November 28, 2012

At the Lookout Café...

Untitled

... keep watch.

148 comments:

abdeel said...

I only visit to see the dogs.

chickelit said...

Man's best friend

Aridog said...

I'd love to have neighbors like you and Meade who seem to take in dogs either visiting or when owners are maybe away? Actually dogs appreciate it too, as they are the consummate social animals. There can never be too many cool people in their world view. So yeah, I admire you both for it too.

Irene said...

I second what Aridog said.

Browndog said...

Showed the pic to my dog. Then my other dog. They both agreed.

He's tired of being a photo-op, and just wants to go home.

Dante said...

I had a discussion last night with a guy regarding taxes, welfare, etc. My father, I believe, has a disdain for my views on some of these things. I was curious what others thought of my viewpoint, if you have the time to follow the reasoning.

First, I HATE when someone forces me to do something. In fact, I hate it so much that even if it's something I would normally do, I still hate it.

So the discussion I had with this guy last night went something like this. There are now four instances in my life where I made a significant effort to try to help someone out, because they were in some kind of pain. In three cases, the changes were life altering in a positive way for the person. In one, it the recent one where I helped a guy who wasn't breathing and whose heart wasn't beating to come back to life doesn't count so much, as it was such a short period of time, and I had no choice in the actions I took.

When I give charity, I am careful who I give it to. I sent off $500.00 to a church, I think in Atlanta, that set up hundreds of dentist seats, got hundreds of dentists, dental hygienists, etc., to help people with really bad teeth problems. I don't care if they are a cult or not, what they did is right.

I gave money to a fund in Lebanon helping people whose villages had been bombed by the Israelis because Hezbollah had set up camp nearby.

And I have spent real time with people who need help. Not fake help, not someone who feels their life is unmanageable, and loves to wallow in self pity, or feels they deserve Obamaphones, and even more. But people who are depressed, or perhaps have become addicted to drugs, etc. My life isn't in that great order, I'm not someone who feels "in control," "happy," "Secure," etc., but I sometimes see people in a certain kind of pain, and I react to it. I think this is normal.

Now, I've been talking to this guy, a blue collar worker. He and I have this disagreement. He thinks people ought to be forced to pay for others. I do not.

We've been going around this for a long time now, and finally it comes out. He knows some people who only care about money, and not about people. He thinks these people are assholes, and they ought to be punished for it. I do not. I think giving, caring, and these things are individual expressions of our humanity, and encoding them into some group think forced government thing actually robs us of our humanity. It steals our energy, our time, and our goodwill.

I noticed this about myself when I saw the Obamaphone woman. I've felt the same about young attractive women who say "You owe us an education," so I'm fairly certain it's not on account of her race. It could be, but I do like the way she expressed herself. Very clear, with no reservations, and I like that in people. There was an honesty in the way she expressed herself.

Now, I know what I have done on my own volition, and I know I have made lives better, with little to nothing in return from them. But inside me, I do what I do because I'm compelled to. I think many people are that way.

Why do we need this big stupid government using force to employ, its version of compassion?

Not only does it not seem to work, it also has this way of removing the capacity of others to act in compassionate ways. I do not understand.

Does this make me evil? I think my Dad thinks that.

shiloh said...

Another example of why Mitt Romney donors really should ask for a refund

"Romney and the outside groups backing him spent $21.5 million in the final five weeks, essentially matching their total spending in the preceding six months, according to a Des Moines Register analysis of TV station records.

That's nearly double what Obama and his Democratic forces spent in Iowa the last five weeks.


But despite spending twice as much as Obama and his allies, Romney got clobbered in the air war:

Although Romney and his allies spent more, the Obama coalition out-advertised them.

About 13,000 more pro-Obama TV ads ran in Iowa than pro-Romney ads during the final weeks.



So Romneyworld spent twice as much as Obamaland on less effective ads that weren't seen as often. It almost makes you wonder if Mitt Romney wasn't a secret agent for Barack Obama, trying to lose the election on purpose. Cue the conspiracy theorists ... I'm sure they're out there."

>

One of Obama's 2008 strong selling pts. to voters was how efficient his campaign was run from the grass roots on up ...

Whereas Willard's 2012 campaign was a frickin' train wreck. hmm, much like the candidate.

Yes, the beauty of being a venture capitalist is you made $$$ regardless. Indeed, as Willard has no problem spending other folk's er con billionaire overlords $$$ foolishly lol.

>

Also, when did Kelly Ayotte become a tag-a-long puppy w/McCain/Graham? Does she think this will help her get re-elected in NH which now has females in all the top political positions: Gov/Senate/Congress. Indeed, being McCain's tool er lap dog while attacking Rice should really help her career.

Both Ayotte and Susan Collins were strong supporters of sexist Scott Brown this year and that worked out well for all concerned ...

>

Did I mention Willard was a train wreck? ok, ok, a spendthrift train wreck!

Lem said...

Is Kerry torpedoing Susan Rice behind the scenes?

I would love for that race card they are playing to just fail... I'm not a card player so I don't know the lingo for when a card doesn't work.

I mean... Lindsey Graham gets called a racist at a news conference and hes not doing something??... something!!

And they wonder why they lose.

shiloh said...

Re: Dante's post and the (6) billion spent in the 2008 American election. Imagine if said (6) billion was spent helping the less fortunate instead of pissed away on negative campaign ads.

The irony of con billionaire overloards spending millions to elect Reps to lower their taxes so they could make more $$$.

Their ROI er betting on Willard was a quest in futility lol as I segue back to my previous post.

shiloh said...

2012 American election ...

NotquiteunBuckley said...

"'He ultimately came out on his own, but at one point gas was introduced into the room, which might have played a role," White said."

I met John White years ago, he was engaging and friendly dealing with hotel staff on a regular basis.


I wondered if he was related to Reggie White, then realized I am (was as it were) racist for thinking that.

Deborah said...

:) I really enjoy your dog entries.

Deborah said...

:) I really enjoy your dog entries.

Penny said...

Would you believe me if I said it isn't about if you "win" or "lose"?

But all about how you play the game?

Ralph L said...

Obama really enjoys dog entrees.

Imagine if said (6) billion was spent helping the less fortunate instead of pissed away on negative campaign ads
These days, newspapers and TV stations are among the less fortunate, and they deserve to be. It's terrible that Republicans must help keep their media enemies afloat while also supporting all those Democratic voters with their taxes. If I were an entrepreneur, I'd take my ball and go home.


Nose Marks!

n said...

Zeus watches and waits.
Gonna miss you when you go.
I'll wait and watch.

As my whimsy leads me.. said...

My son's wire-haired fox terrier, Max, died last summer while he was in Afghanistan with the Marines. Max was 14, but it was still a shock. I wasn't planning to get another dog right away, but when I was ready, I wanted a big, burly, man-eating one. (Bad man-eating, that is.) About a month later, I told someone who was starting a rescue organization that I'd foster a little stray dog that she described as "part Jack Russell terrier and part chihuahua, but really calm." Well, I knew that description didn't fit! It turns out, she's a rat terrier, and she is really calm and sweet. Also spunky, energetic, friendly, and affectionate. I don't know what a purebred rat terrier (who was house-trained and had had pups) was doing with running around rural Kentucky with no ID and no one looking for her, but I'm glad someone was kind enough to take her in.

Rat terriers are an American breed. You can say they are feisty. That's because they are basically the same as the "feist," a small hunting dog developed in the colonies from several different terrier breeds and a few other kinds. I don't know why they aren't more popular, because, if she is any indication, they are nearly perfect as a small, friendly dog that barks just enough, and only for a good reason, is pretty easy to train, and likes exercise but doesn't go crazy missing a couple of days of walks. And, if you have rats, squirrels, or other varmints, they'll go after them, too. They kill them by shaking them to death. My dog hasn't managed to do that yet, but she wanted to take on the raccoon that was in my shed, and she's only 14 pounds!

