April 22, 2017

"I intend to return Berkeley to its rightful place as the home of free speech — whether university administrators and violent far-left antifa thugs like it or not."

"I will bring activists, writers, artists, politicians, YouTubers, veterans and drag queens from across the ideological spectrum to lecture, march and party."

Says Milo Yiannopoulos (and he won't say who's inviting him or backing him).

235 comments:

1 – 200 of 235   Newer›   Newest»
Zach said...

I'm so glad I'm not in Berkeley any more. It's the censors vs the scammers. Include me out.

Yancey Ward said...

Where is that nice young man, ARM?

David said...

Milo is a photogenic fellow for sure. That's quite a picture.

eric said...

ARM hardest hit.

I'm surprised Milo didn't say he was bringing the religious right with him. I mean, isn't that his target audience? ARM? ARM?

Original Mike said...

"Where is that nice young man, ARM?"

Probably at a Truther meeting.

YoungHegelian said...

It would actually be good if Milo can convince some lefties & "centrists" (that pink unicorn of political categorizations)to show up with him in defense of "free speech" at Berkeley. I put "free speech" in quotes because I think that an offense to free speech is when the university or the cops tell your group to pack up & go even if you're peaceable. When Maoist Red Guards physically attack you & destroy property with the active collusion of the local authorities, that's not an "offense" against free speech. That's an invitation to civil war.

whitney said...

After the anarchist got beating so badly at Berkeley, I bet they start bringing guns.

Bay Area Guy said...

I will invite Milo to my lovely abode in Berkeley. I will repeat - Physically and geographically, Berkeley is a stunning, beautiful city, with great restaurants and panoramic views of the Bay. The people, however, are wacked.

AReasonableMan said...

Interesting article, I quote:

"Yiannopuoulos' plan to reinvent himself after mainstream conservatives threw him overboard once audio surfaced of him appearing to endorse gay sex with mature children as young as 13.

After that, a $255,000 book deal was canceled, as was his planned keynote address at CPAC. He also left his job as an editor at Breitbart News, and he has been out of the limelight since."

If only those close-minded mainstream conservatives had been more comfortable with Milo's interest in diddling boys as young as 13 all this unpleasantness could have been avoided.

Michael K said...

The porn queen with the sap gloves will probably be there.

Maybe the adjunct JC instructor with the bike locks. All 14 of them.

Watch out for the Berkeley police firing stun grenades into the crowd.

cubanbob said...

If the DoJ and the DoE were to send the city of Berkeley and the University a dear colleague that we are serious about upholding the 1st amendment letter with the notice of withholding federal if compliance with the 1st upheld both the City and University will find a new respect and reverence for the 1st amendment.

Etienne said...

If any violence were to erupt, Trump should be cocked to federalize the California National Guard against these Marxist bastards.

I want a body count report like they did in French Indochina.

Achilles said...

AReasonableMan said...

If only those close-minded mainstream conservatives had been more comfortable with Milo's interest in diddling boys as young as 13 all this unpleasantness could have been avoided.

Did Milo ever diddle any 13 year old boys? Or was he the victim when he was 14?

Oh you mean ARM is making things up? Shocked.

You are a piece of shit by the way.

Bill Peschel said...

Wackos agitating for free speech? I'm there, if only in spirit.

As someone once said, the First Amendment wasn't written to protect "The Cosby Show."

I hope I don't have to explain further, at least in this forum.

eric said...


You are a piece of shit by the way.


But reasonable. He says so himself.

Btw, it's good to see he has backed off from his religious right nonsense and has changed it to mainstream conservative. Even he can recognize when to move the goalposts.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

What a phony-ass concern troll. Right-wing cucks "restoring" Berkley is about as laughable an idea as when their politicians talk about sticking up for labor or the working class or American prestige. Just total bullshit. Tell that cucky pedophile apologist to take up his free-speech problems with the dildos who drummed him out of his very own conservative movement and a more successful career and profile for availing himself of it. This guy has a Grade A case of political Stockholm Syndrome.

YoungHegelian said...

Right-wing cucks "restoring" Berkley is about as laughable an idea...

Laughable as what, toothless? Laughable as the idea that the left-wing shits who run the place now are going to have a come-to-the-1st-amendment moment?

Toothless, this is the problem I have with folks like you & ARM: you think that the Left now represents the traditions of the Enlightenment. They don't. It isn't righties who came up with post-modernism & post-Marxism. It's the Left.

You don't know this shit because you pretend it isn't there, & you never seem to want to bother to read up on it. Well, I did. In my younger years I read lots of modern European philosophy, & I know what it thinks about this idea that we're endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights.

AReasonableMan said...

How am I the bad guy here? I simply quoted from the article linked to by Althouse and then made a direct uncolored inference. I assumed that Althouse's famous cruelly neutral bullshit meter had already certified this item as safe for conservative minds. I feel that am a victim here. I, not unreasonably, given the circumstances, assumed that the material I was quoting had been fully vetted. Apparently this assumption was incorrect. I am not sure if there is any legal recourse but I have suffered reputational damage through no fault of my own.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"If only those close-minded mainstream conservatives had been more comfortable with Milo's interest in diddling boys as young as 13 all this unpleasantness could have been avoided."

Can you provide us with the link and the quote? Prove to us that Milo said that he wanted to diddle 13 year olds.

Could it be that you are a shameless liar and slanderer, ARM? Or do you simply have difficulty comprehending the English language?

exiledonmainstreet said...

"I, not unreasonably, given the circumstances, assumed that the material I was quoting had been fully vetted."

It must be true. The media said so!

ARM believes everything the media tell him. That explains a lot.

How about a link to what Milo actually said rather than accepting what some undoubtedly completely disinterested reporter told you?

AReasonableMan said...

YoungHegelian said...
In my younger years I read lots of modern European philosophy,


Classic example of a 'wasted youth'.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Laughable as what, toothless?

Well read the rest of the sentence dumbass and you'll find out. Pulling rhetorical questions with ellipses replacing the rest of what I wrote is about as dishonest as I expect of you. But when you do it as the very next comment, it's kind of transparent that you're being a liar.

Toothless, this is the problem I have with folks like you & ARM:

Lol. You have problems? Tell it to your priest at confession.

you think that the Left now represents the traditions of the Enlightenment. They don't.

Hahaha. I'm sure the right does.

It isn't righties who came up with post-modernism & post-Marxism. It's the Left.

And it wasn't "righties" who came up with industrialization, either. But it is they who think that liberalism and progressivism should somehow be blind to the economies and social reality that Locke had no way to account for.

You don't know this shit because ....

Because I don't focus on your warmed-over Father Coughlin points? You're just doing the church's bidding. At least, you're doing the bidding they did before they finally got a guy like Bergoglio who figured out that capitalism was no longer a convenient bedfellow for defensor fidei and keeping adherents from bolting like a Kenyan runner.

Well, I did. In my younger years I read lots of modern European philosophy, & I know what it thinks about this idea that we're endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights.

Blah blah blah. You had your youth to "slum around" with the dirty guys who were still in their infancy of their philosophical development insofar as the break from your Spiritual Godfathers goes.

Michael K said...

Calling Laslo ! Laslo where are you ?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

In any event, add YH to the list of anti-liberals who unwittingly chimes in with nostalgia for the so-called glory days of Berkley in the 1960s.

Some of you are stuck in 1950, some in 1920. Steve Bannyon's stuck in 1290.

And then we get the conservacuck Berkley defenders who with it was 1969.

Hey, don't let me stand in the way of your reminiscences. Even though you probably do it because that's the stage of the "culture war" you'd prefer to be fighting today.

campy said...

Could it be that you are a shameless liar and slanderer, ARM? Or do you simply have difficulty comprehending the English language?

Embrace the healing power of "and".

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

"If only those close-minded mainstream conservatives had been more comfortable with Milo's interest in diddling boys as young as 13 all this unpleasantness could have been avoided."

Can you provide us with the link and the quote? Prove to us that Milo said that he wanted to diddle 13 year olds.


Talk about a shameless liar and slanderer. There's nothing in what ARM said that indicates Bruno wanted to diddle 13 year olds.

Michael K said...

Those who entertain us with the ridiculous posturing that constitutes their "contribution" to humanity, I would offer this book review about a man who meant what some of us referred to as "a man."

They won't read it, of course. Now will they ever know what it means to be such a man and then return to a life as a professor of Botany.

Michael K said...

"Nor" not "Now..."

Mark said...

There are not enough lols in the world for Milo's attempted comeback

He is like a moth, drawn to the flame of destruction. His last run in @ Berkeley cost him his book deal, his job ... now it's his last desperate moment in the limelight before the world forgets this one hit wonder of the right.

He will soon be as sought after as Joe the Plumber.

hawkeyedjb said...

The antifa, the police, the administrators (both town and gown) are all on the same side on this one. None of them wants anything to do with "free speech," so it's not likely we're gonna see it.

Crazy Jane said...


Milo may not be the most intellectually interesting guy on the planet (I don't follow these things), but he isn't the problem. The problem is people who show up wearing masks and employing Molotov cocktails and pepper spray and baseball bats when someone who disagrees with them is allowed to speak on campus. This is worse than the heckler's veto, which is bad enough. It is proto-fascism, and when these people call themselves "anti-fa" they expose how stupid and ahistorical they really are.

It doesn't help when campus security and the city police department decline to take seriously the First Amendment implications of such threats and actions, hiding behind a concern for "safety."

The situation is further degraded by university students so poorly educated that they cannot grok that the First Amendment applies to all speech, even speech that makes you uncomfortable and speech that you happen to regard as "hate speech."

Milo whoever-he-is may be a grandstander and a provocateur, but the rest of this lot expose just how flimsy the protection for free speech is at a fine university that used to take itself seriously. Very discouraging.


Anita said...

Michael K, that is a great book, isn’t it? I think of the young Eugene Sledge often, facing the horrors and misery of those Pacific Islands during WWII to defend our freedoms, and reciting over and over the words of the 23rd Psalm: Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me.

Sam L. said...

Why should Milo tell?? (Logical reasons only, please.)

exiledonmainstreet said...

The Angry Commenter wrote:
"There's nothing in what ARM said that indicates Bruno wanted to diddle 13 year olds."

ARM wrote:

"If only those close-minded mainstream conservatives had been more comfortable with Milo's interest in diddling boys as young as 13 all this unpleasantness could have been avoided."

Words, what do they mean?

rehajm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
exiledonmainstreet said...

Verily, Laslo is a comic genius. In the most recent installment of The Angry Commenter and the Psychiatrist:

"What if I were to tell you that you are NOT superior, but are simply a man with opinions, much like everyone else?"

"Sure, Doc. Nazis had opinions, too. So do child molesters."

"You think that the people who disagree with you must be Nazis or child molesters?"

"Oh yeah. Nazis with sexual problems, that's them. And a lot of them probably can't even get it up anymore. Not even with farm animals. Because they're old."

"So their age matters?"

"Of course it does. Old people have old ideas. Old ideas are in the way."

buwaya said...

Hmm,
I think Im stuck in 1492. Not a bad place on the whole. Lots of perspective looking forwards. Not prefering it.

Anyway, modern American universities are pretty much defined by Marcuse, and no one else, much elaborated upon of course.
The rest of everything exists on sufferance, if at all.

I did post the state of the UCLA Classics department some weeks ago - 16 faculty to teach all of classical literature plus Latin and Greek - for 40,000 students. My daughter was taking those classes some years ago, till she figured out just what lack of depth they had, because no kids had any background at all. This is a girl to whom we read the Iliad and Odyssey at the age of nine.

Its pathetic. That is the root of conservative rage.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Hmm,
I think Im stuck in 1492. Not a bad place on the whole. Lots of perspective looking forwards. Not prefering it.


That's nice, buwaya. I think mainstreet will like that. She would think it makes you sound complacent.

The perfect cuck. Not looking to make a better situation out of anything. Just humbly accepting your fate and placing all enjoyment in the fact of what point of history you're in.

Good job!

buwaya said...

The Liberal Arts, supposed to be the content of that culture which universities are expected to pass on, no longer exist in the universities. Its all faddish elaborations on 1950s-60s radical politics. Its all empty.

By leaving out the classics they cant teach Dante or Cervantes or Locke, because they have no background to understand any of them. This explains why the graduates of these institutions can only argue in slogans. Its a lot like V.S.Naipauls description of the effects of Islam, in that it erases, razed and burned, the entire cultural patrimony of the societies it converts.

And they have no grasp of history at all. You cant hand them even a popular historian like Schama, because they have no idea of the past, they dont understand the peoples motivations.

