The Worst President in History?

The worst tyrannies of this world have been at the hands of those who supposed they alone knew what was truly good for everyone else and who were willing to do whatever it takes to reshape humanity into their preconceived mold. The great majority of this evil has been done in the name of the common good by people who put forward the conceit that they alone were above mere property ownership, and they alone were truly dedicated to the common good. The wrinkle was they claimed the sole right to say and determine just what was the commoin good. Their exhaulted (but self-appointed) status above the greedy common mass, somehow gave them the exclusive right to sit in judgement of lesser beings.

I think I prefer common greed.

0 Replies

I think I prefer food on my table and a roof over my head and the government on the other side of my property line, but then, I'm a liberal.

0 Replies

God damn that Bush man.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

I think I prefer food on my table and a roof over my head and the government on the other side of my property line, but then, I'm a liberal.

This might not make you happy, but I agree wholeheartedly with your above statement. Time to celebrate. Liberals and conservatives can agree on some basics here.

It doesn't require greed to like to own your own property. In my opinion, true greed is wanting what you have not earned. Personally, I could care less if everybody else is richer than me. I can be content with a roof over my head and something to eat, and all of my bills paid. It doesn't have to be the nicest house on the block, and it isn't, thats for sure.

0 Replies

Hi Okie, I kind of agree with you (bills, roof, yard) - but if I see my next door neighbour kicking his dog - then I'm unhappy again.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Perhaps you ought to learn what a "citation" is in one of these discussion threads, Okie, before shooting off your mouth.

Parapharasing is not citing.

I understand your cutting and running, though, and if I were advising you, that is exactly what what I would suggest you do.

My guess is you have damn near no chance of making a substantive case for your original strawman.

Heres a couple, all I have time for now:
From: plainoldme post 2102803 in "Democracies and Mutual Respect":
"THESE CORPORATIONS AS THEY EXIST TODAY RUN OUR LIVES. EVERYTHING WE WANTED AS HUMAN BEINGS FROM THE ENLIGHTENMENT ON IS BEING DESTROYED BY CORPORATIONS."

And this from Anton post 1885152 in "An open letter to all those decent Americans":
"President George Bush talks a lot about bringing democracy to the Middle East when in fact he has demonstrated an evil that is on a par with Nazi Germany the world doesn't need another evil despot; since Bush became President the world has sunken into a mire of fear and uncertainty not seen since the Second World War this is undoubtedly the most arrogant US President I have ever seen his administration has destroyed the reputation of a country most of us held in high regard and kinship."

There is plenty of this type of stuff on this forum. And if you spend fruitless time debating with plainoldme, as she spouts out nonsense like the above day after day, and you also find sympathizers to her opinions, you begin to think for good reason that libs are antagonistic toward corporations, business, and free enterprise while not displaying the same antagonism toward the likes of Castro and his fellow travelers. Although the sympathizers to plainoldme do not say the same words as she does, it indicates that type of thought is fairly common amongst liberals.

Well...those are two. I'll give you that. Both from the same person.

Here is what you wrote originally:

Quote:

I only repond to where some of you seem to want to go on some of these threads. Business is bad. Corporations are evil and the source of all of our problems. We are all victims, blah, blah, blah. American partriots are evil nationalists, bordering on fascists. On and on. I don't recall if you've said those things, but since I've been on this forum, the same old mantra constantly rears its ugly head from various sources. I get the drift, Parados, that many people must think there is utopia waiting for them somewhere sometime, if they could just get rid of evil corporations and turn it all over to the government. Their government of course.

If what you truly meant to say was that this particular poster indulges in excesses such as (the examples you gave)...

...you should have said that.

You are insinuating in your quote that this is something that happens a lot (constantly)...and comes from various sources.

I think that is a gross overstatment...the kind of thing I hear a lot from conservatives. Strawmen that serve only to demonize the dreaded "liberal"...as though the pathetic conservatives of this country are any better than the lunatic liberals.

Yeah...liberals do tend to say things that are outrageous. But for conservatives to point that out as a defect in liberals is like George Dumbya Bush pointing out the defects in father's speaking style.

0 Replies

Is Anton and plainoldme the same identity? Do I have no reason to believe they are?