Needless to say, that fostering idea only lasted about half-way home. I named her Trudy, inspired by Bill Kristol's mother, Gertrude Himmelfarb. I don't know what either of them would think of that, but I was trying to think of a good name from the female conservative realm, and it just came to me. She's much more a Trudy than a Gert, which would fit a big, burly dog better.

So, Meade, don't overlook the small, feisty, friendly dogs when you are starting your new enterprise. I don't know what kind of special job this one would be good at, but she she's working out really well for me. I hope you have a lot of fun and success with your endeavor.

Toy

edutcher said...

Do they let you know when anyone approaches or passes by the house?

If not, you need a York or two.

shiloh said...

blah blah, blah blah

For those who missed it, the real reason the Romster "lost".

In one, concise page.

Also, when did Kelly Ayotte become a tag-a-long puppy w/McCain/Graham? Does she think this will help her get re-elected in NH which now has females in all the top political positions: Gov/Senate/Congress. Indeed, being McCain's tool er lap dog while attacking Rice should really help her career.

It's called integrity and patriotism, two things of which the little weasel knows nothing.

Both Ayotte and Susan Collins were strong supporters of sexist Scott Brown this year and that worked out well for all concerned ...

It helps to stuff the ballot boxes.

Did I mention Willard was a train wreck? ok, ok, a spendthrift train wreck!

The only train wreck is Zero, who can't wait to run us off the fiscal cliff.

Have you heard the recovery won't hit for another 10 years?

And you'll go right along with us, little moron.

The irony of con billionaire overloards spending millions to elect Reps to lower their taxes so they could make more $$$.

The useless idiot speaks.

The overlords "won" and he's too stupid to see it.

Their ROI er betting on Willard was a quest in futility lol as I segue back to my previous post.

An investment in freedom is never wasted.

Since we haven't seen you since Ann and Meade gave you a serial bitch slapping Thanksgiving (for which we're all thankful, btw), I must ask again, where were you hiding out 10/5 - 11/5 when the Romster was winning?

Swamping out the MeadeHouse kennel?

wyo sis said...

I grew up with ranch dogs running around, but never cared much about them. Then I was bitten by a Blue Heeler and that was it for me and dogs.
The dog posts make me think I've missed something.

Sorun said...

I left a camcorder running at home once while I went to work so I could spy on my dogs. This is what they did all day: They looked out the window waiting for me to come home. Sometimes they napped, but not often. I found it really sad.

wyo sis said...

edutcher
I'm glad you keep fighting the good fight and I respect your work.

I have so little respect for shiloh I don't even read his stupid recitations of liberal talking points unless you answer in a way that interests me.

Penny said...

And Meade?

That camera angle on Zeus?

S T R E T C H E D my imagination.

edutcher said...

wyo sis said...

I'm glad you keep fighting the good fight and I respect your work.

I have so little respect for shiloh I don't even read his stupid recitations of liberal talking points unless you answer in a way that interests me.


Thank you, ma'am.

The reason I do this is that's it's an old Lefty trick to throw as many accusations as possible out there in the expectation something will stick, so I try not to let that happen.

The little weasel is nothing more than a propagandist. The boilerplate is prepared and he pastes it.

The fact that I get to stick the occasional harpoon in him and his little friends is what makes it enjoyable.

The fact that I can spread the truth is also rewarding.

shiloh said...

Ann and Meade were busy ((( deleting ))) my posts on Thanksgiving as I agreed w/several other cons who mentioned Althouse was clueless re: religion:

Hagar said...

and since you are not an Anglican, it is not any of your beeswax.

11/21/12 8:11 AM

KenK said...

Hey Althouse. Feel free to start your own fucking religion if you need to but leave the CoE alone.

11/21/12 8:14 AM

Baron Zemo said...

My dear lady the problem of any religion should be the sole concern of those who believe.

We would not interfere with Musselman if they refuse the shell fish.

It is not our place.

11/21/12 8:31 AM

Freder Frederson said...

You don't know that I'm not Anglican.

I do. Because if you were Anglican, you would know the difference between the worldwide Anglican community and the Church of England. You would also know that the American Anglican Church (aka Episcopal Church) has been ordaining women as bishops for quite some time. In fact, the current Presiding Bishop of the American Episcopal Church (roughly, but not exactly the U.S. equivalent of the Archbishop of Canterbury) is a woman (and has been since 2006).

So what exactly is your point as it relates to the American Anglican community?

11/21/12 8:43 AM

>

Although Althouse did not delete my last post in the thread ...

shiloh said...

Althouse, let your beeswax be fruitful and multiply!

Happy Thanksgiving :)

11/21/12 9:33 AM

blessings Althouse #1 doting, trained seal!

McTriumph said...

Question?

If Obama and the Democrats finally auger this economy into the ground and the dollar is worthless, who's going to live a better life, the Kochs and Romneys or Shiloh and Obama? In the economic endgame who's going to have been right?

Dante said...

Shiloh,

I'm not opposed to raising the tax rates on the wealthy at all. In fact, I think it's a splendid idea.

Today, the government essentially forces middle income America, and unborn children, to spend money for commerce today. I have little doubt that people like Warren Buffet get a net return on their government investment. But people like me? Not so much. I'm not complaining about my situation, mind you. I spend most of my life in a 5'X5' location in our home, working on computer programs.

But if the income rich and wealthy had to pay for all this garp liberals pushed, that isn't effective, they might think twice about the role of government. Why, instead of principled people putting up ads, like that Hungarian man, perhaps the wealthy would say "Hey, it's in OUR interests too to not have a big, wasteful government."

At present, it is, despite all the monopolistic inefficiencies of government, it's forcing enough spending (commerce), to keep them on the (D) side. The self destructive policies of importing millions of impoverished people, who, if Demographics is a good indicator, will swamp the boat USA.

Maybe if they had to pay for all this stuff, in a nice, progressive fashion, they would think twice about it.

And while we are at it, how do you feel about Goldman Sachs being in business? I think everyone in that company should be out of a job. But, well, then, there's government to the rescue. Borrow on the unborn's productivity.

Really, I do not understand the Left's morality.

McTriumph said...

Zeus, the watcher on the wall.

McTriumph said...

Susan Rice is an evil capitalist, she owns stock in TransCanada builders of the Keystone pipeline. Her career is over

McTriumph said...

Dante
Taxes should be raised on everyone making over $45,000, that's where the money is, it's where the middle class starts. Beside wealthy is relative, to someone making $24,000, $45,000 is wealthy.
It's FAIR!

edutcher said...

I'll just note the little weasel refrained from favoring us with any of his "wisdom" on the CoE.

We can only imagine...

lol, as they say.

BTW, another little piece of vote fraud - Lansing MI was given an extra day of early voting not legislated.

It all adds up.

PS Where were you hiding out 10/5 - 11/5 when the Romster was winning?

Trying to keep Angus Jones from renouncing "Two And A Half Men"?

Dante said...

McTriumph:

My position is the government spends too much money. I want to identify ways to make it spend LESS money.

I think screwing the rich will make them rethink their position about the effectiveness of big monopoly government.

Like, Yeah, you took all that social security money, spent it, increased commerce, yeah, you made the world safe for trade, and we get a bunch of that, and yeah, all the obamaphones make some companies very rich, but jeeze, you are taking it all back, taking your cut, and it no longer makes sense.

The middle class can be taxed, taxed, taxed, and there will always be an Althouse telling you why you shouldn't complain, or an Inga, etc., even though their policies enrich the ownership class, and make the middle class lifestyle less appealing.

shiloh said...

Dante

Well, we agree on Goldman Sachs.

"Really, I do not understand the Left's morality."


Something about forming a more perfect union, whereas the why's and wherefore's concerning how "we" get there is where libs/cons disagree.

Again, it's ironic that vulture capitalist, born w/a silver spoon Willard, who now makes $$$ solely off of his investments was gonna lead America's economy to the promised land by giving more tax breaks to people like him.

The Myth of the Businessman-President

Not that Romney would ever be considered a true businessman in the "real" world.