And lets be clear, a great number of them are unable to even read a serious work of literature or history. I recall a college girl of our acquaintance remarking on a copy of "Pride and Prejudice" in a pile of secondhand books - "Is that about black people?"

Michael K said...

V.S.Naipauls description of the effects of Islam, in that it erases, razed and burned, the entire cultural patrimony of the societies it converts.

It's Gramsci at work and being more successful than even he could imagine.

buwaya said...

Ritmo,

What are you talking about? You disagree about the state of the Liberal Arts in universities? I dont understand you - well, thats been long established.

From my point of view your comments, for the most part, are like watching one of our local madmen having a fit on BART. What he is doing is obvious, but why he is doing it is a question for God, or perhaps some fellow working at the bleeding edge of neurology.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Goodness, Ritmo is attacking me for quoting Laslo. I'm not the person who came up with the Unhappy/Angry Commenter and the Psychiatrist. If Ritmo feels the parody is inaccurate, then why not call out Laslo? Well, that's easy - the Angry Commenter is afraid to because Laslo might come back with another deadly uppercut to the jaw.

The one who delights in jeering at conservatives here has had his own weapon turned against him - by someone who is much better at it than he is.

It's very entertaining.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I don't know what the best basis is upon which to "judge" the "state" of the liberal arts. I suppose I'd agree with Camille Paglia's criticism - that they're too cramped and fixated on post-modernism. But then, so is so much of the rest of culture - especially the ridiculous conservative political discourse that dominates our society and government. But I don't see myself of some type of an expert in the humanities to be the one to tell.

So I state the obvious: It's another conservative distraction to gripe about so that they can distract everyone about the horrible job they're doing. The universities will sort themselves out - if you do everything else right. Which you're not. "Culture wars" have no winner. If our universities are in a sorry state, it's because conservatives hate the trades and working class and anyone not in the top 1% of society so the proles figured that they're all going to send their kids to college as the next best insurance against their slide into "uncompetitiveness" in an uncaring society. So there's a glut of college kids, and that incentivizes the administrators to push the quality of what they do downward - while jacking up the prices.

So go after the universities all you want. If you want them to improve, stop making life for those offering their customers' alternatives so horrible.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Goodness, Ritmo is attacking me for quoting Laslo. I'm not the person who came up with the Unhappy/Angry Commenter and the Psychiatrist. If Ritmo feels the parody is inaccurate, then why not call out Laslo? Well, that's easy - the Angry Commenter is afraid to because Laslo might come back with another deadly uppercut to the jaw.

The one who delights in jeering at conservatives here has had his own weapon turned against him - by someone who is much better at it than he is.

It's very entertaining.


The queen of unoriginality admits her inability to contribute and celebrates her wise transition from commenter to observer. (Well, an observer who steals material).

As for Laslo, he just doesn't engage at all - so there's no point in commenting on what he does.

Talk about safe spaces! Engage but don't contribute, or contribute but don't engage. It looks like this is the great menu of options for anyone wanting to be a successful conservative commenter here. Lol.

MayBee said...

Crazy Jane- just so

Michael K said...

I usually try to avoid Ritmo but this is so funny I have to risk a comment. I;m sure it will precipitate a barrage of obscenity and rage.

it's because conservatives hate the trades and working class and anyone not in the top 1% of society

This is so funny I couldn't resist. Who in the fuck do you think elected Trump !

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Who in the fuck do you think elected Trump !

People who believed the lies he told them.

You think that someone who calls himself a "businessman" and not a politician can't be a con man?

How stupid do you think everyone is? Even the people who elected him make it clear that they're giving him a short leash and not trusting him on faith, but provisionally.

Tell me what his cabinet of Goldman Sachs billionaires is doing for them.

You've lived in Hollywood and California so damn long that you think a good pitch and sale and story is all that is needed to make reality happen.

Trump is selling a lemon. Uneducated folks in rusted out towns I can understand sending a message with a vote for him.

But with the trust you give him you are defending yourself as some sort of an educated fool - the worst sort there is.

Michael K said...

"How stupid do you think everyone is?"

I have not plumbed the depths of that but reading your comments helps.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

So you don't have a serious response and lost sight of the point of your own original comment.

Pretty typical. Incapable of even following your own logic without getting distracted.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Tooth,
You do realize that the majority of the top 1% are Democrats, right?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Sometimes the Hollywood in Michael Cuckennedy gets distracted and through his dementia convinces him that he's on a sitcom rather than at a place where rational people can discuss things.

What's your one-liner to that?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

You do realize that the majority of the top 1% are Democrats, right?

No, I don't. (Cite your source). And if they are they're not the ones capturing our regulatory oversight capacity with the contributions placed by Koch Industries, etc. There are some Democrats who are happy to collude with efforts to gut Wall Street regulation, for instance. But there's no way they can accomplish that without Republicans and especially Trump!

I don't see the purpose of your point. Obviously Republicans are more easily bought off. Which of them are promoting policies aimed at improving life for everyone else? Do Democrats talk down to the rest of the population by pretending that lobbying isn't rigging the game against them? No.

buwaya said...

Ritmo,

From my point of view, having raised children to adulthood in this country, having had a very great deal to do with volunteering and governance in K-12, and having been a very good customer of the University of California - your comments dont ring true. Let us say our experience is typical, having raised kids of the somewhat above average sort and sent them to somewhat above average universities.
The kids at the UC's are not dumb, far from it. This is most certainly not the case of diluting the intake. Engineering and most of the sciences are in very good shape. Even public K-12 does a decent job with kids with the aptitude. Far more take AP Calc now than thirty years ago, and they pass the exam.
And the UCs are stuffed with very bright foreigners, making up a quarter or more. My daughter roomates for example went to Swiss and International high schools and had IB's.
There is no dilution, not in the UCs anyway, and taking them as a benchmark for the flagship campuses of State colleges I doubt that level has suffered. Lesser private universities, lesser State universities, and community colleges certainly have.
No, the real problem is a set of policy choices that the public didnt make, the institutions did. We have idiotic Liberal Arts in K-12 (I have, several times posted examples of required reading in San Francisco schools, the same ones where in some high schools you get 70+% AP Calc enrollment). This is a choice. They give these very smart kids pap and politics.
So in college they give these very smart, but uninformed kids even more pap and politics.
And so you get UC Berkeley and Middlebury (both quite selective schools) and a complete inability to process ideas.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

You do realize that the majority of the top 1% are Democrats, right?

Tell me what the ones hand-picked by Trump to lead his cabinet are are going to do for the 99% of America.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

The kids at the UC's are not dumb

Neither are the ones at Harvard and the Ivy League, you verbal diarrheaist. You're mentioning ONE system. No one's saying that the most elite aren't still more selective. But a glut's a glut. You disagree that there's a college glut, you're disagreeing with even the sanest conservatives who comment here. You're not convincing anyone of your intelligence by cherry picking. The per capita growth of bachelors degrees (and every other degree) is a fact. I don't have time to sift through your diatribe simply to convince you of the single salient fact that you missed with it. You hate facts? Go to Kellyanne Conway and write a script filled with those alternative facts littering your subject-changing mess of a comment.

exiledonmainstreet said...

LOL, the Angry Commenter calls some else "A verbal diarrheaist" - after he himself has flooded the thread with his shit.

Carry on, Rage Boy! Give Laslo more material!

Michael K said...

"I don't see the purpose of your point."

We know.

Michael K said...

Seriously , Ritmo, there are people here who would be willing to engage a leftist who made intelligent arguments, even if we disagree.

Inga was able to discuss healthcare intelligently although we profoundly disagree on most things.

You just throw out these angry nasty comments and seem surprised when others consider you foolish.

Try to discuss and you might find those will to do likewise.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

So what's your point, mainstreet? That it's wrong to respond to people who have so fucked up their understanding of how the country works, or who have worked those misunderstandings into the way they mischaracterize your own comments?

Hey, if you're happy to have others mischaracterize you, or America, that's what I'd expect from a cuck like you. But others like getting things right. Of course, if you weren't such a cuck for Trump (a role that's familiar to you; perhaps the only one you know), you'd have more pride in getting the country's actions right, too.

The only reason you don't defend your own comments any more, is because you know I will call you out on them the many times when you screw up and get them wrong.

You are right that I will never be the fan of incompetence that you are. But at least you have phony concern trolling for that one oh-so-mean and rage-inducing phrase you think it was so BAD to use in describing Puti's meandering run-on sentences.

Now go make some cheese and fetch me a beer, you boring pretend mild-mannered Midwestern old lady-girl! Just because your own youth was so misspent doesn't mean you'll make up for it by fixating on me!

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

"I don't see the purpose of your point."

We know.


Neither did you.

buwaya said...

Ritmo,

You realize, dont you, that you are rather mad?
You have a serious emotional problem, and it cant be working out well in real life. You really should get help.

Anyway, you miss my point, which I think is the result of hate-reading. Even elite colleges like the best of the UC's have screwed up their liberal arts. These have not suffered from a dilution of intake, rather they have become even more selective.

There is a glut of people trying for a college degree (why do you assume I disagree? I've been saying that for years) , but those people dont go to UC Berkeley or Middlebury, they go to San Francisco State or Diablo Valley College or Cal State Northridge where many of them waste their time. And the situation in those places is even worse than at the UCs. Victor Hanson describes it well, as he still teaches at Fresno State, which actually still has a classics program.

Some of us know what we are talking about.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Seriously , Ritmo, there are people here who would be willing to engage a leftist who made intelligent arguments, even if we disagree.

Inga was able to discuss healthcare intelligently although we profoundly disagree on most things.

You just throw out these angry nasty comments and seem surprised when others consider you foolish.


C'mon. You know you don't want "intelligent disagreement." You just have very delicate feelings and wish the left would be as cuck-like as the right in shutting up and being quaint and easily convinced that their observations are somehow not very persuasive; and that they should have as tough an uphill road to climb in getting them across.

The problem with the left is that it's accepted the rhetoric of the anti-FDR right as a dominant argument in American politics. But it's not. Poll the people on standard right-vs-left issues and they respond in a way that's overwhelmingly progressive and even "socialist." They just don't like the word, is all. Y'all convinced them that it was a dirty-sounding thing.

There's no intelligent, decent debate to be had when it's over why others should accept that the achievements of the greatest president of the 20th century should be considered as trash. You guys won, when it came to the stereotypes you pushed and that you expect everyone here to defer to.

But the country's suffered needlessly and greatly because of it, and I don't see any reason to make any apologies for rejecting that vociferously.

After all, Bill O'Reilly doesn't. Donald Trump doesn't.

Be polite and you'll get politeness in return. It's more than I can say for how others here act. And the idea that any of you have any respect for Inga is hilarious.

You just want a bunch of easily abused Alan Colmeses.

buwaya said...

I thought we were discussing colleges and the politico-intellectual situation therein. The relevant point WRT Milo, Coulter, black block and various related issues, not FDR.

I dont think you will find much love for FDR in the University of California, on many grounds.

Trumpit said...

I love it when right-wingers support a homosexual who advocates man-boy sex, and condemns transgender people as fakes and mentally ill. His warm, voluptuous lips are yearning to breathe free and save Berkeley from its intolerant self. That's rich. He became persona non grata, and liber non grata after he put his foot in his mouth once too often. If he were funny he could do standup, but he's not.

Michael K said...

"You know you don't want "intelligent disagreement."

It's hopeless. You are the detritus of civilization that has gone wrong.

Good bye.

Michael K said...

I love it when right-wingers support a homosexual who advocates man-boy sex, and condemns transgender people as fakes and mentally ill.

I really wonder if you are ill, trumpit.

The whole "advocates" thing is a lie. The Democrats are sidling up to NAMBLA.

What Milo described was his own experience as a child.

Most gender dysphoria cases, which is what "transgender" really is, are mentally disturbed. That's why Johns Hopkins, the first program for sex change surgery in the US, closed its programs a few years ago.

Achilles said...

The Toothless Revolutionary said...
"You do realize that the majority of the top 1% are Democrats, right?"

No, I don't. (Cite your source). And if they are they're not the ones capturing our regulatory oversight capacity with the contributions placed by Koch Industries, etc. There are some Democrats who are happy to collude with efforts to gut Wall Street regulation, for instance. But there's no way they can accomplish that without Republicans and especially Trump!

Ritmo is right. It is not the 1% that is funding the Democrats and GOPe and ruining what comes out of DC. It is the .001%. And it is stupid to think the republicans are not being bought. Much of the open borders legislation comes from cuck Republicans.