I suppose I could back off a bit, but I will maintain that there seems to be much more hostility and suspicion toward business and corporations than there is toward big government by many on this forum. And there is far more hostility and demonization of the president than is justified. When I jump on liberals, I am talking about the extreme types. You may not be. I haven't seen many of your posts. But we are seeing even Democratic Party leaders making some pretty outlandish and extreme statements, so yes, I may be overly sensitive, and whenever I have an opportunity, I defend the country and our way of life. I am tired of whiners and complainers that constantly criticize the country. So on this forum, I've decided that is one thing I can and will do, defend what I see as right about the country and the econmic prosperity that we enjoy.

0 Replies

Okie- There are literally thousands of examples where the left wing depicts the corporations of the USA as "evil". Here are some examples-

WAL MART IS EEEEVVVVIIIILLLL...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shopping for voters
Ruth Rosen

Monday, November 3, 2003
San Francisco Chronicle

Main Opinion Page

IMAGINE THAT you earn $8 an hour working for Wal-Mart. Then, you learn that the store is recruiting workers, at $10 an hour, to convince neighbors and shoppers to vote against a law that would limit the size of "big- box'' stores in unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County.

Great, you think. I'll apply. But Wal-Mart won't hire its own workers because the corporation isn't sure it's legal to use them to promote a political campaign.

When you realize that Wal-Mart will pay higher wages to those campaigning to keep your wages low, you get angry -- which is how I've learned about the Arkansas retailer's countywide plans to repeal the ordinance.

Last June, the Contra Costa Country Board of Supervisors passed the ban when it recognized that Wal-Mart's seductive low prices come with hidden costs to residents. The retailer's subsistence wages drive down the pay of other workers; its huge super-centers undermine local small businesses and create more traffic congestion. Taxpayers, moreover, end up paying for workers' health care because they can't afford costly benefits on such low pay

and, here's another hilarious one- Okie---

Who's responsible for the premature deaths of millions and the nicotine addiciton of kids? Philip Morris? No, now it's Altria. Who's selling unhealthy food and abusing animals through Taco Bell, KFC, and Pizza Hut? Is it Tricon Global Restaurants? Nope, now it's Yum! Brands. And there are so many more...

and another one, Okie

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0 Replies

0 Replies

After that most intelligent comment from Mr. Cycloptichorn, Okie, I will give you another post on "Evil Corporations"!!!

Unborn babies are exposed in the womb to synthetic chemicals.
Enlarge ImageToxic chemicals in our environment threaten our rivers and lakes, our air, land, and oceans, and ultimately ourselves and our future.

The production, trade, use, and release of many synthetic chemicals is now widely recognised as a global threat to human health and the environment.

Yet, the world's chemical industries continue to produce and release thousands of chemical compounds every year, in most cases with none or very little testing and understanding of their impacts on people and the environment.

and

0 Replies

Bernard - nowhere in that article does it say Wal-Mart is evil - it just reports a county's ordinances, Wal-Mart's response, and a bit of what it all means for the locals.

Your predilections have you imagining connotations where there are none.

The effects of Wal-Mart's effective method of business are widely acknowledged - even Friedman talked about it in 'The World Is Flat'. Wal-Mart is just a business looking for a competitive edge (or trying to keep it) and of course there will be social and economic knock-on effects.

Are you suggesting these issues shouldn't be reported because they are left wing hysteria?

0 Replies

PS Frank asked Okie for three quotes from 'lefties/liberals' on this forum. Further evidence of your predilection to read what you want into any communication.

0 Replies

After that most intelligent comment from Mr. Cycloptichorn, Okie, I will give you another post on "Evil Corporations"!!!

Unborn babies are exposed in the womb to synthetic chemicals.
Enlarge ImageToxic chemicals in our environment threaten our rivers and lakes, our air, land, and oceans, and ultimately ourselves and our future.

The production, trade, use, and release of many synthetic chemicals is now widely recognised as a global threat to human health and the environment.