>


Another myth is bi-partisinship in the 60s/70s/80s. Dems/Reps got along only because of love of country mostly ie patriotism, whereas nowadays many Reps really, really hate Obama and have gone off the deep end.

Again, the Rep philosophy that they should never lose a prssidential election regardless. Many of these fools having come of age in the Reagan era thinkin' their demi-god was anointed on high.

Dante said...

Shiloh:

Well, we agree on Goldman Sachs.

But do we agree on Barney Frank? He forced banks, along with Acorn, through lawsuits, to give loans that were substandard.

This started a bubble, that ended with the unbelievable actions of Goldman Sachs (and others).

shiloh said...

"any of his "wisdom" on the CoE"

Again Althouse tag-a-long lapdog, as mentioned, Althouse deleted my posts as they made her look stupid.


Much like everything you post makes you look like an idiot!


dreams said...

I think Romney carries Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and maybe Michigan. Romney by a landslide.

11/5/12 9:05 AM


trained seal said...

What dreams said.

I also think the Romster will take NV, NM, possibly OR, and maybe Jersey - given the events of the last few days.

Be interesting to see how close NY is.

Steve Austin said...

I wonder if Obama will face any hecklers in Madison today?

I wonder if people will walk out halfway through as they did in VA.

11/5/12 9:33 AM



btw, that thread was a hoot as several cons were totally bat shit crazy!

DADvocate said...

Dante - governments don't have compassion. Governments don't have thoughts or feelings. Lefties and liberals like to pretend governments do, anthropomorphism, so they, the lefties and liberals can continue their selfish, self-centered ways while pretending to care.

But, the bigger and more intrusive governments become, the more government interferes with the true compassion of individuals by making compassionate and other actions more difficult. Whether the intrusiveness is for good reasons or not doesn't really matter.

deborah said...

Have you only dog-sat labs? I'd like to see you take on Irene's cute poodles!

shiloh said...

Dante yes, Barney Frank was partly to blame along w/several others. Indeed, it takes bi-partisanship to really screw up! :)

chickelit said...

I just can't read the election 2012 rehash anymore. It's bad enough that I picture Shiloh as a portly, bearded reenactor.

How Althouse finally lost me.

Lydia said...

This may warm a few hearts around here: US-based anti-Islam filmmaker, 6 others sentenced to death by Egypt court

chickelit said...

Class ennui warfare.

Dante said...

Indeed, it takes bi-partisanship to really screw up! :)

I totally agree with this sentiment. As an example, you mentioned RR. What he did, among other things, was to create a "Devil's Deal" with Democrats, in which programs increased, and taxes on the wealthy were reduced significantly.

The worst of these deals was the agreement between Patrick Moynihan and Alan Greenspan, in which Social Security rates were raised dramatically. The excess money, to the tune of $1.5T was spent on programs. But SS is a highly regressive tax. It was so prominent as a source of revenue that it accounted for 38% of Federal Receipts in 2010, a couple of percentage points behind the income tax. All the excess money was spent on programs, and social Security has been expanded to the point at which less than 2/3rds of SS recipients are of retirement age.

This was a MASSIVE ripoff of the middle class. But the press was nowhere to be found while this was happening. Aren't they supposed to be the guardians? They failed. In fact, I have found very few serious accounts of this on the web, only one professor with a liberal bent who points it out. At least, that was a couple of years ago.

This is one example. Do you agree with me on this? Democrats wanted programs, Republicans wanted to keep the wealthy in wealth, and the compromise was to tax the middle class, and borrow money from the unborn.

shiloh said...

"I just can't read the election 2012 rehash anymore.

Not to worry as either Christie or Jeb Bush will lead cons to the promised land in 2016. It could happen! ;)

Now you know how many libs felt Nov. 2004. Again, the yin/yang of winners/losers!

bagoh20 said...

I love the intelligence expressed by believing that the government that spent all the money we ever sent them and all that we ever will and still is more broke than ever is somehow a good place to send even more money. If you can't think of any better way to spend, invest or give your money than to give it to Congress to spend, then you should just give it all, because it's a waste in your hands.

You'll just have to sit in wonder at how the rest of us actually can come up with better uses for our money.

The level of stupidity, lack of compassion and imagination it takes to think higher taxes is a good idea is unprecedented in the history of this country, which managed to go broker than ever, while collecting record levels of revenue. There is dumb and then there is useless. Even a jackass can be use to get something done, but a modern liberal is just a slacker with a credit card mentality, and theft in their heart. Theft by a mindless selfish mob.

Dante said...

Now you know how many libs felt Nov. 2004. Again, the yin/yang of winners/losers!

You do mean 2000, don't you? How could anyone want that morally bankrupt Kerry as president.

Al Gore, jeeze, what a disgusting man.

At least Bush has an excuse: he's "stupid" and believes in God.

Not that I liked that guy whatsoever, mind you. Or Romney. I have such low affinity for any (R)s, though my favorite is Newt Gingrich. He admits his warts, and wants to do things. Ron Paul, I like personally, but sorry, to radical. He's the real liberal on the stage.

shiloh said...

Dante, I mostly agree but also Dutch wanted to increase USN ship's to over 600 ie increased military spending which led to humongous deficits/debts.

And then Bush put (2) wars off-budget and lowered everyone's tax when the country was at war. So much for shared sacrifice.

Hey, you're either w/us or against us!

As always, America survives despite itself.

McTriumph said...

Dante
Obama is President Goldman Sachs.

Google it, do some research.

chickelit said...

You'll just have to sit in wonder at how the rest of us actually can come up with better uses for our money.

If Bush spent like a drunken sailor, at least he gave the people the illusion of wealth albeit borrowed. This enriched China among others.

I picked up a copy of the San Diego Business Journal and guess what? San Diego is poised to boom based on....[wait for it]....





...Federal largesse!

shiloh said...

"morally bankrupt Kerry as president."

Again, elections come down to choices and I held my nose and voted for the wind surfer.

Interesting bin Laden came to Bush's rescue w/a tape release just before the election. So bin Laden caught Bush w/his pants down giving him a 90% job approval rating and then he helps re-elect the fool. Plus a couple condition oranges lol.

And so it goes ...


chickelit said...

You do mean 2000, don't you? How could anyone want that morally bankrupt Kerry as president.

Not to mention John Edwards as VP.

Shiloh...you seriously wanted John Edwards that close to the Presidency?

Be honest for once.

McTriumph said...

Dante
Reagan's deficits averaged $240 billion a year, those are huge?

Ralph L said...

But SS is a highly regressive tax.
BS. Low income earners get proportionally much more in benefits from it than high. Even more so with Medicare. In the years they have children, the EITC means they pay little net federal tax or even get money back.

deborah said...

"Al Gore, jeeze, what a disgusting man."

I just read that because of the bugetary spending on developing green technologies, Gore's net worth went from $2 million to $100 million.

Dante said...

I love the intelligence expressed by believing that the government that spent all the money we ever sent them and all that we ever will and still is more broke than ever is somehow a good place to send even more money.

Bagoh, if this is directed at my comments regarding taxing the wealthy more, perhaps you do not understand my position.

I think the really wealthy get a net return on their government investment at the expense of everyone else. Government is sand in the grease. It needs to be stopped.

In the meantime, the simple "moral" argument is as follows. It makes little sense to me the maximum effective Federal tax rate of a married filing jointly couple making $216K is 36%. Nor does it make sense to me that someone with an income of $200K can have a marginal Federal tax rate in excess of 50%. Especially when the 400 most income rich Americans in 2010 had an effective tax rate of 17%, slightly above the 14.4% social security burden for earners making up to $108K.

I want the federal government maybe 1/5th the size it is. I want State and Local governments to slim down proportionally, and let people live their lives.

I think recruiting the income rich and wealthy to this aim is a good thing. That's why I think Republicans should roll over, say "Yes, Obama has the mandate," and SCREW the income rich and wealthy. Then, let's see how Warren Buffet feels about inefficient, wasteful, monopolistic government.