I don't see the purpose of your point. Obviously Republicans are more easily bought off.

Is that why democrats get more money in contributions? Makes sense. Republicans are cheap traders.

Which of them are promoting policies aimed at improving life for everyone else? Do Democrats talk down to the rest of the population by pretending that lobbying isn't rigging the game against them? No.

You aren't serious are you?

"If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor?"

"It depends on what the meaning of 'is' is."

"If any American really believes that Obamacare is going to control costs, I've got some real estate in Whitewater, Arkansas I'd like to sell them."

"Exploiting the stupidity of the American voter is fun and easy: kinda like squeezing a lemon."

Achilles said...

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

C'mon. You know you don't want "intelligent disagreement." You just have very delicate feelings and wish the left would be as cuck-like as the right in shutting up and being quaint and easily convinced that their observations are somehow not very persuasive; and that they should have as tough an uphill road to climb in getting them across.

Some of us want to come to a point where the government serves the people. Others want to play political games and "win."

In particular Ritmo you are a Jeckyl and Hyde on this point. You are the most intelligent lefty on this site and come to reasonable conclusions after engaging thoughtfully. Much of the time though you and others on this site antagonize each other needlessly.

Hyphenated American said...

"There's no intelligent, decent debate to be had when it's over why others should accept that the achievements of the greatest president of the 20th century should be considered as trash. "

You sound like a fanatic who cannot possibly imagine anyone disagreeing with him. Yes, FDR was a horrible president, his policies prolonged the Great Depression, and if you cannot imagine having an intelligent debate on this, you are closed minded and ignorant. And most importantly, you are the perfect product of American public education.

Michael K said...

"Yes, FDR was a horrible president, his policies prolonged the Great Depression,"

I think he was a great war president but he was an economic ignoramus. Coolidge had no education in Economics but he and Harding did better than any president since, Maybe Reagan.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

You sound like a fanatic who cannot possibly imagine anyone disagreeing with him. Yes, FDR was a horrible president, his policies prolonged the Great Depression, and if you cannot imagine having an intelligent debate on this, you are closed minded and ignorant. And most importantly, you are the perfect product of American public education.

I'm willing to re-think FDR's policies - to a point - as even he did. Intelligent presidents change course when confronted with important evidence and FDR was probably one of the most outspoken advocates of that. He said he'd try something and if it didn't work, to try something else. Whether he prolonged the depression is debateable. What is not debateable is that he was an astounding speaker, leader and righteous "class traitor" who didn't give a damn about enriching the comfortable when the nation was dying. A man won the greatest and most important war of civilization to date and set the stage both economically and through regulation for somehow avoiding another depression for 80 years - longer than had ever been the case before. Until the think tanks convinced America that those policies were no way to invite another near depression in 2008. How lucky we are to have such policies as those that led to 1929 and 2008, right?!

I am the perfect product of American public education? I'm glad you think so. My public school was nationally ranked and renowned for the accomplishments of its students, but that's primarily a matter of school district funding - as any intelligent person knows is exactly the case in America. Glad to know that you think that a decent education should only be the reserve of the wealthy. It's not a respectable position and charters (which I assume you think is the ONLY answer) are a mixed bag in terms of results and whom they're serving, but regardless. You my friend are the perfect product of the American think tank. An institution accountable to no one but its funders. Sorry to go there but as much respect as I have for Achilles, including when it comes to his criticisms of me, I can't let every silly swipe go unchallenged. Education in this country deserves better than Betsy DeVos and a lot better than your willingness to trash it simply to insult me.

So call me ignorant all you want. But give me something other than rank ideology if you feel a need for me to dish out something better than what you're serving me.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I think he was a great war president but he was an economic ignoramus. Coolidge had no education in Economics but he and Harding did better than any president since, Maybe Reagan.

Talk about an economic ignoramus. Like the consumer of snake oil, Kennedy promotes the bubble part of bubble economies - but wants to blame the depressions they always and inevitably bring on whomever's left to clean up the mess.

Being a great president to him apparently is all just a matter of timing. Be a president before your bubble explodes, says Mr. K. It's like buying and selling stocks, to him. Get out while the getting out is good. And until then, screw the American people with false optimism for as long as you can get away with it.

Hyphenated American said...

I've heard multiple times that he was a Great War president, but I never seen anyone actually show the evidence to prove it.

FDR missed all the signs of Japanese attack. Check.
FDR did not prepare US military for the war. Check.
FDR was negligent in helping Great Britain until the ussr was attacked. Check.
American military strategy was completely uninspiring. Check.
American tanks were worse than Russian or German, and even British tanks. Check.
FDR stupidly trusted Stalin and distrusted Churchill. Check.
FDR gave up all of Eastern Europe to Stalin without a peep. Check.


USA with its massive economy and population was much stronger than Germany. FDR was given all the running cards. He could not lose the ear to hitler and Japan. Where exactly was his genius? What exactly did he do?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

FDR missed all the signs of Japanese attack. Check.
FDR did not prepare US military for the war. Check.
FDR was negligent in helping Great Britain until the ussr was attacked. Check.
American military strategy was completely uninspiring. Check.
American tanks were worse than Russian or German, and even British tanks. Check.
FDR stupidly trusted Stalin and distrusted Churchill. Check.
FDR gave up all of Eastern Europe to Stalin without a peep. Check.


Let's all live in an alternate universe where the strength of the isolationist movement wasn't an overwhelming constraint on nearly every military policy that FDR could commit to. CHECK.

Normal people look at the scope and stakes of that conflagration and are amazed at FDR's leadership. But to the tv/iPod generation, it's all just a game whose unpretty and flawed execution is all that counts.

A perfect war. Now there's a ridiculous notion! The only thing that matters, is winning. You know. That thing that even Bush W. couldn't do much later in nearly twice the time in an optional war that we were so much less outmatched in fighting.

There's no pleasing some people.

Michael K said...

Ritmo continues to sound like an ignorant kid.

Hyphenated American said...

"Intelligent presidents change course when confronted with important evidence and FDR was probably one of the most outspoken advocates of that. "

That's a slogan.

"He said he'd try something and if it didn't work, to try something else."

Amusing. You are claiming that FDR was a great president because he said he would try anything that works. That's pathetic.

"Whether he prolonged the depression is debateable."

That's the core of the matter. If he prolonged the depression, then it matters not what he said. If he ended the depression, then it does not matter what he said. In short, what you wrote above is useless and stupid.

" What is not debateable is that he was an astounding speaker,"

Sorry, but Hitler also mesmerized tens of millions of Germans. I am not saying FDR was Hitler (although it is well-known that FDR was examining the operation of USSR, Nazi Germany, Japan and Italy in order to figure out how to deal with US economy). A claim that FDR was an "astounding speaker" is amusing, since it goes back to Obama's "just words, just speeches"... Nothing more. At best.



"leader and righteous "class traitor" who didn't give a damn about enriching the comfortable when the nation was dying."

You are claiming that FDR demonstrated the emotions that you approve of. Again, irrelevant.


"A man won the greatest and most important war of civilization to date"

FDR did? Not Churchill? Not Stalin? Only FDR? Win in what way? He freed Europe from totalitarian dictatorship? Hardly. Most of Europe was simply occupied by another totalitarian regime.

"and set the stage both economically and through regulation for somehow avoiding another depression for 80 years"

This claim requires evidence. For one, if the Great Depression was a result of government stupidity (under Hoover and FDR), then realistically, FDR was a dumb f#ck, dumber than all presidents after him, and most of them before him.

"Until the think tanks convinced America that those policies were no way to invite another near depression in 2008."

2008 recession was no worse than the recession in 1981-82 - and mind you, with a good president, the 1981-82 recession ended quickly, and economy grew rapidly afterwards.


"How lucky we are to have such policies as those that led to 1929 and 2008, right?!"

To put things in perspective, the unemployment reached 10% in 1931 - and stabilized for a while. There was no Great Depression in 1929 or 1930. It was a normal recession. The idiocy of the federal government caused the Great Depression.

"I am the perfect product of American public education? I'm glad you think so."

Yes. You don't know the facts, don't care about the facts, proclaim that your guess about one's emotions and ones empty promises are what count - not actual policies. I don't think you know how little you know or comprehend - and yet, you are arrogant and self-assured. Yes, perfect product of American public education.

"Glad to know that you think that a decent education should only be the reserve of the wealthy. "

I give you an opportunity to quote me and prove that this is what I said. If you cannot do that, you have an opportunity to apologize to me, and concede that you were mistaken. If you refuse to do that, I proclaim you a liar, a dishonorable man, a perfect product of American public education, who simply invents the words for the people you disagree with, because you lack any arguments. Agreed?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

FDR did not prepare US military for the war. Check.

USA with its massive economy and population was much stronger than Germany. FDR was given all the running cards.


What's astounding is how clueless Hyphenated American is in understanding that America's population and economy (as a function of its population) was nowhere near as advanced as Germany's specifically due to how far behind we were on industrialization, and the powers deprived of American presidents up until FDR. FDR ushered in the imperial presidency. Until the crises of the 1930s, no president had achieved the power that he was trying to accumulate and didn't succeed in accumulating until Pearl Harbor left his opponents with no other choice. Up until then, America was a backward, primitive country by design. The same design that the anti-FDR haters want to return us all the way back to. Just leaving everything to industry and kneecapping the presidency as a force for rallying the nation to the kind of strength and victory that FDR and every president simply lacked the powers, up until then, to do.

That's what hatred of government does.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Ritmo continues to sound like an ignorant kid.

I'll let you worry about sounds - and looks - Dr. Hollywood.

I'll worry about substance.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

FDR did? Not Churchill? Not Stalin? Only FDR? Win in what way? He freed Europe from totalitarian dictatorship? Hardly. Most of Europe was simply occupied by another totalitarian regime.

The fact that you never bothered to pick up on the basic fact that the war was not all that winnable until the entry of an America that was finally forced by it to industrialize fully tells me everything I need to know about you and your misunderstanding of WWII and hatred of FDR. You are not worth discussing this with. You know too little to take seriously and it speaks volumes for how you came to your opinion. By using it as a replacement for your ignorance on the matter. But bias as skewed as yours isn't possible without it.

Good luck. Let us know when your peer-reviewed revision of everything anyone who knows anything about WWII gets published.

Are you a Holocaust denier, too? Just curious. They're big revisionists also. And also hated pretty much everything about FDR.

Good to get your name out there. Someday I hope to read your earth shattering works on the matter.

Hyphenated American said...

"Let's all live in an alternate universe where the strength of the isolationist movement wasn't an overwhelming constraint on nearly every military policy that FDR could commit to. CHECK. "

FDR changes US economic policy at will, with no regard to Constitution, laws of the republic or the supreme court. And, yet, it is argued he was completely constrained in what he could do. He pushed against Japan, and yet it was the "isolationist movement" that made it impossible for him to comprehend that Japan may attack USA - even though the military had the information which showed they were doing that. Yes, FDR was such a genius.

"Normal people look at the scope and stakes of that conflagration and are amazed at FDR's leadership."

I don't know who you claim are "normal people". Let's discuss facts. Let's look at history books.
What exactly did FDR do, which was so "amazing"? Name 5 things from the top of your head. These things have to be specific.

" But to the tv/iPod generation, it's all just a game whose unpretty and flawed execution is all that counts. "

First of all, it's amazing that same products of American public schools claimed that Bush's war in Iraq was horribly, miserably mishandled, and Bush was stupid - and yet proclaim that FDR was a genius. Cause Bush was supposed to defeat Saddam and rebuilt a moslem country flawlessly, but FDR - hey, he could f#ck up anything - and that was okay, since war is not pretty and flaws are expected.

Hey, dude, you don't know who I am, when I was born, and what I know. If you want to discuss WW2, sure, lets dive into details. It's not your public school debate though - you are dealing with adults here.

"A perfect war. Now there's a ridiculous notion! The only thing that matters, is winning. You know. That thing that even Bush W. couldn't do much later in nearly twice the time in an optional war that we were so much less outmatched in fighting. "


Who said anything about "perfect war"? You did. No one blames FDR for not being perfect in leading USA in the WW2. Question is - what exactly did he which was so amazing?
Oh, and one more thing - even Obama and Biden conceded that the war in Iraq was won. And yes, it was president Bush who did it.

"There's no pleasing some people. "

Well, "good enough for FDR" is the best you can say.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

As incoherent as the rambling Hyphenated American is (confusing the leeway given to him to fix a broken economy has nothing to do with the same, powerful isolationist movement that kept him from doing much about EUROPE'S PROBLEMS), I owe my gratitude to Laslo, who has convinced me that the psychologically healthy thing to do is to ignore him and not comment further.

