Where is the US economy headed?

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

it doesn't matter how many times I tell okie and ican that I'm and <Independent.

True! That's because we are smart enough to know you are NOT an independent. We judge you by what you post.

@mysteryman,

Quote:

Asking "how many black women have you raped" meets your definition of being civil?

Listen, game player, he insulted me some time ago, and he will never enter my good graces. Stop playing your tiresome, fifth-grade games.

You insulted me some time ago. You later challenged me on that and I posted your insult for you. You, in an ican-like manner, denied that the post was an insult. That's because as a conservative, you take no personal responsibility for anything.

It was a long time ago, and, unlike you, I have things to do, so, even were it possible to look it up again, I would not.

It is up to you to be honest and adult.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

I try to hold others to the same standard I hold myself. I remember your having described yourself as an independent long ago, on a2k. I therefore expect okie and ican to remember the same thing. They have been exchanging barbs with you longer then I have and should not only know you better but remember more of your writing, simply because they have seen more.

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

Quote:

True! That's because we are smart enough to know you are NOT an independent. We judge you by what you post.

You have just provided evidence that you do not believe in either personal freedom or in the First Amendment, which covers Freedom of Speech.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

Both ican and okie's memory cells are gone.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

Since when does disagreeing with someone equate to not believing in the First Amendment?

Here is the 1st amendment...

Quote:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Now, you note it says CONGRESS.
That means the govt, not a private citizen. Now unless ican is the govt, he isnt violating anyones first amendment rights.

Also, since ican is not stopping anyone from saying anything, nor is he censoring what anyone is writing, he is in fact not violating the 1st amendment.

But using your logic, your posts would also be evidence that you do not believe in either personal freedom or in the First Amendment, which covers Freedom of Speech because if you did you would not be disagreeing with what anyone writes, including ican.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

I dont care if he insulted you or not.

The question you asked was ignorant, insulting, racist and beneath even your low standards.
Its possible to not like someone without going to that depth.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

Perhaps, I have overestimated MM. I have been interpreting posts such as this as game playing, a perpetual effort to pick a fight:

Quote:

Since when does disagreeing with someone equate to not believing in the First Amendment?

That statement was made in response to this statement, posted by me, Saturday, 25 September:

Quote:

You have just provided evidence that you do not believe in either personal freedom or in the First Amendment, which covers Freedom of Speech.

Were my words the only words in that particular box, I doubt that MM's "since when . . . " would come across as anything but a non sequitur.

However, my response was made to ican, that sterling example of totalitarianism.

Ican had taken on cicerone imposter, who, as everyone with average reading ability and a normal memory knows, has been posting for years that he is an independent.

ican -- who as a conservative may be under the influence of Leo Strauss -- believes that cicerone is lying. Why does ican believe cicerone is? In part because Leo Strauss set the modus operandi for the Neo-Cons: the ruling class has the right to lie and should lie when the national security demands it.

Now, ican is not part of the ruling class. He just thinks like a member.

So, the exchange between ican and cicerone looked like this, with ican dressing cicerone down:

Quote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
it doesn't matter how many times I tell okie and ican that I'm and <Independent.

TO WHICH ICAN RESPONDED:

True! That's because we are smart enough to know you are NOT an independent. We judge you by what you post.

In other words, ican claims to know what cicerone is really, really thinking.

That sounds like a violation of cicerone's right to exercise his own free speech as an expression of his own thoughts.

In other words, ican did more than call c.i. a liar, ican told c.i. what to say and how to say it.

I quoted ican in my response which made it perfectly clear.

So, what is your verdict, dear readers, on MM? Is he a cyber-bully pulling stunts or is he unable to read at the middle school level?

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

Quote:

The question you asked was ignorant, insulting, racist and beneath even your low standards.

No. The ever pompous ican, who has demonstrated an inability to understand the simplest of information, set out to prove that he is superior to c.i., parados, me and several others by comparing himself to the FFs.

He has no idea what the concepts he is trying to present mean.

That you called my statement racist only demonstrates how ignorant you are. You know there is a concept labeled racism but have no idea what it means.

Jefferson struggled with the fact that he owned slaves. He knew that slavery would tear the country apart and it did. For a century after the Emancipation Proclamation, de facto slavery remained.

After the death of his wife, Jefferson had a relationship with Sally Hemmings, who, like his wife Martha, was the daughter of John Wayles. Had Jefferson been a Roman Catholic, the Church would have said that his marriage to Martha Wayles made him a relative of her half-sister, Sally Hemmings.

It is possible that Martha and Sally resembled each other. There are no portraits of Sally Hemmings. Furthermore, Jefferson was deeply depressed following his wife's death in childbirth. A resemblance between his wife's half-sister and slave might have drawn Jefferson to Sally. However, to me, having sexual relations with your dead wife's half-sister is creepy.