Ralph L said...

Reagan's deficits averaged $240 billion a year
Using what year $?
IIRC, they peaked about $240 B in 1982 and declined every year after that to just over $100B in 1988, before GHWB let the spenders loose again.

shiloh said...

"Be honest for once."

Whereas Edwards turned out to be a total scumbag, info was sketchy at that time er not known.

And Clinton was a known total womanizer before he was elected which tells you what people thought of Bush41 Nov. 1992.

Again, every pres except Truman and Ford cheated as I'm not looking for a saint ...

Apologies to scumbags!

>

I could have voted for McCain in 2000, 2008 not so much.

Dante said...

But SS is a highly regressive tax.
BS.


I think of SS as a tax.

Now, is it, or is it not regressive?

Dante said...

McTriumph:

Dante
Reagan's deficits averaged $240 billion a year, those are huge?


Normally I would look this up, but yes, they do seem huge. As an example, $250B in 1981 is $678B today, according to the CPI.

Then there's the interest, etc. Reagan was a big borrow of the future. That is one of the ways he made it work. The wealthy don't want to give up their stuff, so borrow it from future generations, and let them sort it out.

bagoh20 said...

" Low income earners get proportionally much more in benefits from..."

everything.

That's the nature of being poor.

For the wealthy, additional money does little more of value for them, compared to what it does for others in the economy when they spend, invest, or give it away. When you compare that to what the government generally does with it to advance corruption, graft, dependency, sloth, and waste; you see that anything more than directly helping the truly helpless though government is misguided folly.

The rich should not keep their money just because it's better for them, but because it's better for everyone.

Dante said...

Whereas Edwards turned out to be a total scumbag, info was sketchy at that time er not known.

It took the National Enquirer to do the reporting on Edwards. Why?

McTriumph said...

Ralph L
I'm a Reaganite, actually $237.5 billion is the average yearly deficit I've seen quoted.

Ralph L said...

I think the really wealthy get a net return on their government investment at the expense of everyone else
Prove it. The top few percent of earners pay the lion's share of income tax--more than they did when all rates were higher. Only the politically-connected rich see much direct benefit from government. Remember, dividends are taxed twice, and the Fed will soon inflate their interest income to negative.

Of course, the rich were lucky to live in a country in which they could become rich without fear of kidnappers, extortionists, and confiscatory taxes.
Were.

McTriumph said...

Dante
When you look at economic charts they are in the same dollars, otherwise what would be the point of charts.

McTriumph said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
chickelit said...

shiloh answers my request to be honest for once:

Whereas Edwards turned out to be a total scumbag, info was sketchy at that time er not known.

Could you admit that much of the press was rather incurious about Edwards at the time? Think of all those voters who almost got duped!

Dante said...

The rich should not keep their money just because it's better for them, but because it's better for everyone.

Money needs to go to the innovators, and the entrepreneurs. Not to Teresa Heinz Kerry investing in Tax Free Muni Bonds, so greedy people can get what they want now. Not to the salaries of illegals, who come here to compete with our workers for substandard wages, so the wealthy can collect more on the backs of the middle class who pay for the government services they enjoy.

Now, to the extent you made the money yourself, and I do mean like Warren Buffet, Mitt Romney, Bill Gates, they made the world a better place. Good for them. They have less than they deserve.

But the inter-generational monarchical rights inheritance? I disagree. Yeah, it sucks for farmers, but tough. Think Oklahoma. Shit happens, you have to renew in each generation.

Dante said...

Dante
When you look at economic charts they are in the same dollars, otherwise what would be the point of charts.


McTriumph,

Like I said, I'm not in the mood much to look into this at this point. I'll pick it up at some later point.

In general, yes, $250B sounds way too much. Even today, when GDP per inflation has gone up so much. Trade deficits too.

Anyway, I doubt we are much different in our thinking, but maybe have different basis for our positions.

bagoh20 said...

You have two guys:

Guy "A" has spent every penny he ever got, and is now deep in debt, and can't possibly pay for everything he has currently on order from Amazon.com, even if he could somehow pull together all his future earnings today.

Guy "B" has assets, cash, and seems to have a rare ability to make more of both even in a bad economy.

Why in hell would you take money from the second guy and give it to the first one? Is there any doubt what will happen to it?

Is there any doubt about what will happen if the second guy keeps it? The worst thing he can do is save it, but obviously he will use it as he always has - to create wealth. Do we want that or not? Do we want to live with the economy and values of guy A or guy B?

McTriumph said...

Noted on Drudge, 2/3 of Britain's millionaires leave country to avoid 50% tax increase.

Also note that many corporation are issuing large dividends before the end of the year to avoid higher taxes next year.

leslyn said...

Now, I know what I have done on my own volition, and I know I have made lives better, with little to nothing in return from them....I think many people are that way. Why do we need this big stupid government using force to employ, its version of compassion? Not only does it not seem to work, it also has this way of removing the capacity of others to act in compassionate ways.

Well, pin a rose on you, for treating us to the detailed account of your compassion.

Govt compassion is about keeping the hungry fed, the homeless housed, the abandoned found. It's about veterans with rehabilitation, children with meals, and far more lives saved than even you are able to do on your own.

You complain that it prevents others from acting compassionately--right after you complain that you hate other people "forcing" you to do things.

Here's the bottom line: If everyone gave charitable, sufficiently, and according to biblical principles, THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR GOVERNMENT COMPASSION. That's what the giving principle is partly for; more importantly IMO, it's to it's to separate us from the idea that fortune has elevated us and we must cling to it.

Here's the other bottom line: NO ONE IS FORCING PEOPLE NOT TO GIVE.

Have you read The Grapes of Wrath? Do you want to go back there?

shiloh said...

"Could you admit that much of the press was rather incurious about Edwards at the time? Think of all those voters who almost got duped!"

You can thank Obama then. :D

btw, Edward's wife knew about all his "problems" and still let him run for president er kept quiet.

Did I mention power is intoxicating.

Speaking of keeping quiet lol there hasn't been a whimper from either Vitter or his wife since he met up w/the DC Madam. Indeed, as Mrs. Vitter must have him on a very short leash ...

McTriumph said...

Have you read The Grapes of Wrath? Do you want to go back there?

It won't be long.

leslyn said...

bagoh20 said... "You have two guys: Guy "A" has spent every penny he ever got, and is now deep in debt, and can't possibly pay for everything he has currently on order from Amazon.com, even if he could somehow pull together all his future earnings today."

Can't wait to see the comments on how the Powerball winners should spend, and not spend, their money. What business is it of anyone's how they spend their money?

Re your guy A--why indeed should guy B give him money. You didn't posit such a situation.

You make it sound like all the world is Guy A and B, and that they are tied together. It isn't, and they're not.

bagoh20 said...

"NO ONE IS FORCING PEOPLE NOT TO GIVE"

How can I give what the government has already taken.

Solyndra is not feeding hungry children, and neither is most government spending going to the needy. The war on poverty is a failure after half a century of theft from the prodcutive class to expand the non-productive. It's a failure, busted, broke and unsustainable, and now it's going to collapse with far more dependent on it than ever would have if been if it never started. It was not compassion - it was stupid, when it wasn't purely politically motivated for votes, power and graft.

You want to take money from people who earned it and give it to people who you see caught in corruption, and waste on a daily basis and say that's good. It's not - it's evil.

bagoh20 said...

"Re your guy A--why indeed should guy B give him money."

Tax evasion is a crime and prison sucks.

bagoh20 said...

"You make it sound like all the world is Guy A and B, and that they are tied together. It isn't, and they're not."

I was speaking of the conditions on Earth. I don't know about where you live.

Dante said...

THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR GOVERNMENT COMPASSION.

How many in the US died during the Great Depression? With all that Government Compassion in Russia, how many died?

Just wondering.

I swear, there is nothing worse than a programmed retard.

chickelit said...

btw, Edward's wife knew about all his "problems" and still let him run for president er kept quiet.

