE JUST FINE WITH THAT!!!

2. We, the electorate have the right to vote, whether we have sense enough to vote. The majority of the electorate not only doesn't want to know the truth, they make efforts to avoid it, right wing, left wing... we only want to know the truth that agrees with what we like to hear.

3. Because of #2 above, we keep electing the biggest smile and the biggest liar, who, once in office, will do whatever the cadre wants (within the limits of whatever the public knowledge will allow).

4. We seem to continually get pitted against each other. No matter what we believe, we can get along to fight against the problems, but because of the other problems, we simply won't do it. White against black aganst hispanic against asian. Rich against poor against welfare recipient aganist who knows who. Democrat against republican against 3d party against indepedent.

Personally, I have a dreadful feeling it all boils down to #2. I believe if the large majority of voters would actually study out the candidates, the scumbags would not even run for fear of being found out. But we're not gonna do that, are we. I guess it's too fun to watch the demise of the greatest nation on earth, rather than actually THINK for ourselves.

Solution: Limit the vote, but not to race or religion or sex, and not even to education, but to understanding. That would be a start. However, we still have so many people voting for whatever they think will benefit them personally, even that may not help.

Solution: A federal balanced budget amendment wouldn't hurt either, nor would term limits, but again, we the people should impose that at the voting booth.

What say ye, Lew

[Mike]

Puddleglum wrote:

Let me try this again.
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
You will find that it has happened before.
<quoted text>
That is interesting ,isn't it?
<quoted text>
I just do research. There are many people with inside information on the internet. I have always felt the explosives in the World Trade Center were already in place and were just utilized on 911. I read a leaked e-mail the other day that confirmed this. They were there, supposedly, to control the collapse of the buildings in the event of a cotastrophy. The buildings were powered down in the days before 911 probably to test the system. You can verify this by research. This kind of operation is highly compartmentalized so that they can keep as many people as they can out of the loop.
<quoted text>
I am not sure what you mean by biased but what I was pointing you to is the Project for a New American Century. Their supposed goal is to spread democracy all over the world. It is more like lining the pockets of companies like Haliberton and others in the military industry. They said there plans would be hard to sell to the people unless they had " a new Pearl Harbor". The got it on 911.

I caught what it was about, and it was good stuff, but the information I'd need to validate it for me was more or less left wing. That would be okay if I could find some right wing balance. My preference would be neutral info (not always available).

But I will still be looking. I want to know.

[Mike]

And my time is limited as to research on political matters. But I gotta tell you, it could be a topic for my next book, so I'll be looking it up.

[Puddleglum]

Polemics wrote:

<quoted text>
I thought to begin with you were serious.

I didn't like the double quotes at the top. I wanted to be able to do it right the next time so I posted again to make sure I had it.

[Puddleglum]

Mike wrote:

And my time is limited as to research on political matters. But I gotta tell you, it could be a topic for my next book, so I'll be looking it up.

Will I be in the credits? HaHa

[Puddleglum]

Mugsy wrote:

very interesting reading.

You would like the book by Bill Still titled "New World Order the ancient Plan of Secret Societies". You can get it at Amazon. I promise you will not be disappointed.

[Lewholt]

Mike wrote:

<quoted text>
Before we can formulate solutions, we have to agree on the problems. My thought of what the biggest problems are:
1. We created a constitution, which created a national government and almost from day one, we did everything to circumvent that contract. Today, we all but ignore it, and WE AS AN ELECTORATE ARE JUST FINE WITH THAT!!!
2. We, the electorate have the right to vote, whether we have sense enough to vote. The majority of the electorate not only doesn't want to know the truth, they make efforts to avoid it, right wing, left wing... we only want to know the truth that agrees with what we like to hear.
3. Because of #2 above, we keep electing the biggest smile and the biggest liar, who, once in office, will do whatever the cadre wants (within the limits of whatever the public knowledge will allow).
4. We seem to continually get pitted against each other. No matter what we believe, we can get along to fight against the problems, but because of the other problems, we simply won't do it. White against black aganst hispanic against asian. Rich against poor against welfare recipient aganist who knows who. Democrat against republican against 3d party against indepedent.
Personally, I have a dreadful feeling it all boils down to #2. I believe if the large majority of voters would actually study out the candidates, the scumbags would not even run for fear of being found out. But we're not gonna do that, are we. I guess it's too fun to watch the demise of the greatest nation on earth, rather than actually THINK for ourselves.
Solution: Limit the vote, but not to race or religion or sex, and not even to education, but to understanding. That would be a start. However, we still have so many people voting for whatever they think will benefit them personally, even that may not help.
Solution: A federal balanced budget amendment wouldn't hurt either, nor would term limits, but again, we the people should impose that at the voting booth.
What say ye, Lew