Neither ican nor okie are man enough to admit to the racist history of American conservatism. BEcause the Southern Democrats were once the emblem of racism in America, rather than the Republicans and the Tea Totalitarians, both okie and ican say that liberals are racists. They have no idea that the parties changed roles.wssssssssss

Lately, ican has taken to calling himself a "rightist liberal," I assume, partly in response to my having asked him repeatedly in the Freedom Riders and the participants in Freedom Summer were "conservatives." Several people to whom I am closely connected were participants in both activities and I know that they have been left/progressive/liberal all their lives.

ican should be honest and acknowledge that racism is now and has always been a right wing thought process.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

Quote:

So, what is your verdict, dear readers, on MM? Is he a cyber-bully pulling stunts or is he unable to read at the middle school level?

false dilemma pom.

It could be that MM is correct when he states ican hasn't violated c.i.'s first amendment rights.

Ican says he knows what c.i. is thinking. While ican is stupid for arguing that he can read c.i's mind, it can be interpreted as simply disagreeing with someone.

2 Replies

Finally, in MM's off-topic response, he tried to make a point about Congress. I just didn't bother to read the rest.

However, what that brought to mind was a lecture by a journalism professor at the University of Michigan during the summer of 1968. He said, several times in fact, that the ACLU brought freedoms for all of us through their law suits, generally against police forces in various cities.

The point of recalling this is that people, whether in official positions or not, often do what ican attempted to do here (albeit, ican's attempt was minimal and inconsequential): limit the First Amendment rights of another, in this case, cicerone imposter.

ican acted very much like a totalitarian in a dystopian novel. Take your pick as to which one.

BTW: The class I recalled dealt with the rights of writers, editors and publishers under the First Amendment.

And that was more of my time than MM's silliness merited. The sad thing is he will not be embarrassed.

2 Replies

@parados,

I think the element of bullying is too strong and that ican is on a continuum with stronger forces.

0 Replies

@parados,

The only issue here is that ican can not remove cicerone or anyone else from this forum. If he could, then he would be limiting their freedom of expression.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

ican should be honest and acknowledge that racism is now and has always been a right wing thought process.

You are here duplicating the illogical features of oakie's arguments and reducing disjoint issues to your own distorted left-right paradigm.

Think for a moment about our oh-so-liberal President Woodrow Wilson, also an avowed racist.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

And that was more of my time than MM's silliness merited. The sad thing is he will not be embarrassed.

Are you sure? You appear to have so much of it to lavish on such rather bitter diatribes against MM, oakie and others: the quantity of your time & posts is rather throughly debased already.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

thanks, ob.

heading out the door with a vision of okie as pinocchio... Shocked

oakie...

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

You are not independent of this distinction:
Leftist liberals seek to secure their right to steal wealth others earn;
Rightist liberals seek to secure their right to retain wealth they earn.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

Quote:

In other words, ican claims to know what cicerone is really, really thinking.

That sounds like a violation of cicerone's right to exercise his own free speech as an expression of his own thoughts

The sad part is that while you accuse others of this, you refuse to admit that you are guilty of the exact same thing.

You constantly claim that "All conservatives" believe something or act some way, thereby violating their first amendment rights in the same way you accuse ican of doing.

2 Replies

Sigh. Back on topic -

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-gruener-tax-the-rich-20100920,0,6399518.story

Quote:

No one particularly enjoys paying taxes, but one lesson we should have learned by now is that for the good of the country, we need to tax people like me more. At a minimum, we need to return to the tax rates of the Clinton era, when the economy performed far better. Simply taxing the wealthiest 2% of Americans at the same rates they were taxed before the Bush tax cuts could reduce the national deficit by $700 billion over the next 10 years. Remember, paying slightly more in personal income taxes won't change my investment choices at all, and I don't think a higher tax rate will change the investment decisions of most other high earners.

What will change my investment decisions is if I see an economy doing better, one in which there is demand for the goods and services my investments produce. I am far more likely to invest if I see a country laying the foundation for future growth. In order to get there, we first need to let the Bush-era tax cuts for the upper 2% lapse. It is time to tax me more.

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2010/09/20/tax-me-more-says-wealthy-entrepreneur/?mod=rss_WSJBlog

Quote:

As Congress and President Obama fight over the Bush tax cuts, a small number of left-leaning rich people have come out in support of paying higher taxes. The most famous are the members of the Responsible Wealth Project, who say they pay too little in taxes and want to address inequality.

They may be an eccentric minority, or (in the view of conservatives) a lunatic fringe. But a Quinnipiac University poll this year showed nearly two-thirds of those with household incomes of more than $250,000 a year support raising their own taxes to reduce the federal deficit.

So not all of the wealthy are angry about tax hikes. But that doesn’t mean they just want bigger government. What they want is better government – and investment in growth.

It would seem that opposition to tax raises for the rich is mostly carried out by a small minority of them, and a large number of people who aren't in fact rich - but have an ideology that says that all tax hikes on them are bad, so...

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

You literalists! She was making a generalization. Get it?

BTW, she is incapable of denying anyone their First Amendment rights. The Amendment is only operative against government.

1 Reply

Where is the US economy headed?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know