Are you deflecting or projecting, shiloh?

Ralph L said...

children with meals
If their parents won't feed them, why must the National Government do so? Could the cities and counties waste a little less money on employees to feed their children?
Are there no workhouses for the poor?

Dante said...

Have you read The Grapes of Wrath? Do you want to go back there?

yes, I read the "Grapes of Wrath." Here are some points about it.

First, people are goddamn amazing, aren't they?

Second, yes, some people run over the turtle, and others do not. And then there are those who feel and help.

A lot of them, who help. Remember the penny candy?

chickelit said...

When will the left OK or accept stigmatizing freeloaders? What will it take? Or are they too caught up in buying their votes to care?

bagoh20 said...

Oh now I see, Leslyn that you didn't get who guy A was.

Hint: Guy B works for a living, and guy A gets elected.

leslyn said...

McTriumph (what a perfectly dahling name):

J.K. Rowling, estimated net worth, chooses to stay in Great Britain and pay her taxes because she was helped earlier in her life by public assistance. She is also a philanthropist.

See my earlier comment about the a purpose of giving being to separate us from the notion that fortune has elevated us and we must cling to it.

"Have you read The Grapes of Wrath? Do you want to go back there?" "It won't be long."

Trite.

Dante said...

Well, pin a rose on you, for treating us to the detailed account of your compassion.

Leslyn, you are such a bitch. The next time I feel compassionate, I'm going to remember this, and say "Fuck you, I remember a bitch, leslyn, who ridiculed things I've done, and I don't care if you are going to kill yourself, due to your misery, and that no one in the world sees what you are going through."

chickelit said...

shiloh writes a deflection regarding the MSM' incuriousity about John Edwards' infidelities, blaming instead the late Elizabeth Edwards:

btw, Edward's wife knew about all his "problems" and still let him run for president er kept quiet.


unbelievable. I can't make this shit up.

leslyn said...

"NO ONE IS FORCING PEOPLE NOT TO GIVE" How can I give what the government has already taken.
Perhaps you know the quote about rendering unto Caesar...and the rest of it. You may have heard the story about the widow in the temple, too.

chickelit said...

in case you haven't noticed, Leslyn and Inga are tight like fingers in a dyke.

leslyn said...

Leslyn, you are such a bitch. The next time I feel compassionate, I'm going to remember this, and say "Fuck you, I remember a bitch, leslyn, who ridiculed things I've done, and I don't care if you are going to kill yourself, due to your misery, and that no one in the world sees what you are going through."

Sure, blame it on me that you blew your horn and you're left to pat yourself on the back. Have you never heard about giving in secret--and why?

You're such a victim.

Dante said...

Leslyn,

Seriously, how did you become such a class "A" bitch? Was your Daddy an asshole? Did he die on you, or leave your screwed up mother?

Really, I don't get your vitriol. Think about it. I think you need psychological counseling. You are obviously reasonably smart, but so goddamn angry. I am supposing you are a woman. I expect this kind of crap from men, but not women.

Something bad happened to you, and you need to get over it. Or, who knows. Maybe you are just a bitch. Sorry, that isn't a suspect class, yet.

McTriumph said...

leslyn

The Koch brothers are philanthropist too, they aren't leaving the their country come hell or high water and I bet they employ more people than J.K. Rowling. They add more to the GDP and government revenues.

I'm glad you like my name.

bagoh20 said...

Maybe most people don't see it like I do. On one side, I see people like me working, risking, innovating, and consequently making money. I invest nearly all of it in employees, the company they depend on, or I give it to people doing good works.

On the other side, I see politicians who don;t help me at all to create it who want to take it from my uses and give it to who will help get them elected or a cushy gig afterward.

I can't justify that transfer. And if you think it's much more complicated than that, you are falling for the scam.

chickelit said...

leslyn chides Dante: Well, pin a rose on you, for treating us to the detailed account of your compassion.

I hope you weren't referring the guy whose life he saved last week.

Dante said...

Sure, blame it on me that you blew your horn and you're left to pat yourself on the back. Have you never heard about giving in secret--and why?

Oh, I patted myself on the back. I'll tell you what I did, psychologically imbalanced person, I explained that I thought people are good. You, on the other hand, think people are bad.

In fact, as I think of this, it explains a lot. People like you think it is necessary to force people to take care of their fellow man. That's because you have such a dim view of people.

I think you are projecting. You think of yourself as a person of little compassion, therefore can't understand it in others, and have to wield the Big Liberal Stick to beat down everyone else.

There is little more than I despise than people taking out their problems on everyone around them, and pushing them down, because they are fundamentally damaged goods.

chickelit said...

@leslyn, Inga, shiloh: Good night. You bore me with your lack of something.

leslyn said...

Dante said... THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR GOVERNMENT COMPASSION. How many in the US died during the Great Depression? With all that Government Compassion in Russia, how many died? WHEN?

Just like a victim to totally distort what was said with a partial quote.

BTW, you just destroyed your argument against government compassion, by comparing one form which provided work, with another which did not.

Say, how about that jobs bill which has been languishing in Congress?

Chip S. said...

I'm not sure what it would mean to "go back" to the Grapes of Wrath, and I certainly don't see what the great Okie migration has to do w/ a system that spends something on the order of $30K per family-with-kids receiving means-tested federal benefits.

Maybe what it would mean to go back to the G of W in today's policy environment would be to set up some elaborate system of permanent federal subsidies to keep people in Oklahoma instead of letting them get the hell out of a place that was overfarmed b/c people mistook weather for climate in the years preceding the return to more typical conditions.

McTriumph said...

Good night. You guys got problems, hell I stayed up to watch the original version of Solaris on TCM. It's got fucking subtitles, their speaking it Russian, WTF!

leslyn said...

Same to you chickelit.

bagoh20 said...

People who give a lot themselves understand gratitude, and are grateful for others who give. You very rarely find charitable people who show disdain for others' charity even if they tell of it themselves. In fact, such people often share the charity they do openly, because it gives them such joy and validation, and it's what they do. The less charitable often get pissed by that. People giving to others makes them looks bad. Just my observation.

It's like the epic stinginess of people like Joe Biden who gives almost nothing, or the Obamas who gave very little until they were in the White House under scrutiny, even though they were already 1 percenters for years.

Dante said...

Just like a victim to totally distort what was said with a partial quote.

I'm enjoying Chopin Nocturnes right now. I'm thinking, right this second, it's amazing that I can listen to some of the most beautiful music ever made. I don't have to be some aristocrat, I don't even need to go to opera house to hear it. I can listen to this magnificent, beautiful music like a king, in my own home.

Now, getting back to the intellectual point at hand, what I've been trying to say here in this thread all along, is that people do care. Some don't, it's true, and some are really angry about something, and they get selfish. But people care. Especially when suffering is right there in their face.

That's all. I'm going to listen to more Chopin.

leslyn said...

I think you are projecting. You think of yourself as a person of little compassion, therefore can't understand it in others, and have to wield the Big Liberal Stick to beat down everyone else.

That's just one little bit of your vitriol because of one sentence: "Well, pin a rose on you."

Look in a mirror.

And yes, I find it annoying when people proclaim their good deeds "before men." There's a lesson in it.

leslyn said...

You very rarely find charitable people who show disdain for others' charity even if they tell of it themselves. In fact, such people often share the charity they do openly, because it gives them such joy and validation, and it's what they do. The less charitable often get pissed by that. People giving to others makes them looks bad. Just my observation.

:) Sounds like you attend charitable "events."

Chip S. said...

I find it annoying when people proclaim their good deeds "before men."

Well, ya know, it's a late-night thread and I suppose Dante could've gone and dug up some data on charitable giving to make his point instead of giving personal testimony but the fact is that anyone who's followed the comments on this blog for a while oughta be very familiar w/ the established empirical fact that conservatives back up their talk about private giving w/ their actions and liberals back up their talk about the inadequacy of private giving by giving inadequately.