Go read a book, Mr. I Hate American Education. Teach yourself something, if you're so good at it.

Bye-bye.

Hyphenated American said...

"What's astounding is how clueless Hyphenated American is in understanding that America's population and economy (as a function of its population) was nowhere near as advanced as Germany's specifically due to how far behind we were on industrialization, and the powers deprived of American presidents up until FDR. FDR ushered in the imperial presidency."

I can see that you are being emotional, again. As I said, you are the product of American public education. You are too ignorant of the history of USA or Germany. To five you one example.... It was in America, where the airplanes were invented and first built. America was the leader in automobiles. In general, USA was the leader in mass production....

Here is a quick quote from wikipedia:

"American economist Robert A. Brady extensively documented the rationalization movement that shaped German industry in the 1920s, and although his general model of the movement applied to the automotive industry, the sector was in poor health in the later years of the Weimar Republic. Germany's slow development of the industry left the market open for major American auto manufacturers such as General Motors who took over German company Opel in 1929, and the Ford Motor Company which maintained the successful German subsidiary Ford-Werke, beginning in 1925."

By all accounts, USA was a massive industrial power, much larger than any other nation by far. In 1913 for example, USA had more than double the GDP of Germany: 517,383 million dollars compared to 237,332. How about per capita GDP? Same thing. In 1913, US per capita GDP was 5,301 against mere 3,648.

This wikipedia site claims that USA had the largest GDP in the world since 1890. Are you saying that this was because of FDR? It's amazing how little you know about the world history. Amazing. As I said, you are the perfect product of American public education.


"Until the crises of the 1930s, no president had achieved the power that he was trying to accumulate and didn't succeed in accumulating until Pearl Harbor left his opponents with no other choice. Up until then, America was a backward, primitive country by design."

Oh, you are right FDR did accumulate a lot, a lot of power. That just does not mean that he made USA the strongest nation on the planet - that happened well before him. He was also not the one who made USA the most advanced nation in science or technology. But yes, he did accumulate a lot of power.

"The same design that the anti-FDR haters want to return us all the way back to. "

Yes, we want the government the government to give the power back to the people.

"Just leaving everything to industry and kneecapping the presidency as a force for rallying the nation to the kind of strength and victory that FDR and every president simply lacked the powers, up until then, to do. "

Amazingly, (and a lot of public educated folks don't know this), the world was able to defeat Germany in WW1, and yet, the US president did not get as much power as FDR. Weird.

David said...

AReasonableMan said...
How am I the bad guy here?


Someone has to do it, and you keep volunteering.

Hyphenated American said...

"The fact that you never bothered to pick up on the basic fact that the war was not all that winnable until the entry of an America that was finally forced by it to industrialize fully tells me everything I need to know about you and your misunderstanding of WWII and hatred of FDR."

There a multiple false claims in just one sentence.

Firstly, by the time USA was forced into WW2, Hitler was already defeated at the outskirts of Moscow. By the time US troops saw active action in Africa, Hitler was already stopped at Stalingrad and his troops surrounded.
Secondly, and this important, do not even pretend that USA was a backwards country before December 1941. It was not. It was the strongest, most industrialized, high-tech country in the world, with the largest GDP. I showed the numbers in another post. Numbers, as in, empirical evidence. US car and airplane manufacturing was the best. FDR did not "industrialize" USA - he used the US industrial base to build the US military - and he was not the one who built that base - free market economy did.


"You are not worth discussing this with. You know too little to take seriously and it speaks volumes for how you came to your opinion."

I shared empirical evidence, i.e. size of GDP. What have you done to prove your claims?

"By using it as a replacement for your ignorance on the matter. But bias as skewed as yours isn't possible without it."

You are very emotional again. No empirical evidence, no facts, no references to support what you are saying. Pure emotions. Not a scintilla of evidence. Nothing. A perfect product of American public education.

"Good luck. Let us know when your peer-reviewed revision of everything anyone who knows anything about WWII gets published."

Let's simply compare the empirical evidence. Are you claiming that Germany had a larger GDP than USA? That German manufacturing base was larger than US manufacturing base? Here is one site:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II#Economy

US had more than twice the GDP of Germany in 1938. Oh, and let's be clear, it was also like that before FDR.

'Are you a Holocaust denier, too? Just curious. They're big revisionists also. And also hated pretty much everything about FDR. "

Oh, on the contrary. FDR was a known anti-semite. He did not like the Jews, but he liked Stalin. And speaking of revisionism - to proclaim that USA was backwards country (compared to Germany) economically before FDR is not revisionism - it's pure craziness. You probably also do not know about the massive immigration of people from Europe to USA (including from Germany) precisely because USA was a much more prosperous country. Again, you are perfect product of public education, you know nothing about history.
And one more thing.... I am a Jew, whose relatives were killed in the Holocaust - same Holocaust that american liberals denied during WW2, NYT ignored it, and FDR refused to do anything about it (even though Churchill begged him to bomb the extermination camps). So, go easy on the Holocaust denial...

"Good to get your name out there. Someday I hope to read your earth shattering works on the matter."

Only a perfect product of the American public education would proclaim that it's Earth shattering news that USA was much strongly economically than Germany for half a century before WW2.

Michael K said...

"I'll worry about substance."

Hilarious.

Hyphenated American said...

"As incoherent as the rambling Hyphenated American is (confusing the leeway given to him to fix a broken economy has nothing to do with the same, powerful isolationist movement that kept him from doing much about EUROPE'S PROBLEMS), I owe my gratitude to Laslo, who has convinced me that the psychologically healthy thing to do is to ignore him and not comment further."

You failed to provide a single data point to prove your claims.
And now, when I did the job and found the data to prove you wrong - you walk away, still certain in your views, undeterred that all your claims were proved factually wrong....

You are a perfect product of American education. The liberals who run American schools want American to be like you - brainwashed, ignorant, stupid, and yet certain about your views, and unable, unwilling and incapable to even check your claims against existing empirical evidence....

On one side, we have the internet, which allows people an easy access to plethora of information with a simple click of a mouse. On the other, we have the people educated by American liberal establishment, who are too stupid to learn how to press that button - and even incapable of comprehending that you need to check your beliefs against any evidence. If the school teacher tells you America was backwards in 1940 - then it was backwards, no need to question the authority and check the facts. The teacher is always right. All who question her are evil.


"Go read a book, Mr. I Hate American Education. Teach yourself something, if you're so good at it. "

Sorry, but only the perfect product of American public education can say such a thing. It's not enough to "read a book", comrade. You need to read thousands of books to become educated. Thousands. I am not sure if you can even count to a thousand, you perfect product of American public education.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

How many JP Morgans, Andrew Carnegies, and John D Rockefellers did Germany have for that GDP that was much greater than the half that America's was despite only having half America's population?

How advanced were America's highways in 1939 compared to Germany's autobahn?

How many other countries' industries did America directly control and extort compared to the number that Germany controlled by 1941?

How well coordinated was the command structure of the separate branches of the U.S. armed forces and what amounts were spent on them in 1941? In 2013 dollars? Which part of the Constitution allowed for a stronger national defense compared to the states? As a bonus, how much of any nation's industry typically (and that of the U.S. specifically) results directly from its military build-up? What happened in 1947 to change all that?

Behold the product of a Soviet education.

Your Soviet education has served you well. You yammer on like a loony in the Kremlin or politburo.

Go be Putin's bitch elsewhere.

Michael K said...

Ritmo's on a roll !

Ignorance rolling off the keyboard.

Amazing !

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

You failed to provide a single data point to prove your claims.

I don't need to claim anything to refute someone too dumb to learn the difference between military/diplomatic isolation and the TVA or WPA or whatever other domestic works programs that FDR set to uses other than the military.

Go join the KGB if the intel on that is that elusive to you.

Behold the ramblings of a Soviet-"educated" puppet, everyone.

Maybe he sustained direct radioactive injury to his cerebrum at Chernobyl.

Fuck off. You don't belong here. Leave, immigrant.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Geez, Cuck Kennedy. Hasn't your Soviet master given you enough biscuits for more than just a series of yips from the peanut gallery?

I see all that phony civility on display right there. Can't even offer a single rebuttal. Just a howl or two of an insult.

Trump's a cuck to Putin and Kennedy's a cuck to the wacky Soviet bitch with the multi-colored rainbow face and pencil mustache avatar.

Whatever floats your boat.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"FDR was a known anti-semite. He did not like the Jews, but he liked Stalin."

You're correct about that, although FDR's antisemitism was relatively mild "country club" antisemitism. He opined once that the Nazi "resentment" of the Jews was understandable since the Jews controlled the media, academia, the arts and medicine in Germany.

It's damn near a miracle that Israel came in existence and timing was crucial. The USSR initially backed Zionism in order to give the finger to the British. Truman was pro-Israel but many at the State Department were not. Stalin turned anti-Israel (and became increasingly anti-Semitic in his final years) after the country's founding and Cold War and State Department pressure might have made it impossible for Truman to support the creation of Israel if it had happened a year later. One of Truman's aides said that he seriously doubted that Israel would have come into existence if FDR had lived.

Of course, that is not something many American Jews or public school grads know.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"It's not enough to "read a book", comrade. You need to read thousands of books to become educated. Thousands. "

Hey, I'm sure The Angry Commenter knows his Zinn by heart! He doesn't need other perspectives!

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Truman was pretty anti-semitic too. And then he saw what had gone on in the camps. (Places that Hyphenated-Soviet American probably doesn't figure into his "GDP" figures. I guess he takes slave labor for granted).

Truman laughed at the idea of any dignity for a people who had endured what the Nazis had been doing to them.

True fact for the newest and oldest revisionist on the block.

Not something that many Catholic school kids know, it would seem. Along with their own nasty history of anti-semitism in America.

Everyone needs to feel better than someone, it seems.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I'm pretty sure that Francis Bergoglio has read way more Zinn than I have. Especially since I haven't read any.

But there's Mother Coughlin Mainstreet just finding another scapegoat to prove her "philo-semitism" on.

Etienne said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Toothless Revolutionary said...

And one more thing.... I am a Jew, whose relatives were killed in the Holocaust - same Holocaust that american liberals denied during WW2, NYT ignored it, and FDR refused to do anything about it (even though Churchill begged him to bomb the extermination camps). So, go easy on the Holocaust denial...

FDR and America didn't have anything to do with the holocaust. Apart from Coughlinites like mainstreet and the nastiness taught to their kids, Jews had it pretty good in America, comparatively speaking.

I guess your ancestors weren't smart enough to get out while the getting out was good. Pity.

Maybe they should have read more books, or something. Thousands more.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Behold the ramblings of a Soviet-"educated" puppet, everyone. "

Hmmm. I don't recall the Left bitching about the Soviets at all when the USSR actually existed. No freedom of speech, an all-powerful state, government surveillance of enemies, political prisoners shipped off to the gulag - shit, it sounds like Ritmo's dream country. Oh, let's not forget - They had full employment and free healthcare too!

exiledonmainstreet said...

"I'm pretty sure that Francis Bergoglio has read way more Zinn than I have. "

Maybe. That's why he's a shitty Pope. We do get stinkers every so often.

Hyphenated American said...

"How many JP Morgans, Andrew Carnegies, and John D Rockefellers did Germany have for that GDP that was much greater than the half that America's was despite only having half America's population?"

Lets look at one - John D. Rockefeller... The guy who founded Standard Oil. His company entered the oil industry in 1870. The price of oil was about $80 per gallon. By 1885 it was $20.

http://www.globalpetrolprices.com/common_images/articles/20150622011731.png

The reason why USA had so much more powerful economy than any other country - is because US was a free economy (yes, capitalism), and people like Morgan, Carnegie, Rockefeller, Ford and many, many others....

Again, I gave you empirical evidence. You only supply emotions.

"How advanced were America's highways in 1939 compared to Germany's autobahn? "

Oh, the Nazis did built thousands of miles of autobahn before WW2.. One minor problem - the people did not have cars to drive on them:

"As many American visitors had noted during the 1930's, the autobahn was built before the country had enough motor vehicles to justify the expense. Only the well off or powerful in Germany could afford automobiles. Hitler had highlighted this problem in a speech on March 3, 1934, at the Berlin International Automobile and Motor Cycle Show:

It can only be said with profound sadness that, in the present age of civilization, the ordinary hard-working citizen is still unable to afford a car, a means of up-to-date transport and a source of enjoyment in the leisure hours. One must have courage to face problems and what cannot be solved within one year may become an established fact within ten years . . . ."