Yet, the world's chemical industries continue to produce and release thousands of chemical compounds every year, in most cases with none or very little testing and understanding of their impacts on people and the environment.

and

(must use Internet Explorer)

Demonstrators Oppose Globalization
And Threaten The Environment

Dennis T. Avery

CHURCHVILLE, VA- Last weekend, a few thousand of America's children of wealth and privilege took to the streets to protest the World Economic Forum at New York's Waldorf Astoria hotel. They screamed at police, abused the American flag, and demanded the dissolution of the corporations that deliver their cherished cars and DVD players.

Simultaneously, 60,000 people gathered for a counter-conference to the WEF at the World Social Forum in Puerto Alegre, Brazil. The anti-globalization conferees in Brazil demanded debt relief for poor countries, water as a universal right and a ban on genetically engineered seeds.

***********************************************************

Okie- It is my considered opinion that most of the people who reflexively oppose Corporations qua corporations and think they are evil are either doctrinare Communists( very few); ignorant( some) or confused about the nature of corporations.

Corporations are the engines that feed the pensions and 401K's of most of our retirees. Corporations give most of the American people jobs. Corporations have advanced our individual affluence so that the average American is one of the richest persons in the world.

Those who know this but still protest against it are usually speaking from envy. They have not, for some reason, been able to take advantage of the largesse provided by American skill, hard work and productivity.
So they engage in knee jerk reactions against the "Corporation">

0 Replies

BernardR, Do you ever get anything right? Small business hires more workers than big corporations in this country. Learn your facts befrore you spout out more stupid stuff.

0 Replies

You need to read the newspaper once-in-awhile to learn that big corporations like GM and Ford are laying off by the thousands. Most manufacturing in the US is being lost to off shore companies where labor costs are pennies on the dollar.

0 Replies

Of course, small business hires more than large corporations. The left wing is attacking CORPORATIONS. Most mom and pop stores are NOT incorporated.

And, Mr. Imposter, I am certain that you know little or nothing about globalization and its effects.

Try reading either of Mr. Friedman's books on Globalization--The Lexus and the Olive Tree and/or The Earth is Flat.

You will find out some things you probably do not know.

l. Globalization cannot be stopped

2. Protectionism will not work

3. We must meet the challenges of globalization by getting smarter

0 Replies

BernardR wrote:

3. We must meet the challenges of globalization by getting smarter

When are you going to start doing your bit? :wink: (sorry, I just couldn't resist). But I would recommend The World Is Flat as an interesting read.

0 Replies

BernardR wrote:

Ahhh...we are back to Mr. Hingehead...something you say you never do.

You are not very consistent, Bernie.

0 Replies

BernardR wrote:

After that most intelligent comment from Mr. Cycloptichorn, Okie, I will give you another post on "Evil Corporations"!!!

Bernard, thanks for the support. I gave Mr. Apisa two of the most obvious examples of bias, but as you say, the forum is full of anti-business sentiment and anti-American sentiment. It does not always come forth totally spelled out, but it is there. A prime example is the recently started thread by Walter Hinteler: "Liberalism failed to set us free; indeed it enslaved us." So, Mr. Apisa, consider this example #3.

In this thread, the entire premise of the article cited is that what I would consider liberty and free enterprise (described as liberalism in the article) and what it brings to us in the way of standing up for liberty, individual rights, capitalism, free enterprise, etc. has now gone too far, and it has now enslaved us. Among the posters singing praises or at least apparently sympathizing with this commentary are Walter Hinteler, Amigo, nimh, najmelliw, and dyslexia. I'm not sure about dyslexia. I am sure there would be many more if they had noticed the thread.

Among the things mentioned as possible things that have gone too far are: freedom of the press, individual rights, "meritocracy," triumphalism (as in winning the cold war), and advocacy of freedom (at the expense of Islamic fundamentalists (terrorists). I am amazed that the intellectuals somehow think the article identifies something very profound, when in actuality it is nothing more than a load of hogwash designed to advocate a government solution for all of this. Communism is mentioned once in the article as once being the other idealogy that claimed the "moral high ground," so I suspect the old affections for such are still there, waiting for their opportunity of revival.

So Mr. Apisa, consider this a very good illustration of the sentiments commonly held by the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, which incidentally controls the party these days.

0 Replies

The Worst President in History?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know