So I think you should cut Dante some slack, leslyn, is what I'm sayin'.

leslyn said...

Sure, Chip S. As long as you're not attempting to lump me in a group.

Chip S. said...

I wouldn't think of it.

cf said...

I am in a bad mood, except for Edutcher whooping that cunt Shiloh, thanks E.

Free-floating mad that:

* Just like the averted eyes on Edwards' campaign press bus, we have never gotten the stories of those basement heroes that wrote our labyrinthine PelosiCare. Somebody knows their names. I wanna see their proud faces and hear their excited memories of those long nights nailing shut every possible way to wriggle out of ironclad enslavement. I mean it in the most affectionate way that I imagine there are maybe six, all guys, geeky, mostly Jewish, whippersnapper sharp, probably ALL law, damn, a vice grip tangle of words type law.

Come on, somebody, pose them in their old digs -- take a double-truck spread photo like Vanity Fair did of Bush's cabinet -- their office behind or beneath the Skeleton Queen's office, and let them tell us their war stories from their days in the law-writing trenches.

* I know a few folks whose different kinds of jobs are related to implementing PelosiCare, and they are each wild-eyed at the burdensome micro-managing that is sludging into every doctor transaction, amazed if it will be ready to implement as scheduled, and not able to imagine how it all might actually WORK. But none of them are doing or saying anything about it, they kind of shrug. I multiply that across myriad insurance and hospital offices, state agencies and business staffs, and I'm sad.

* and of jobs done off the books, like shadow email accounts, on the QT, is there a bookeeper making a final report of where all those $250 or less campaign contributions came from for The Won? How many are in fact illegal? How many were robo-called to hide an enormous lot of money from a single source out of ?? Dubai? Tajikistan?? For the ones that count, someone knows their names and how much came from them. makes me mad that "gadflies" are averting their eyes on this one, too.

* if we just lift a bit above the noise, say about Drone level -- no maybe we need to be a bit higher -- we can look back and see clearly that Hilary Clinton and King Milhouse Obama created a Disastrous Foreign Policy that was ransacked, overrun and left for dead on Sept. 11, 2012. And, they have been Slow-Walking it, back pedaling it, stuffing it into any closet they can ever since. Ptewy. Their shuffling past the wreckage without self-examination and correction just makes it all the more dangerous now -- for every one of us. disgusting..

* I am becoming callous. Nakoula in prison to bugger-off the Muslim street hardens my heart.

Inga said...

WTF, why am I being dragged into ths thread?

Just watched The Kings Speech, which was pretty darn good.

Plus I think there's a mouse in my house, the cat is staring into the crack between the stove and counter top.

Dante said...

That's just one little bit of your vitriol because of one sentence: "Well, pin a rose on you."

Leslyn, I do admit there is a fault in me that would like some kind of admiration, for instance, that I helped save a guy's life last week. I view it as a personal fault. But, when I think back through the events that occurred, the reaction had nothing at all to do with any possible accolades, good personal feelings, etc. I did what I did because some part of me compelled me to take action. Not my conscious mind, something else, deep, deep inside that used other parts of my brain.

I admit right now, and here, I deserve nothing for my part in saving that man's life. I have avoided going to work (thank goodness there is a WFH policy). My parents do not know about this. I told one of my sisters, whose SO of fifteen years died three weeks ago, because I knew it would make her feel good, and to be proud of me, and add some light in her dark despair. Because she is a good person, and not a jealous person.

Other than that, of people who know me, I let my closest friend, and my wife only know what happened. The reason is simple. I did not want to pin the kind of shame on myself, by myself, that you just did.

Even still, I admit to you now, I would love nothing more than to be lifted up on shoulders, to have all the beautiful Indian women at work want to come up, hug me, and desire me and have sex with me for what I did. But, I am suppressing all those parts of my psyche, because they, in my view, while part of me, are not the best of me.

So yes, Leslyn, there is a childish part of me that wants a rose, or a kiss, or even more, but I resist it as a smaller part of what I am. Plus which, it isn't very likely anyway. If it were, I might try for it.

Regarding why I posted the information on this web site, here they are:

A) I needed to get the experience out of me. I still see that man's blue face, no breathing, turning whiter, and with color, and then magical breathing. It's horrifying.

B) The experience I had was one of the most memorable 5 minutes I've ever spent in my life. Other memorable visceral moments others experience.

C) There are many good, intelligent people on this blog, you too, Leslyn, and I wanted to share in this anonymous forum, the experience.

D) I do not want to hold this inside of me, to make it grow, and make me a more powerful man.

It was really an amazing lesson to me. Here is something I'm ashamed of. And how small minded I am.

Some part of me, and I don't know why, knew instantly that the man was in serious trouble of heart failure. Someone offered up that he was having a seizure, but I've seen seizure and it wasn't right, and I eliminated it immediately. There were 200 people watching this episode, and only two acting. The other guy who was acting had been trained. My training came from a youtube video on hands only CPR.

This guy made a wrong diagnosis. He thought the guy was breathing. He wasn't. He thought the guy had a pulse. He did not. I started CPR probably 45 seconds later than I should have because of what he said. When the D'Fib kit was finally ready to go, it said "Shock him," and his heart restarted.

I talked with the guy over the phone for a couple of days after that, and he continued to say he thought it was some kind of chocking. I knew it wasn't, and I pushed it back in his face, and forced him to realize it wasn't. Only after the guy came back alive, five days later when they revived him, and his brain was still working, and I talked with my friend, did I understand my small mindedness.

The guy who helped me was the victim's friend. He has known him for years. And if he withheld the necessary treatment because he was wrong, then he would have a huge burden on his shoulders.

See the small mindedness, Leslyn? I do, and I feel horrible for it. And the only saving grace is the guy is alive, against the odds, and has no brain damage.

leslyn said...

Dante,

You bring me to tears.

I am grateful.

Dante said...

Leslyn,

I'm not trying to bring you to tears, sweetness and light. I'm trying to help you to understand that your worldview is warped.

Yes, we are all terrible animals, but there is also something about us that compels us to care about others.

I suppose in your world it's simply not possible. Really sad.

Chip Ahoy said...

It's known scientifically by k-9 studies that dogs bred for specific purposes over centuries maintain genetic memory and access it daily through their unique dog thought patterns.

They appear to access the memories of previous generations, the ones that lived to reproduce and the ones that contributed their own experiences to the collective memory whenever events are significantly emotionally charged to register and cleve in their dna.

Zeus' excellent thought adventure.

Dante said...

McTriumph:

I'm surprised that W's deficit spending was less than RRs. I thought W's spending was totally insane. Of course, the more the previous guy borrows, the harder it is for the next guy to borrow, with the same risk level. Don't tell the Obamao that, though.

Ronald Reagan
1981-88 4.2 %
1982-89 4.2
Average 4.2

George H. W. Bush
1989-92 4.0
1990-93 4.3
Average 4.2

Bill Clinton
1993-2000 0.8
1994-2001 0.1
Average 0.5

George W. Bush
2001-08 2.0
2002-09 3.4
Average 2.7

Barack Obama
2009-12* 9.1
2010-12 8.7

leslyn said...

"I suppose in your world it's simply not possible. Really sad."

Please don't walk this back.

I would like to remember you for A,B, C, and D. They are like the people I know, and work with and have worked with, and like and respect and admire. It is something weighty to take the burden of life voluntarily on your shoulders. It's rare. It's a great responsibility, but a privilege and a cherished one. Imagine what it would demand of you as a person, how it would affect you, to walk out the door every day purposely to meet it.

To whom much is given, much shall be required.

Can we leave the politics out of that, and may I pass on to you the first hug I have received from a military veteran--today.

Assuming that I may, I present to you--your life saving medal.

Please be assured that the one who presents such a medal is humbled by it.

Chip Ahoy said...

A magnificent pose for cat lovers.

rhhardin said...