In USA, though, a car was no longer a luxury even in the 1920ies. So yes, you got a huge government project in Germany to build roads - and in USA, free market economy build cars for the people. And when you go to war - what do you need more? Huge factories which manufacture cars (and can be changed to make tanks, trucks, armored vehicles) - or hundreds of thousands of people who almost manually built roads of no use?

"How many other countries' industries did America directly control and extort compared to the number that Germany controlled by 1941? "

Wait, are we now comparing the entire military power of the 3rd Reich, and comparing it with USA, USSR, Great Britain, Australia and Canada?

"How well coordinated was the command structure of the separate branches of the U.S. armed forces and what amounts were spent on them in 1941? In 2013 dollars? "

You dummy, the reason FDR could spend those money is because free market economy created those resources - whole industries, educated workers, know-how.... Do you comprehend this? FDR used the US economy, which was much stronger than any economy in the world. He did not create it.

Hyphenated American said...

"Which part of the Constitution allowed for a stronger national defense compared to the states?"

The one which says that defense is the role of the federal government. You know, the same constitution which allowed Lincoln and later Wilson to win their wars.

"As a bonus, how much of any nation's industry typically (and that of the U.S. specifically) results directly from its military build-up"

Sorry, but that's not really the point. You started by claiming that USA was a backwards country, with minuscule economy, and FDR transformed into a behemoth, and then used to defeat the Nazis. The reality is different, very different from your claims - FDR inherited the largest, stronger, most powerful industrial economy in the world. By far, the largest, stronger and most powerful. The fact which you disputed. Right?

"Behold the product of a Soviet education. "

Soviet, post-Soviet, and American. And I also read thousands of books. I am also an engineer, I argue with facts, empirical evidence. You are a left-wing snowflake, who is ignorant, and self-assured, who cannot bother to check any of his claims against the facts.

"Go be Putin's bitch elsewhere."

Speaking of being a Putin's bitch - this is what Putin's bitch would do:

Limiting fracking as much as he possibly could
Blocking oil and gas pipelines
Opening negotiations for major nuclear arms reductions
Cutting U.S. military spending
Trying to tamp down tensions with Russia’s ally Iran

I am sure, you, as a good Putin's bitch, voted for the Putin's super-bitch and lackey, Obama, who did all of this.

Oh, and one more thing - did you assume that I was Putin's bitch simply because I was born in Russia? I wonder if you would say that every moslem is member of ISIS?

Ray said...

Freedom's Forge: How American Business Produced Victory in World War II is a great book that addresses the creation of a private war industry in the US. It was actually done before the US entered WW2. Before this revolution happened, that created the military industrial complex the government made many of their own weapons in their own armoury, basically at a craft level such as the Springfield Armoury.

There was a difference in ideology of weapon development between the US and Germany, perhaps due to culture that still exists. German weapons were beautiful, high maintenance, and A+ quality. Think BMW. US weapons were like Chevy's. Quantity has quality of it's own. It took a number of generations till the US finally - 1980 with the M1, had a world class tank.

Where the US excelled in WW2 was logistics, naval warfare, manufacturing, trucks, and eventually aircraft such as the B-29 and P51.

Back to the original topic, I am saddened that the home of Free Speech, has drifted so far.

I wonder how long the CA college system, that is long overdue for an update to the master plan, will be competitive with fast growing alternatives such as distance education. Can the CA college system continue to produce a product that is becoming less prestigious and with less skills at a higher cost due to growing numbers of administrators with more and more red tape?

UC's are now $30K a year in state, so a 4 year education if you got the classes you need is $120K. This is cheaper than a top tier private school at $60K, for $240K for 4 years. Or will the disrespect for a high percentage of the population create Mizzou in CA? Or will residents continue to flee Ca, including the college system for other alternatives? Will foreign students continue to pay out of state fees for a university that has this type of violence? And what plans does the Trump administration have for a college system that mostly hates his guts due to ideology?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Hmmm. I don't recall the Left bitching about the Soviets at all when the USSR actually existed. No freedom of speech, an all-powerful state, government surveillance of enemies, political prisoners shipped off to the gulag - shit, it sounds like Ritmo's dream country. Oh, let's not forget - They had full employment and free healthcare too!

Oh cut the shit. Why do you have to call on me as if I have to speak for "the left?" And why should "the left" (or anyone) care about the USSR? The USSR was a problem of its own making - best left to implode on its own making. Can't you get over it? I realize you're jealous about FDR's accomplishments, but Reagan's really were small potatoes in comparison.

And even the RCC has moved on. Yes, it had to make ugly bedfellows with unregulated capitalism while communism competed with it as the second-biggest statist theology. But that time has gone. Time to move on.

Just like in the 1960s when it figured that teaching the kids at its schools to beat up Jewish kids right around Easter time probably wasn't such a Christian thing to do.

Learn to value progress. You are really almost as retro as Mel Gibson.

exiledonmainstreet said...

I doubt Ben-Gurion gave a shit about what Truman thought about Jews, as long as Truman supported Israel. Which Truman did. FDR would not have.

I'm off to bed now, but I'm sure Ritmo Rage Boy will add, oh about 10 more angry comments, so he can assure himself that HE WON!!!

Or, as Laslo put it:


"I add comments. I add a LOT of comments."

"And what do you discuss in these comments?"

"I write about how this Blog and its commenters make me sick. Angry and sick."

"And this makes you feel better?"

"Yeah. I tell them they are all assholes who are getting it wrong. I come up with some pretty great put-downs. Occasionally I wish death on another commenter."

"While this may make you happy in the short-term, it doesn't seem healthy as a long-term behavior."


The Toothless Revolutionary said...

The one which says that defense is the role of the federal government. You know, the same constitution which allowed Lincoln and later Wilson to win their wars.

"As a bonus, how much of any nation's industry typically (and that of the U.S. specifically) results directly from its military build-up"

Sorry, but that's not really the point.


It's completely the point. Ever since the Manhattan Project, the dependence of American industry and the R&D driving it on the military is too substantial to ignore. Only a Soviet-miseducated America hater would deny that. It's a WWII legacy. As only a Soviet-miseducated America hater would claim his knowledge (must be a Soviet thing) of America while insisting that America's military was a puny shadow of what it became due to its reliance on state militias. That's what kept the Union from quelling the confederate insurrection as quickly as it otherwise would have and the legacy was retained (as any idiot can see in the funding graph) through WWII - apart from the short clip of WWI. Go read any military historian. Go read any WWII historian. You are simply being an idiot by insisting that strewing together disjointed and unrelated numbers that this is not the case.

Hyphenated American said...

"I don't need to claim anything to refute someone too dumb to learn the difference between military/diplomatic isolation and the TVA or WPA or whatever other domestic works programs that FDR set to uses other than the military. "

Sigh.... Here is what you claimed:

"What's astounding is how clueless Hyphenated American is in understanding that America's population and economy (as a function of its population) was nowhere near as advanced as Germany's specifically due to how far behind we were on industrialization, and the powers deprived of American presidents up until FDR. "

This is a major level stupidity and ignorance. To proclaim that US was economically weaker than Germany before FDR is astonishing. I posted the data comparing US GDP (total and per capita) with German GDP before FDR. What have you done? I showed the data on car manufacturing. What data did you provide to prove something which is on the face of it wrong? Nothing. Only hysterical pronouncement....

"Go join the KGB if the intel on that is that elusive to you. "

Wait, I need to join the KGB because I said US was much stronger economically than Germany before and during WW2? Or is it because I was born in the USSR? Tell me, which one is it?

"Behold the ramblings of a Soviet-"educated" puppet, everyone. "

Puppet? I am a man who is quoting well-known public sources. You are the one who stupidly repeats the crap that some teacher put in your head. Some left-wing, socialist teacher....

"Maybe he sustained direct radioactive injury to his cerebrum at Chernobyl. "

Wow. That's cute. Are you saying that only a person who has "direct radioactive injury" is capable of checking the facts and providing empirical evidence? Is this what the socialist teacher in school told you?

"Fuck off. You don't belong here. Leave, immigrant."

Wow. This is even funnier. I wonder if you would dare to say this to a moslem or a mexican who is in USA illegally, but supports Obama.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Yeah, either Catholics are Frankie fans or they're with the Mel Gibson crowd. There's absolutely no middle road there!

Wow, I continue to be amazed by the sophistication and subtleties of your thought process, Rage Boy! Cause that's some real nuance there!

I do wish to thank you for the many laughs you have given me today. Because you really are truly funny!

Hyphenated American said...

"FDR and America didn't have anything to do with the holocaust."

It's well-known that Churchill and others begged FDR to bomb the Nazi extermination camps. FDR refused. He did not care, thought it was not worth the cost to bomb the camps. That's a fact.


"Apart from Coughlinites like mainstreet and the nastiness taught to their kids, Jews had it pretty good in America, comparatively speaking."

Sorry, let's go back and discuss FDR's unwillingness to put any effort to help the Jews when Hitler was exterminating them.


"I guess your ancestors weren't smart enough to get out while the getting out was good. Pity. "

Oh, I am sorry - yes, the relatives of my grandma, who lived in Poland, did not know Hitler was coming to kill them all. And neither did the Jews who lived in Odessa. I guess you know everything what will happen before it happens. Right?

"Maybe they should have read more books, or something. Thousands more."

I can see so much sympathy from you towards the victims of the national-socialist German worker party....

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I doubt Ben-Gurion gave a shit about what Truman thought about Jews, as long as Truman supported Israel. Which Truman did. FDR would not have.

You sure are confident in your counterfactuals. As you are confident that Israel's existence is some type trump card to use against whatever other anti-jewish crap you want to throw out there. If Israel didn't exist would there have been a Second Vatican Council? Should there not have been? Would you still have been running around with kids taught to beat up Jewish kids at Easter? What about Coughlin? What about what the church did to facilitate the mischief and prosperity and escape of the Nazis during and after WWII?

Give me a fucking break. You are one complacent ho.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Hyphenated American said:
"This is a major level stupidity and ignorance. To proclaim that US was economically weaker than Germany before FDR is astonishing. I posted the data comparing US GDP (total and per capita) with German GDP before FDR. What have you done? I showed the data on car manufacturing. What data did you provide to prove something which is on the face of it wrong? Nothing. Only hysterical pronouncement...."

You don't get it. This is what Ritmo does. Throw facts at him and he insults or changes the subject. He is far too emotional and insecure to ever admit he is wrong. Earlier in this thread, he stupidly accused me of slandering ARM. I refuted him by reposting what ARM had said. Never mind, he just sails into insulting someone else.

Achilles thinks too highly of him. Ritmo has a facile way with words, which he uses to cover his ignorance and emotionalism. You won't get an honest, adult argument. So it's better to simply mock him.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

"Apart from Coughlinites like mainstreet and the nastiness taught to their kids, Jews had it pretty good in America, comparatively speaking."

Sorry, let's go back and discuss FDR's unwillingness to put any effort to help the Jews when Hitler was exterminating them.


Why? Because you lost the point? That's not the same thing. You just resent coming from a pseudo-country where that couldn't have been the case. You've got issues.

Oh, I am sorry - yes, the relatives of my grandma, who lived in Poland, did not know Hitler was coming to kill them all.

Because they were apparently backwards idiots who couldn't learn any more from history than you're able to learn?

But keep making all the wrong enemies. I'm sure that will serve you well.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Yeah, either Catholics are Frankie fans or they're with the Mel Gibson crowd. There's absolutely no middle road there!

There really isn't. Where in the RCC is there room for a "middle ground" faction, and who are they? Why doesn't anyone hear from them?

You're either progressive or you're not. Are you pro-Second Vatican Council or against it? As fond as you are of pretending that Vatican State is the epitome of all goodness, as fond as you are of pretending that anti-semitism is how you define evil in anyone you hate, you can't seem to come to terms with the reason for why they thought it (VC2) was necessary in the first place.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

This is what Ritmo does. Throw facts at him and he insults or changes the subject.

Facts aren't things that responsible people "throw". You either put them together with reason and context or you are just using fallacies and scoring bullshit partisan points.

Ritmo has a facile way with words, which he uses to cover his ignorance and emotionalism.

Emotional-ism? WTF does that even mean? That I'm not the cold, heartless, fascist bitch that you are?

Healthy people don't bottle themselves up the way you do. Apparently if you ever had an emotion, you'd be afraid of what it would do to you. Probably make you melt or shatter. I guess it's easier for you to freeze up or dry up instead.