Our biggest problem is the national debt. Nothing else comes remotely close.
#1. Balanced Budget Amendment. We are doomed without it. You can't get elected without promising to spend money and you can't get relected without spending money. The politicians need cover or an excuse why they can't spend money.
#2. Surplus Budget Amendment. Requires the Federal government to invest a percentage of taxes taken in; into various investment vehicles and take the earned interest and reduce personal taxes the right way. This is no diferant then Microsoft sitting on a $10 billion reserve for R & D and expansion.
We'll always be arguing over the constitution and other things. if the debt isn't handled, and handled soon all the other issues you bring up will become moot.

[kelly almon]

Lewholt wrote:

<quoted text>
Our biggest problem is the national debt. Nothing else comes remotely close.
#1. Balanced Budget Amendment. We are doomed without it. You can't get elected without promising to spend money and you can't get relected without spending money. The politicians need cover or an excuse why they can't spend money.
#2. Surplus Budget Amendment. Requires the Federal government to invest a percentage of taxes taken in; into various investment vehicles and take the earned interest and reduce personal taxes the right way. This is no diferant then Microsoft sitting on a $10 billion reserve for R & D and expansion.
We'll always be arguing over the constitution and other things. if the debt isn't handled, and handled soon all the other issues you bring up will become moot.

if the national debt is out rageous, then WHY are you in love with the idiot that is spending money faster than they can make it?YOU DONT HAVE A CLUE DO YOU?

american tax payers pay $25000 per cash for clunker car.WHO signed this into order? LEWS FRIEND obama

WHO is destroying the ceonomy by the hour? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA

WHO is buying out all the privately held businesses? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA

WHO is trying to get a 5 trillion dollar government take over of healthcare voted in? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA

WHO is giving americans who buy a house $8000 to buy it with after he says that is what has the economy in the shape it is in> LEWS FRIEND OBAMA

WHO is extending unemployment benefits instead of dropping payroll taxes, and tax on businesses in america?LEWS FRIEND OBAMA

WHo has taken over the major banks in america? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA

WHo has taken over insurance companies in america? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA

WHO has paid the america people $300 each and says it will improve the economy? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA

WHo has NEVER proved he is an american citizen? LEWS FRIEWND OBAMA

WHo has spent more money than ALL OTHER PRESIDENTS COMBINED since being in office? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA

SO LOU..... WHY SHOULD YOU WONDER WHY TAXES ARE GOING UP? I thought you were a claimed smart man.YOUR AN IDIOT

[Mike]

Durn, Lew! I didn't know you knew the President so well, dude. Can you put in a good word for me, maybe for White House Historian, please, please.

[Lewholt]

kelly almon wrote:

<quoted text>
if the national debt is out rageous, then WHY are you in love with the idiot that is spending money faster than they can make it?YOU DONT HAVE A CLUE DO YOU?
american tax payers pay $25000 per cash for clunker car.WHO signed this into order? LEWS FRIEND obama
WHO is destroying the ceonomy by the hour? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA
WHO is buying out all the privately held businesses? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA
WHO is trying to get a 5 trillion dollar government take over of healthcare voted in? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA
WHO is giving americans who buy a house $8000 to buy it with after he says that is what has the economy in the shape it is in> LEWS FRIEND OBAMA
WHO is extending unemployment benefits instead of dropping payroll taxes, and tax on businesses in america?LEWS FRIEND OBAMA
WHo has taken over the major banks in america? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA
WHo has taken over insurance companies in america? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA
WHO has paid the america people $300 each and says it will improve the economy? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA
WHo has NEVER proved he is an american citizen? LEWS FRIEWND OBAMA
WHo has spent more money than ALL OTHER PRESIDENTS COMBINED since being in office? LEWS FRIEND OBAMA
SO LOU..... WHY SHOULD YOU WONDER WHY TAXES ARE GOING UP? I thought you were a claimed smart man.YOUR AN IDIOT

The number is $5 trillion, yahoo. Thats what the republicans borrowed. Bush also hired 200,000 federal employees. Get the facts.

[Lewholt]

Obama has borrowed more money then all other presidents combined? Did you reaaly say that? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...typical wingnut.

[Lewholt]

Obama has borrowed about a trillion dollars. We owe $10 trillion right now and $37 trillion in future commitments. There is no end to the Wingnuts idiocracy.

[Lewholt]

Next Wingnut , please. And send me a smarter one this time.