Window gazing indicates some activity outside, squirrel or UPS truck for example.

rhhardin said...

The rich do not spend their wealth mainly on consumption. It's mainly in seed corn.

If it's in muni bonds, it's funding government.

If it's in stocks, it's funding business.

If it's in the bank, it's funding whatever the bank lends to.

If it's buried in a Scrooge McDuck vault, it's promptly replaced by the Fed and funds government until such time as it shows up again.

To get that wealth, the rich had to make somebody else better off, unless it's a rich politician.

You can tax it away, and the funding stops for all those things, you eat next year's seed corn, and the rich guy stops making other people better off.

He doesn't need all that wealth, as Obama constantly points out. That's why it's capital in the first place. You don't need seed corn either, until next year comes around.

Joe Schmoe said...

So what are the chances that Bob Woodward will be allowed back into the sanctum sanctorum of the WH to document the ongoing fiscal cliff negotiations?

After the Price of Politics, I'd say Woodward is lucky not to be in a cell next to Nakoula.

Pretty amazing that a book that damning of Obama's negotiating and management skills, or lack thereof, would get so little play a few months before a presidential election, especially with another round of high-stakes negotiations to occur right after.

Michael Haz said...

Wow. Leave it to liberal trolls to take the fun out of a thread about dogs.

Althouse and Meade, thanks for the reminder that I need to find some time-share dogs in my neighborhood. Dogs like to borrow other humans, and the deal is pretty good for the humans as well.

Rusty said...

Where's the guy?
I just know he's at the lake throwing sticks in the water.
I'll wait here.

Rusty said...

The rich should not keep their money just because it's better for them, but because it's better for everyone.

No it's not.
What in the world makes you think any government entity can oversee that wealth better than they can? What is better for everyone is to allow more people to become as wealthy as the wealthiest.
There is no such thing as fair. What would be less unfair would be a straight flat tax on everybodys income.

Saint Croix said...

The level of stupidity, lack of compassion and imagination it takes to think higher taxes is a good idea is unprecedented

They're not trying to fix anything.

They're trying to punish the greedy.

Think of liberalism as a cult attempting to punish a sin.

Saint Croix said...

Imagine right-wingers out on the street somewhere, blocking traffic, waving signs about lust.

Ex-prosecutor said...

Is Zeus married? If not, I'd love to fix him up with a lovely, unmarried, four year old black Lab named Peggy Sue.

edutcher said...

shiloh said...

any of his "wisdom" on the CoE

Again Althouse tag-a-long lapdog, as mentioned, Althouse deleted my posts as they made her look stupid.


Yet the little weasel is still afraid to bless us with it.

Much like everything you post makes you look like an idiot!

Which is why my frequent rebuttals of him go unanswered, no doubt.

BTW, crowing about a stolen election garners little in bragging rights.

So, where were you hiding out 10/5 - 11/5 when the Romster was winning?

LiLo's drama coach on "Liz And Dick"?

cf said...

I am in a bad mood, except for Edutcher whooping that cunt Shiloh, thanks E.

I do my best.

Rusty said...

Saint Croix said...
The level of stupidity, lack of compassion and imagination it takes to think higher taxes is a good idea is unprecedented

They're not trying to fix anything.

They're trying to punish the greedy.

It really is a peasant mentality.
You have more than I do. Therefore you stole it from me.
They have no idea how things work. Robert Cook is good example of this peasant mentality.
The left nurtures that envy, that lack of insight.

Robert Cook said...

Sorun said:

"I left a camcorder running at home once while I went to work so I could spy on my dogs. This is what they did all day: They looked out the window waiting for me to come home. Sometimes they napped, but not often. I found it really sad."

Maybe.

But maybe not. Maybe they're looking out the window to watch whatever is happening out there...maybe it's their version of watching tv.

shiloh said...

chicky, just stating a fact re: Elizabeth Edwards and re: the MSM Edwards did not hold a political office after Jan. 3, 2005, so after he dropped out of the pres race in 2008, the MSM probably didn't care much about him one way or the other.

>

"I do my best."

And still Althouse #1 lap dog fails miserably which is sad and pathetic. As always, someone give the doting, trained seal a hug!

And he has a kindergarten buddy who uses the C word. Indeed, Althouse must be soooo proud of her childish con flock ...

rhhardin said...

1. One can imagine an animal angry, frightened, unhappy, happy, startled. But hopeful? And why not?

A dog believes his master is at the door. But can he also believe his master will come the day after to-morrow?--And what can he not do here?--How do I do it?--How am I supposed to answer this?

Philosophical Investigations part 2.

Meade said...

Gold, Chip. Pure gold.

Saint Croix said...

Well, we agree on Goldman Sachs.

The anger at Goldman Sachs is justified, because they are in bed with the government.

Ann Althouse said...

"Where's the guy? I just know he's at the lake throwing sticks in the water. I'll wait here."

The guy was right here, working alongside me, and then I had to go, and the guy took him to run himself ragged with the other 2 dogs (Bingo and Joey). Then as I finished up teaching my conlaw class and darkness fell, Meade and Zeus walked downtown to meet me at the top of Bascom Hill. The threesome had a 1.3 mile walk back to Meadhouse and became a twosome at 1.25 miles.

rhhardin said...

The threesome had a 1.3 mile walk back to Meadhouse and became a twosome at 1.25 miles.

Meade traded the woman for the dog.

It happens all the time.

Saint Croix said...

It really is a peasant mentality. You have more than I do. Therefore you stole it from me.
They have no idea how things work. Robert Cook is good example of this peasant mentality.
The left nurtures that envy, that lack of insight.


I don't think it's envy. I don't think Obama, or Cookie, envies the rich.

I think it's moralistic self-righteousness. They damn the rich. They want to punish the rich, kill the rich, eat the rich. They want the rich to disappear. That's their big plan. Let's make the rich disappear. And then when the rich disappear, the next class level has to disappear, and the next, and the next, until we're all equally poor.

Except people in the government, of course. But even then, if the people in the government had to give up their money, too, Obama would still follow this path to the bitter end.

In this regard, socialists are exactly like radical Islam, who also hate greed. For instance, you're not allowed to charge interest in Islam. Islamic societies that follow this rule are, of course, very poor. Just like the socialist countries that despise banks and lending and interest are very poor.

Islam is also notable for being very intolerant about lust. So it's doubly hellish to live in an Islamic society. Nobody is allowed to charge interest, and women have to cover their entire bodies.

I think the hostility to Judaism from Islam--and in certain quarters of the left--is because Judaism is among the most tolerant of religions. The Jews understand that people are going to feel lust and greed, and a bunch of other sins, too, and it can be very dangerous trying to blot these things out. This is why Jews are always being called greedy or lustful. Not because they are any more greedy or lustful than anybody else. But because their religion has a deep humility that is missing in Islam, or the secular left.

Saint Croix said...

And the point of the American experiment--we are among the most tolerant of societies, believe it or not--is that God punishes us for our spiritual sins, not the government.

It's not the government's business to point out how greedy we are, or how lustful we are.

Obama is importing a sort of Marxist hate for the rich that is very European and very un-American. This country has always been very tolerant of rich people, who are sinners in the same way that promiscuous people are sinners. We're all sinners, we recognize that.

But Obama wants to take their money. He wants to raise taxes on the rich as a punishment for their greed. Fix the debt? Bah. He is far more interested in taking their money and denying their greed.

He's on a spirtual quest, and his spiritual quest is going to make us all materially poorer.

wyo sis said...

I think it's pride. The idea that someone else is not allowed to have more than I have because I'm the important one. Not only are they not allowed to have more than me, they must be punished for even thinking about it. That's why they have no problem with setting themselves up to be rich while bringing everyone else down. Obama and people with his worldview don't see it as hypocrisy, but as their asserting the way things should be. Helping the poor is just the cover story.

shiloh said...

As always, the attempted, pedestrian/parochial con psychoanalysis re: liberals is somewhat amusing ...

or re: socialists/communists like Cook lol as he is one of the few posters here you can take at face value.

chickelit said...