I remember someone once using the phrase "desiccated spinster in drag" to describe his childhood, er, teachers. I think that phrase was invented for someone like you.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Apart from Coughlinites like mainstreet"

Right. Because I've posted so many anti-Semitic, anti-Israel comments here. Funny, though, I don't remember them. Ritmo, maybe you can produce some quotes, some, you know, actual proof that I hate Jews.

Otherwise, you might look like you're just pulling slanders out of your ass without any evidence whatsoever to back them up! Just like ARM did with Milo!

Gee, why do leftists lie so much? Why do they lack integrity? Why are they so hysterical, emo boy?

Hyphenated American said...

"Ever since the Manhattan Project, the dependence of American industry and the R&D driving it on the military is too substantial to ignore."

Are you saying that FDR defeated Hitler due to Manhattan project? If not, your claim is irrelevant.


"Only a Soviet-miseducated America hater would deny that. It's a WWII legacy."

Oh, but you see, if the government spends trillions of dollars on new technologies for military and aero-space - some of that would spill into the private industries. But that's really is not the point. The reason why you can spend so much money on the military and have the Manhattan project - is exactly because you have free market economy that creates the industries which can work for you.

FDR got one of the strongest military in the time (or the strongest, if you want) because he started with the strongest and most powerful economy in the world. FDR did not Detroit into the power house, he did not build Standard Oil, Ford or many, many other companies - he used them. He was given an enormous industry, which he could use to build up the military.

"As only a Soviet-miseducated America hater would claim his knowledge (must be a Soviet thing) of America while insisting that America's military was a puny shadow of what it became due to its reliance on state militias."

Please quote me saying this. Go ahead. If you cannot, please concede that you made up this claim.


" That's what kept the Union from quelling the confederate insurrection as quickly as it otherwise would have and the legacy was retained (as any idiot can see in the funding graph) through WWII - apart from the short clip of WWI. Go read any military historian. Go read any WWII historian. You are simply being an idiot by insisting that strewing together disjointed and unrelated numbers that this is not the case."

I am trying to understand what argument you are making here - but it's impossible. You are telling me to read books on WW2 - although you showed no indication that you yourself read any. But apart from that, what is it that you are trying to prove?

Here are a few good books to read, which would give you info on WW2:

1. Memoirs of Albert Speer
2. Modern Times (the portion on WW2)
3. Churchill memoirs on WW2
4. Maybe some specialized literature like: JG26 or Luftwaffe Fighter aces.
5. Don't forget the read the Russians- from Suvorov (Icebreaker) to Nekrasov (Frontline Stalingrad), and Kurochkin, À La Guerre Comme À La Guerre!

But just in general, take a good high-school textbook on ww2. I am sure you don't even know the basic dates, and who attacked whom, when...

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Where in the RCC is there room for a "middle ground" faction, and who are they? Why doesn't anyone hear from them?"

The middle ground is most of the people sitting in pews on Sunday. A majority of them voted for Trump BTW. See, I actually know about the Church. You don't.

Talking about the Catholic Church with you is like talking with a brain-damaged kid about the Theory of Relativity. I could waste time doing it, but what's the point? Nothing will sink in. You're unteachable.

Hyphenated American said...

"You don't get it. This is what Ritmo does. Throw facts at him and he insults or changes the subject. He is far too emotional and insecure to ever admit he is wrong."

On the contrary. I do get it. I can also how easily I can get under his skin. He is reduced to waving his hands and screaming at his computer screen..... Trust me, I know what I am doing.

exiledonmainstreet said...

You're a desiccated male, Ritmo.

An arrested, insecure adolescent with Daddy issues, as Laslo figured out. And probably Mommy issues too.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

"Apart from Coughlinites like mainstreet"

Right. Because I've posted so many anti-Semitic, anti-Israel comments here. Funny, though, I don't remember them. Ritmo, maybe you can produce some quotes, some, you know, actual proof that I hate Jews.


When you are as obsessed as you are at proclaiming Vatican State as the font of all virtue (do you do that for other states, BTW?) - including covering up its copious sins of anti-semitism through the centuries basically from the beginning all the way through to the 1960s (notable exceptions and acts of individual virtue aside), then yes, you do abet anti-semitism. Someone as addicted to whitewashing the church's history as you are is only anti-anti-semitic as a convenient ruse. Or you probably aren't really anti-semitic (why assume most people bother to care especially about Jews as opposed to whomever, but regardless). But you lack the integrity to integrate that with your adoration of the church as this temple of moral perfection on earth. Which it most definitely isn't and never was.

Gee, why do leftists lie so much? Why do they lack integrity?

First, start with the facts. (Things you, by virtue of partisan reality, HATE). Then figure out how they can or cannot be reconciled (integrated) together.

Myself, I have my own feelings and ideas and wholeness. Whether you or the church or Israel or FDR make complete sense is on all y'all. It doesn't affect my own feelings and my own completion as a person one way or another.

Contrary to you - someone who will fucking MELT like the witch in Oz the minute an uncomfortable truth is said about whichever external person or institution you rely on to feel like you have any worth as a person.

Isn't that just a little pathetic? Seriously.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

The middle ground is most of the people sitting in pews on Sunday. A majority of them voted for Trump BTW.

Yeah, I know. Keeping their mouths shut and being obedient.

Very courageous, those types. Just the kind the world needs more of.

They're just, you know, "following orders."

exiledonmainstreet said...

On the contrary. I do get it. I can also how easily I can get under his skin. He is reduced to waving his hands and screaming at his computer screen..... Trust me, I know what I am doing.

4/23/17, 12:33 AM

And you are doing a fine job. I have enjoyed your posts in this thread and have learned from them. Although I knew already that the US overtook the UK as the world's premier economic powerhouse in the 19th century and the idea that we were economically weaker than Germany until Holy Lord FDR appeared on the scene is ridiculous. That is not something I learned in Catholic school, but from reading books. On my own. Independently.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"When you are as obsessed as you are at proclaiming Vatican State as the font of all virtue (do you do that for other states, BTW?) "

When did I do that? Provide quotes.

Hyphenated American said...

"Sorry, let's go back and discuss FDR's unwillingness to put any effort to help the Jews when Hitler was exterminating them.

Why? Because you lost the point? That's not the same thing. You just resent coming from a pseudo-country where that couldn't have been the case. You've got issues. "

Let's try this again.... This is what I originally said: "FDR was a known anti-semite. He did not like the Jews, but he liked Stalin. "

I also said that FDR did not want to save the Jews from holocaust.

Are you denying any of that?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I can also how easily I can get under his skin.

Idiocy gets under most thinking people's skin.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Although I knew already that the US overtook the UK as the world's premier economic powerhouse in the 19th century and the idea that we were economically weaker than Germany until Holy Lord FDR appeared on the scene is ridiculous. That is not something I learned in Catholic school, but from reading books.

Was that when it overtook it in population?

You know, because it's rather hard for an economy not to do that when that happens.

exiledonmainstreet said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
exiledonmainstreet said...


Ah, Rage Boy is making up shit again. That's the only way The Unhappy Commenter can win arguments - when he invents arguments and puts them in his opponents' mouths.

Why, Rage Boy convinced himself that a relative of Holocaust survivors is - get this - a Holocaust denier!! Well, shucks, Rage Boy can win any argument he wants when he fights imaginary demons.

You'll have soooo much to discuss with your shrink this week, Angry Commenter! Laslo will keep us posted.

Hyphenated American said...

"Idiocy gets under most thinking people's skin."

That's true. Very true. Probably the first good argument you have made today.

One quick question - what do you care how thinking people feel? It's not your battle, bro, not your concern. Be rest assured that no one mistakes you for a thinking man. Quite the contrary.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

I also said that FDR did not want to save the Jews from holocaust.

Are you denying any of that?


Sure am. Most thinking people and patriotic allies understood that winning the war was the best thing for everybody, including whomever Hitler was persecuting - and rightly focused on that instead. Nothing wrong with that. Only a fuckface of the highest caliber thinks that prioritizing Hitler's defeat was a way of "not wanting to save Jews."

But I forgot. You play the part of an armchair American president in your spare time. When not contemplating the moral conundrums and humanity of sine waves or whatever you spend your days as an engineer doing.

Engineers tend to be more inept at working with people than your average cockroach.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Why, Rage Boy convinced himself that a relative of Holocaust survivors is - get this - a Holocaust denier!!

When did I say I was convinced of that?

And why are you getting so angry? So emotional?

It must be all the confidence you have in all the nonsense you're spewing.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Earlier Ritmo wrote:


What's astounding is how clueless Hyphenated American is in understanding that America's population and economy (as a function of its population) was nowhere near as advanced as Germany's specifically due to how far behind we were on industrialization, and the powers deprived of American presidents up until FDR."

Now after being shown that we were in fact not behind Germany before FDR became prez:

"Was that when it overtook it in population?

You know, because it's rather hard for an economy not to do that when that happens."


Move those goal posts!

Hyphenated American said...

"Was that when it overtook it in population?

You know, because it's rather hard for an economy not to do that when that happens."

Sigh...

From an article: "Thus, the United States overtook the United Kingdom in overall labor productivity by 1890, but did not overtake in per capita income until 1910. The lower share of the population in the labor force in the United States during the nineteenth century can be explained at least in part by demographic factors. The median age of the population was substantially lower in the United States than in the United Kingdom, where an earlier fall in fertility led to an earlier fall in the child dependency rate..."

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~dirwin/docs/C19USUK11a.pdf

Reality is hard-right...

And one more thing - India has about 3 times the US population, and yet, much lower GDP. Chinese population about 4 times larger than US population, and comparable GDP.

USA with 300 million people have higher GDP than all of Africa and Latin American combined.

Before I forget - USA had higher GDP per capita than Britain or Germany BEFORE FDR.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Ritmo wrote of Hyphenated American said:

"Are you a Holocaust denier, too? Just curious. They're big revisionists also. And also hated pretty much everything about FDR."

Gee, if you hate FDR you must be a Holocaust denier! Impeccable logic there!

I believe Hyphenated American is a very well read man. I also somehow don't find it difficult to believe that a Russian-born Jew who is aware of how much FDR sucked up to Stalin might be less than impressed with FDR.


Hyphenated American said...

"Most thinking people and patriotic allies understood that winning the war was the best thing for everybody, including whomever Hitler was persecuting - and rightly focused on that instead. Nothing wrong with that. Only a fuckface of the highest caliber thinks that prioritizing Hitler's defeat was a way of "not wanting to save Jews."

It would not have taken a lot of resources for FDR to bomb the huge nazi extermination camps, which were used to kill millions of people. Given that USA was bombing nazi occupied areas for years daily, it was a relatively easy. It would have given a chance for Jews to escape and have destroyed the facilities that hitler used to murder the Jews. FDR refused. He just did not care.

"But I forgot. You play the part of an armchair American president in your spare time. When not contemplating the moral conundrums and humanity of sine waves or whatever you spend your days as an engineer doing. "

I am sorry, but this is not a discussion of moral conundrums. It's an analysis of available resources, and potential usage of them to achieve a goal. It's a technical discussion, not an emotional one. It's not about giving speeches - it's about solving an actual problem. So yes, as an engineer I am trained to do that. You better listen to me.



Engineers tend to be more inept at working with people than your average cockroach."

We are discussing facts, logic, history. Analyzing data. You are an emotional wreck, and the only things you want to discuss is how FDR made you feel with his speeches. No data, no evidence, not a single attempt to analyze what actually happened.

As I said, you are the perfect product of American public education. You cannot think for yourself, cannot check the facts, cannot learn - only repeat as a parrot the slogans which were put into your head years ago. That's pathetic.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Now after being shown that we were in fact not behind Germany before FDR became prez:

"Was that when it overtook it in population?

You know, because it's rather hard for an economy not to do that when that happens."


Move those goal posts!


How much do you want them moved?

Because the fact is that the scale of America's industry grew exponentially with its WWII military build-up. Entire industries were hatched directly out of the defense R&D. Even an asshole as obsessed with proving me wrong as you are must know this. So, while U.S. per capita GDP (as if that's the sole meaningful metric) might have been higher than Germany's, it wasn't twice as high (which it should have been if a twice-as-high population had at least as productive economy - minus the trillionaires), and doesn't account for the industries Germany appropriated from every country in Europe it invaded. Germany had a more advanced transportation system, and was obviously better prepared militarily. Yes, the U.S. had more overall wealth, whatever Carnegie/Rockefeller/Morgan and our top-notch Wall Street financiers were doing to be directly invested in the manufacture of bombs and airplanes and such. And if it wasn't much, no big deal. Capital of that sort that takes no time to build at all. Too bad they had to shift auto plants to the manufacture of warfare infrastructure, when Morgan/Rockefeller/Carnegie's fortunes could have been stitched into bombs and guns before the fucking factories were even built!

Even being just evenly matched to Germany (and Japan) was no easy presumption in 1941. You are an entitled wanker who takes for granted the fact that our military in 2017 is bigger than the next 7 countries combined. To have done what we did, let alone to have the confidence in our infrastructure for doing it successfully took a massive shift in resources and priorities - of a scale that you can't imagine. You just look at one set of numbers and can't even fathom how or where they rightly apply.

Inga said...

My theory is that Laslo is describing a rage filled woman who often fights with and obsesses over liberals.

Hyphenated American said...

exiledonmainstreet:

"I believe Hyphenated American is a very well read man. I also somehow don't find it difficult to believe that a Russian-born Jew who is aware of how much FDR sucked up to Stalin might be less than impressed with FDR."

Thanks for kind words. One more thing - my grandparents survived Stalin's concentration camps. So I am a Russian-born Jew, who also hates communism-socialism-naziism-fascism (which to me are pretty much same things).... As Dovlatov said about the Soviet immigrants - "there is only the wall to the right from us".....

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Because the fact is that the scale of America's industry grew exponentially with its WWII military build-up. Entire industries were hatched directly out of the defense R&D"

That is true. It doesn't change the fact that America was far ahead of other competitors long before FDR took the oath of office.

What WWII changed was America's geo-political status - we became a superpower. We were already an economic powerhouse in the late 19th century.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

And one more thing - India has about 3 times the US population, and yet, much lower GDP. Chinese population about 4 times larger than US population, and comparable GDP.

Right. India and China are almost as comparable to America as Britain is to America.

...the only things you want to discuss is how FDR made you feel with his speeches.

Because you are a Soviet engineered automaton who thinks that leadership occurs in a vacuum and has no clue about how a free society can be motivated to take part in a catastrophic war a world away where your European soul-mates are slaughtering each other as they'd always been doing for millenia. But that's because you're a robotic engineer who grew up under tyranny and just assume that people can be made to do what you robots were made to do in the USSR, as if they were just parts to a machine. Which in your system, and the system that still runs your rotted mind, they are.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

What WWII changed was America's geo-political status - we became a superpower. We were already an economic powerhouse in the late 19th century.

With a third-rate military capacity. Both in terms of the political structure behind its leadership and in terms of infrastructure.

What the military build-up did to our economy was comparable and way superior to what Germany's military build-up did to its own economy. But both were built on that development.

How hard is it for you to get that point, fascist lady? Our financiers were not going to be the ones to fight the war or build its weapons or the factories that made them. The fact that you think Wall Street money is interchangeable with blood and tears just helps explain why you were on the side that cheerled the supposed cakewalk into and right out of Baghdad.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

We are discussing facts, logic, history. Analyzing data.

You sound like a Soviet scientist. Go listen to Kraftwerk or something, robot boy.

We are discussing human events, which is what history is. It can't be reduced solely to ONE set of numbers, no matter how fond you are of reducing human beings to numbers in every other capacity. Just like numeric tattoos on people's arms or the data of how many cattle cars arrived in Poland on this or that day in 1942.

Those Germans were VERY good with numbers. And just as ass-backward at understanding any human dimension behind them.

History is only about human beings. You are a bizarre robot who actually thinks history is about all you can analyze once you subtract the people from it.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Inga said...
My theory is that Laslo is describing a rage filled woman who often fights with and obsesses over liberals.

4/23/17, 1:09 AM

Oh, I don't think so Inga. Would Laslo put these words in my mouth:

"Oh yeah. Nazis with sexual problems, that's them. And a lot of them probably can't even get it up anymore. Not even with farm animals. Because they're old."

"So their age matters?"

"Of course it does. Old people have old ideas. Old ideas are in the way."

Doesn't sound like me, does it?

Just like I don't think Francisco D. was offering psychiatric help to ME. You could always ask Francisco D (who sounds pretty damn conservative) or Laslo, of course. Why don't you do that? Because you want to believe your silly fantasies.

That is the way of ditzy liberal featherheads.

Hyphenated American said...

"Because the fact is that the scale of America's industry grew exponentially with its WWII military build-up."

Please provide the numbers for the term "scale of America's industry".... Yes, FDR used the considerable industries built before him and the wealth created before him to build a new army. Or, more specifically, not to "build it" - but order military supplies from private industries, using the government money.


"Entire industries were hatched directly out of the defense R&D. "

Must most of defense R&D was done at private companies, created before FDR.


"So, while U.S. per capita GDP (as if that's the sole meaningful metric) might have been higher than Germany's, it wasn't twice as high (which it should have been if a twice-as-high population had at least as productive economy - minus the trillionaires), and doesn't account for the industries Germany appropriated from every country in Europe it invaded."

But total US GDP (which is what you use in the war), not per capita, was more than twice compared to the German GDP. This is why the top German leaders agreed that they needed to defeat USSR and take over all of Europe before USA was able to bring its resources - which were much larger than the Germans resources. Read the memoirs from Albert Speer, the guy who ran German industry for Hitler since 1942 or so. Every German expert feared American power exactly because it was so much larger than what Germany had at its disposal.


"Germany had a more advanced transportation system, and was obviously better prepared militarily."

German transportation system did not help against the Russians during battle for Moscow, Stalingrad or Kursk. It was also useless in Africa and Italy. It did not make more tanks, more airplanes, more soldiers, more guns. It was useful, but hardly sufficient.


"Yes, the U.S. had more overall wealth, whatever Carnegie/Rockefeller/Morgan and our top-notch Wall Street financiers were doing to be directly invested in the manufacture of bombs and airplanes and such."

What do you mean by "Wealth"? Are you saying Rockefeller build his empire by speculating on Wall Street? He built a massive oil industry. Carnegie built the US steel industry. Morgan build a finance empire - which was responsible for loaning money to enterprises. He also played a role in turning USA into a manufacturing giant.

"And if it wasn't much, no big deal. Capital of that sort that takes no time to build at all."

These people, and many others built the US economy. Without them, FDR would be arming US soldiers with swords and rocks.

"Too bad they had to shift auto plants to the manufacture of warfare infrastructure, when Morgan/Rockefeller/Carnegie's fortunes could have been stitched into bombs and guns before the fucking factories were even built!"

You dumb fuck. Rockefeller built the US oil industry. Without oil, you have no military. Carnegie built US steel business. Without him, you have no weapons. Ford built US car industry, without it, you have no trucks, no cars, no tanks.

"Even being just evenly matched to Germany (and Japan) was no easy presumption in 1941. "

Wait, where did USSR and Britain and Canada and Australia go? Are you saying USSR did not fight against Hitler? That Britain was not doing enough? you clearly know nothing about the WW2. Do you seriously think that FDR single-handedly defeated hitler?

exiledonmainstreet said...

Unhappy Commenter writes:

How hard is it for you to get that point, fascist lady?

Unhappy Commenter Visits His Psychiatrist:

"So someone who disagrees with you is not just disagreeing, they are inferior?"

"Hell yeah. They're Idiots and Douchebags. Or Douchebag Idiots. You get the idea."

"What if I were to tell you that you are NOT superior, but are simply a man with opinions, much like everyone else?"

"Sure, Doc. Nazis had opinions, too. So do child molesters."

"You think that the people who disagree with you must be Nazis or child molesters?"

"Oh yeah. Nazis with sexual problems, that's them. And a lot of them probably can't even get it up anymore. Not even with farm animals. Because they're old."

"So their age matters?"

"Of course it does. Old people have old ideas. Old ideas are in the way."

exiledonmainstreet said...

And I will never tire of quoting Laslo's classic back to you Rage Boy, because it shows you follow a script. Laslo parodied you, hilariously revealed your M.O. - and you STILL can't keep yourself from following your script. "Nazi, fascist!" Because that is all you know how to do. You are incapable of reacting like an adult.

How does it feel, to know you are a parody? A laughingstock?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Wait, where did USSR and Britain and Canada and Australia go?

Right. The Canadians and Australians. I forgot about the massive numbers of troops those demographic powerhouses were contributing.

I forgot about all those land invasions the British did prior to the massive U.S. invasion at Normandy.

I forgot about how much on the offensive the Soviets were by letting Germany cakewalk into about a third of their country before having to rely on the cold weather to freeze them out.

You are dumber than a box of rocks.

Are you done masturbating with minor protests around the main points that you keep massively failing on, Mr. Humans Don't Matter but I can Study Economics and History Without Them Robotic Soviet Automaton?

Asperger's isn't curable, but surely there are medical professionals who can help you figure out how to cope with it more effectively.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Wow. That's one long quote you keep re-posting to do your insulting for you. And in response to a single two-word reference.

Talk about angry. You're more easily triggered than the PC police.

Are you or are you not a fascist? You certainly aren't a fan of liberal democracy or individual rights.

Do you or do you not believe that business and wealth should control the U.S. government?

Simple question. There must be a reason why it's easier for you to feel triggered than to just answer it.

Hyphenated American said...

"Because you are a Soviet engineered automaton who thinks that leadership occurs in a vacuum and has no clue about how a free society can be motivated to take part in a catastrophic war a world away where your European soul-mates are slaughtering each other as they'd always been doing for millenia."

Because you are a Us public school product, you do not comprehend that you need to go beyond speeches, and study facts, study numbers, study empirical evidence. You really think that emotions is all you need to get the economy going? It's amazing.

"But that's because you're a robotic engineer who grew up under tyranny and just assume that people can be made to do what you robots were made to do in the USSR, as if they were just parts to a machine. Which in your system, and the system that still runs your rotted mind, they are."

It's amusing. You made factually wrong claims about the US economy. You provided no evidence to support your opinion. And yet, when faced with someone who shows you facts, data, incontrovertible evidence, you still believe you are superior - because you can call me an "automaton". Funny and amusing...

And one more thing.... Exactly because I was born, raised and educate in the USSR, and I read enough books, that I know that people are not robots, and won't do something what you want them to do. This is why I reject socialism. You, on the other side, believe in socialism, believe in the government running all things at gun point, and running it efficiently.

Your argument is simply reduced to: Hey, look, FDR ordered things to work well - and they did - that's how he won the WW2. He created the US economy, before him US economy was nothing, weak, pathetic - and the hero FDR came, got the near-dictatorial power and built the whole country, from the ground up, defeated hitler (all by himself) - and now we live in the country which is great only because of what he did....


That's the argument you were making for the last few hours. And I took precious time explaining to you that FDR inherited the greatest economy in the world - which is why he was able to buy the best military - from the private industries, again, industries built by american industrialists.

In short, you are arguing in favor of the people as automatons controlled by a great leader - not me. But are you smart enough to comprehend what I am telling you? Unlikely.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Angry Commenter wrote: "Are you done masturbating with minor protests around the main points that you keep massively failing on, Mr. Humans Don't Matter but I can Study Economics and History Without Them Robotic Soviet Automaton?"

Oh come on, Ritmo stop projecting. We all know the real reason you hang out here:

"We're near the end of our session. So, to recap: you are Unhappy, and you spend your time reading a Writer you don't respect and then communicating with others that you don't respect. And you want all of them to change while you stay the same. Is that a fair assessment?

"Pretty much. It gets so tiring, being compelled to constantly deal with people who disappoint me. But it also helps me masturbate too, you know?"

"I think we're going to need a LOT of sessions..."

"I would think so: it takes a lot of time for someone to fully understand just how smart I am..."

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Exactly because I was born, raised and educate in the USSR, and I read enough books, that I know that people are not robots, and won't do something what you want them to do. This is why I reject socialism.

But you like the part about Wall Street Casino Corporatist capitalism that reduces people to numbers. Of course! The only "natural" way for people to relate to each other! How much are their lives worth, financially speaking - robot boy? For how much can their dignity be purchased? Their concern for co-nationals suffering in poverty while billionaires pay lower tax rates? You are a third-rate fool. America figured its way around your talking points decades ago. It's like I'm listening to a North Korean quoting de Tocqueville to me.

You, on the other side, believe in socialism, believe in the government running all things at gun point, and running it efficiently.

Right. Because France, Germany, Scandinavia and all of Western Europe does it that way.

Just go back to Motha Russia. Americans have a better understanding of the balance of things than someone like you, who's simply compensating for your tyrannical youth, does.