Saint Croix wrote: He's on a spirtual quest, and his spiritual quest is going to make us all materially poorer.

Good summary

Aridog said...

rhhardin @ 4:13 AM....

What is in dogs that makes them total UPS detectors? Our two will let you know loudly when the UPS tuck turns the corner on to our street ...two blocks away.

Logic says it is their great hearing. Okay. But they don't wear watches, so how does the large male dog know to sit by the front window at noon weekdays....the time when the UPS dude usually arrives?

edutcher said...

shiloh said...

I do my best.

And still Althouse #1 lap dog fails miserably which is sad and pathetic. As always, someone give the doting, trained seal a hug!

And he has a kindergarten buddy who uses the C word. Indeed, Althouse must be soooo proud of her childish con flock ...


The little weasel does his hit-and-run act without rebutting anything I said.

There's a surprise.

Aridog said...

edutcher ... by now you must have noticed that most *progressive* thinkers, but not all (some actually engage civilly), don't answer questions. They just *answer* by asking another question, or by some diversionary pronouncement equivalent to "Oh, look...SQUIRREL!"

shiloh said...

Too funny Adog mentions Althouse trained lap dog and civility in the same sentence. Indeed, as her favorite pet seal must have been 1st in line w/a $100 donation to his royal highness.

Otherwise she would pay him no notice. Living in a dream world totally unaware of what's happening around him. Like many of Althouse con flock.

Lather, rinse, repeat ...

Aridog said...

shiloh ... you sure like to compartmentalize anyone who does not agree with you completely. Why is that? Do you ever actually have a cogent dialog with anyone not perfectly in your orbit without ad hominem?

Once in a while, just about the time that you've made a salient point worth discussing...BAM! You up and toss one of your sundry "con" grenades. Then," oh, look...SQUIRREL!"

As for @edutcher, save when he is maligned with demeaning ad hominem, such as say "trained seal", he is quite civil and you know it. You toss the insult as provocation and you know that too.

You mention "financial contributions" ... tell me, have you ever made one by any means? Either here or on any other blog you frequent daily? Maybe even Wikipedia if you use it frequently? Or do you just use and presume it is your due?

You brought it up so I'm just asking. If you affirm, I'll be pleased, if you don't, I'll not be surprised.

shiloh said...

"anyone who does not agree with you completely"

Only Althouse #1 trained seal as he replies to just about every comment I make ie follows me everywhere. And no, edutcher is a quick study so no need for compartmentalization.

At a reality tv site once made a $50 dollar "gift" as it offered good company and many Big Brother pics, streaming video clips many of which were mine. It was a pleasant community the first couple years.

Much like edutcher follows me everywhere, there are many cons here who follow Althouse religiously, which is fine but somewhat amusing as she is not a con, but plays one at this blog.

To each his/her own ...

Again, political blogging is a hobby to most as hopefully they find it entertaining.

Dante said...

Can we leave the politics out of that, and may I pass on to you the first hug I have received from a military veteran--today.

Hugs are great. I reject the medal part unless it includes heterosexual sex.

The purpose of my post was political, which is to say there are lots of good people out there who will take care of each other, and you don't need a big government.

The second part of that was going to be that Big Government has failed. But if I can't convince you of the former, you will always believe in the later. Because people are good and will take care of each other.

My thinking is that Democrats are the ones with the dimmer view of human nature. Plus, the approaches have turned out to not work at all.

shiloh said...

"approaches have turned out to not work at all."

hmm

Social Security
Medicare
Unions
Civil Rights
Voting Rights
Minority rights
Equal protection under the law
Unemployment Insurance
Disaster Relief
FEMA under Dem pres
FEMA under Rep pres

Again, if one is looking for political Nirvana, good luck working w/Reps who long for the good ole days when only white property owners could vote.

leslyn said...

Dante said,

"The second part of that was going to be that Big Government has failed. But if I can't convince you of the former, you will always believe in the later. Because people are good and will take care of each other.

"My thinking is that Democrats are the ones with the dimmer view of human nature. Plus, the approaches have turned out to not work at all."

Not sure I understand the bolded sections, Dante. Are you talking about two different groups?

[Just as you hate being "forced" to do something, I hate being dumped into a group.]

As to the "approaches" not working "at all"--I agree to disagree with you. The debate is too long, I'm tired, and while we may (and I think we would) find some common ground, I doubt we'd fully convince each other.

Just...must the conversation be in absolutes? "has failed," "always," "at all" etc.

Re sex, the married thing knocks that out. Glad you took the hug, though.

Aridog said...

shiloh...vis a vis FEMA under anyone and disaster relief....you're on very thin ice if you believe it has improved. If you haven't been there done that with FEMA, you just can't know. Don't believe what political sponsors say about how federal and military response in New Orleans was a week late. That's bullshit, excuse my French.

My team was on the ground in NOLA the Saturday before the Monday landfall of Katrina. The unprepared dimwits were the city and state folks who had not clue one and were organized like recess at kindergarten.

Mississippi and Alabama were far different with state and local folks who knew what they had to do and when.

As I am fairly certain I posted here on a different thread, FEMA has grown itself where it didn't need to...establish a large acquisition office rather than use the existing and efficient contracting offices of GSA, USACE and DLA, who can acquire anything at any time for delivery anywhere on time. No excuse for the expansion inside DHS/FEMA but turf grubbing....they, rightly, handle the money and apparently want to keep more of it for their own expanded overhead....redundant to 3 other mega agency acquisition operations.

This newbie acquisiton clown show by amateurs is why bottled water wasn't even ordered by DHS/FEMA until a week after Sandy's landfall and wasn't distributed until after virtually every corner bodega had full shelves of the same thing.

Formerly, FEMA would activate ESF-3 operatons, for USACE, NFS, DOI, et all, and USACE would PRE-position water, ice, temporary shelt materials, and portable generators from GSA inventory aided by US Army 249th Prime Power Battalion and local National guard Engineer Branches.

These days...who the flip knows who is doing what when. I stubled across the water solicitation on FedBiz site and couldn't believe it so I called some acquisiton folks and they confirmed that FEMA had reinvented the wheel.

The rest of your list have been tinkered with by both party wonks and no longer solely belong to either.

However, I get it...many of the items were initiated by Democrats, and that is true. Now civil Rights and the Voting Rights Acts, enacted in my youthful day and time, were scarcely sole Democratic efforts given the composition of Democrats at the time..e.g., the late 50's and mid 60's.

Fact is, we really do DO better when the parties work together for the good of the country rather than just their own interest in persevering. I'm not sure it is possible any more given the generated faux acrimony these days.

shiloh said...

Since 1961, for 52 years now, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats 24," Clinton said. "In those 52 years, our private economy has produced 66 million private-sector jobs. So what's the jobs score? Republicans 24 million, Democrats 42 (million)." In the packed convention hall, it was one of the night’s biggest applause lines."

>

"So Clinton is right. But we’ll bring up a few points worth noting."

>

"The fact that Democrats finished so far ahead despite taking government jobs off the table makes it a more impressive accomplishment."

>

Clinton’s figures check out, and they also mirror the broader results we came up with two years ago. Partisans are free to interpret these findings as they wish, but on the numbers, Clinton’s right. We rate his claim True.

blessings

>

chickelit said...

Shiloh quotes: Since 1961, for 52 years now, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats 24," Clinton said. "In those 52 years, our private economy has produced 66 million private-sector jobs. So what's the jobs score? Republicans 24 million, Democrats 42 (million)." In the packed convention hall, it was one of the night’s biggest applause lines."

Congressional control tends to shift in opposition to WH occupancy, so all those jobs created may actually be credited to Republican House, not to mention Randian fiscal policy at the hands of Alan Greenspan.

Of course Shilho wants the fantasy of pretending that "Government" is a monolithic entity which may easily be assigned to periods and timelines (his single-party fantasy). But that's an oversimplified approach to understanding American politics.