I don't need any anti-Soviet propaganda. I didn't grow up in the Soviet Union, bolshevist boy. And you can complain that I'm turning the U.S. into the Soviet Union the first moment you notice Western Europe turning into the Soviet Union. Which hasn't happen and isn't gonna.

They're all better educated than you. Talk about emotion! Your entire extended rant here is a paranoid plea for help against this fantasy that I'm going to get Americans to turn our country into the hellhole that you grew up in and fearfully whinge is in danger of happening everywhere.

Just go away. Fuck off. Take your protest to somebody more credulous.

Hyphenated American said...

"he Canadians and Australians. I forgot about the massive numbers of troops those demographic powerhouses were contributing."

Well, one would remember that Canadians and Australians fought against the Nazi since 1939. Where was FDR back then?

"I forgot about all those land invasions the British did prior to the massive U.S. invasion at Normandy. "

Sigh. Okay, so you don't know about the Brits fighting in Europe in 1940. Okay. How about Africa? You do know that Rommel fought against Montgomery in Africa for years before the US troops arrived, right? Have you heard about the Battle of Britain in 1940? Britain alone fought the entire German luftwaffe and won. And one more thing - you do know that the Brits also landed in Normandy, and took the beaches with no trouble, while the US soldiers could not take theirs for many hours? How about the battle in Italy?

"I forgot about how much on the offensive the Soviets were by letting Germany cakewalk into about a third of their country before having to rely on the cold weather to freeze them out. "

Cakewalk? By the time the first US soldiers landed in Normandy, Soviet soldiers have already killed millions of German soldiers, destroyed thousands and thousands of Nazi tanks. Have you heard about the battle of Moscow? It was the first time the German troops were stopped and forced to withdraw. Have you heard about Stalingrad? A million strong nazi army was defeated there. Where were the FDR's troops then? In Britain? Have you heard about the tank battle of Kursk? Without looking it up, do you even know when it happened? Damn, you know nothing about WW2.

There is no doubt that USA helped to win WW2. But to proclaim that USSR played no appreciable role in that war is amazing ignorance.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

And I took precious time explaining -

Please waste more. It shows either:

1. How worthless your time must be

2. How shitty a capitalist you are.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Right. Africa.

While Hitler could have had Europe, at least the British were going to take over what the Ottomans left them!

Awesome.

This isn't Jeopardy, shit-for-brains. If you piss on and on and on, I'm sure eventually you'll get to an actual, accurate detail that matters.

Did you want a gold star for it?

It looks like someone sure resents whatever it is that HIS teachers didn't do for him.

Hyphenated American said...

"Do you or do you not believe that business and wealth should control the U.S. government?"

This is just one of those dumb marxist lines.... Meaningless crap.

How about this one - I want the government to be small and limited. I don't want anyone to be allowed to use coercion to control me - neither business nor the government. I keep my fruits of labor, and I decide who to associate with. It's none of your or governments' business. That's all.

But you cannot offer this to me. Since you need, you want to control me. You see, you need my fruits of labor to feed you.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Rage Boy points his finger in his best Tailgunner Joe imitation and demands to know: "Are you or are you not a Fascist?"

Uh, no, dummy, of course not.

I want people like you kept as far away from power as possible. I want government to leave me the hell alone.

Of course, the fascists were all about leaving people alone, right?

Idiot.

exiledonmainstreet said...

The Toothless Revolutionary said...
And I took precious time explaining -

Please waste more."

His insights are surely wasted on you because you are an ignoramus. I find them valuable.

Hyphenated American said...

"Right. Africa.

While Hitler could have had Europe, at least the British were going to take over what the Ottomans left them!

Awesome."

Sigh. Wow. You show amazing ignorance.

The first time the US troops fought face to face against the Nazis was in ..... Africa. After the Nazis were defeated in Africa, Britain and USA invaded Italy. Italy surrendered in 1943. The Nazis put their troops in Italy, and for the ret of the war, the Allies were trying to push through Italy to no avail. German general Keslering was able to stop them.

You see, the original plan was to invade into Europe from Africa - into Italy - and then up and up and up. It did not work out, so the new plan was to invade France, which was a very difficult proposition, and it barely worked.

Oh, and the fun part - you don't know shit about the history of WW2. Seems like in your mind, the world was quiet, and then all of sudden - FDR alone on a white horse attacked Hitler in Normandy and saved the world from the Nazis. The complete history from 1939 to 1944 is completely unknown and unknowable to you.

And one last thing - a German soldier killed in Africa, is still a German soldier killed in Africa. He is just as dead.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

This is just one of those dumb marxist lines.... Meaningless crap.

No it's not. Who pays for the elections and how is lobbying regulated and how are conflicts of interest managed? Again, I understand that bribery is the natural course of events where you come from. But here, Americans care about who pays whom to keep them from doing what they're hired (by the people electing them) to do.

How about this one - I want the government to be small and limited.

How about this one? No one cares. This isn't 1980. Name your "size" and "limitation" and then fuck off. You get just as much say as the next person. And no more.

I don't want anyone to be allowed to use coercion to control me - neither business nor the government.

Including yourself, apparently. The entity that seems to have the least control over you. How much vodka did you have tonight?

I keep my fruits of labor, and I decide who to associate with. It's none of your or governments' business. That's all.

But you cannot offer this to me. Since you need, you want to control me. You see, you need my fruits of labor to feed you.


Please, keep your rotten fruity-smelling labor to yourself. I don't want it.

But just to piss you off, I think I'm going to lead a movement to get the government to tax confiscatory rates on tendentious, tedious, Soviet-born engineers who think they're going to re-write U.S. political, economic and military history late at night on Blogger.

You waste more time than a screensaver.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

His insights are surely wasted on you because you are an ignoramus. I find them valuable.

You should consider that that's due to how little you know.

Your comment is incoherent. You're the one who's an ignoramus if you need him to fill you in on the obvious details (usually irrelevant) that he mixes in with the shit he pulls out of his ass. And with the schizophrenic mix of pro-Soviet/anti-Soviet propaganda.

It's basically unreadable, as far as history goes.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Hyphenated American, it is amusing to see Ritmo attack you for growing up under a system that he would dearly love to see implemented here. Total state control, no freedom for dissenting views - that produces "automatons."

But isn't that precisely what Ritmo wants? Dissent? Not permitted. Facts and data? We don't care about that! Flowery words and fine speeches are the important thing! Agree with me or you are a fascist!

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Thanks for telling me about the war plans that didn't work out Hyphen-Man and about how all enemy soldiers are somehow equal value targets. Oh, and how Italy was more easily defeated. Never knew that. Gee, you sure are a brilliant man. Here I was thinking Mussolini was like the second coming of Augustus.

Any more nuggets of intellectual pontification you'd like to spread?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Hyphenated American, it is amusing to see Ritmo attack you for growing up under a system that he would dearly love to see implemented here. Total state control, no freedom for dissenting views - that produces "automatons."

But isn't that precisely what Ritmo wants? Dissent? Not permitted. Facts and data? We don't care about that! Flowery words and fine speeches are the important thing! Agree with me or you are a fascist!


Muh stupidity is as good as yer relevant k-nowledge! Respect it! Respect muh ignorant authoritah!

exiledonmainstreet said...

" I think I'm going to lead a movement to get the government to tax confiscatory rates on tendentious, tedious, Soviet-born engineers who think they're going to re-write U.S. political, economic and military history late at night on Blogger."

Good luck with that, Rage Boy!

Hyphenated American said...

"But you like the part about Wall Street Casino Corporatist capitalism that reduces people to numbers."

This phrase is completely meaningless. "Capitalism" is nothing more than a freedom for people to trade with each other. The meaningless slogan you typed as some kind of evidence of your deep thinking shows how little you understand....


"The only "natural" way for people to relate to each other!"

If people want to relate to each other - it's their choice. Freedom of association, bitch. If to me you are no more than an irrational number (do you even know what an "irrational number" is?), that's my choice. Free to choose, bitch.

"How much are their lives worth, financially speaking - robot boy?"

I literally do not understand the question. Your life, financially speaking, means nothing to me. To me, you are an irrational creature, whose only activity is that you breathe in oxygen, and breathe out CO2, eat food, drink water - and shit. You are less than useless, you are a waste of resources. Your life is worth nothing to me. And yet, you are a human being, and you have unalienable rights, among them, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to keep your fruits of labor and your property, freedom of association. I would fight to defend these basic rights for you and anyone else. But as I said, you, yourself, are worthless piece of shit to me. But I do respect your rights. Is that clear enough?


"For how much can their dignity be purchased?"

Only a person with no dignity would ask a question like that. No dignity and no brains. So, answering the question on how much I would pay for your dignity - the answer is "nothing". You have none to offer, and I don't need any to buy. Walk away, and sell your mythical dignity to someone gullible enough to buy it.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Muh stupidity is as good as yer relevant k-nowledge! Respect it! Respect muh ignorant authoritah!"

Now, that's a good honest summation of your POV Ritmo!

You've shown you know jackshit about the history of WWII and you're flailing helplessly when shown up by someone with more education and brains than you possess.

Public school education....

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

"Capitalism" is nothing more than a freedom for people to trade with each other.

Including political favors if the price is right. Must be one of those inalienable rights you came here to piss and moan about. The inalienable right for politicians to be bought and sold and bribed and corrupted as easily as they are in your own country. Change your name to Prostitutional American.

The meaningless slogan you typed as some kind of evidence of your deep thinking shows how little you understand....

You're the one who doesn't understand shit. This is the very essence of what elections are being waged over nowadays.

But you still seem to think that you're in Russia.

BTW, your own life is of no value, either.

Now go back home. There are many people there who think just like you do. You would fit right in.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

You've shown you know jackshit about the history of WWII and you're flailing helplessly when shown up by someone with more education and brains than you possess.

Public school education....


It's like listening to someone in a mental institution. He blathers on with innumerable irrelevant details to distract that most of the main points totally elude him. This isn't a catechism. There are tons of details on WWII. But he simply doesn't, in most cases, understand the significance of what any given fact is. He doesn't understand cause-and-effect, what leads to what. It's like I'm listening to a thousand "Hail Marys" and "Our Fathers" but just with random words inserted in there.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

This is what Prostitutional American sounds like.

Hyphenated American said...

exiledonmainstreet:


"But isn't that precisely what Ritmo wants? Dissent? Not permitted. Facts and data? We don't care about that! Flowery words and fine speeches are the important thing! Agree with me or you are a fascist!"

Exactly. This is what I told him. He stupidly believes that a "Dear Leader" like FDR raises the whole economy single-handedly, wins the war, and all that simply because he grabs more power, and more government control, more regulations, more spending. It cannot be because the free people in US free market economy created the strongest, largest economy of all times - no, it's because of the Dear Leader. USA was nothing before FDR - it was all FDR.

And then he talks about "automatons", and free will.

I am starting to wonder if he is computer generated algorithm to demonstrate to the world the stupidity of leftism.

"We support immigrants" - "You, go back to Russia, you don't belong here"
"You cannot stereotype people" - "You are Russian, therefore you are Putin's lackey".
"Killing innocent people is bad" - "Your relatives were dumb for failing to escape from Hitler, let me laugh at them".

And the slogans he is spewing here one after another, complete and utter ignorance of the WW2 - and yet, so much arrogance.

It must be a computer program. A crazy program, written by some right-wing extremist. Cause real human beings, flesh and blood cannot possibly be this stupid. I mean, with this low level IQ, how did he manage to figure out how to breath on this own? If he is indeed human, he is the complete and utter refutation of the Darwin theory of evolution. Any time you hear someone arguing about it - just ask them - how can the theory evolution possibly explain the existence of The Toothless Revolutionary? If theory of evolution is correct, an entity such as that would have died out millions of years ago from multiple system failures - like inability to breath air and maintain itself in vertical position at the same time. The brains of such a creature would be overwhelmed with a sight of a door knob and die from intellectual exhaustion in a futile attempt to figure out its usage.

Anyway, I think it's time for me to go to sleep... Bye. Good talking to you.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Hey, you're the one who brings up how being Russian, etc. colors your whole existence, how it defines you, how you cannot escape it and stop it from controlling your understanding of the world as if you're in a prison. Not me.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Ritmo wrote of Hyphenated American:

"There are many people there who think just like you do. You would fit right in."

Really, Rage Boy? What Hyphenated American wrote here sounds pretty damn American to me:

"How about this one - I want the government to be small and limited. I don't want anyone to be allowed to use coercion to control me - neither business nor the government. I keep my fruits of labor, and I decide who to associate with. It's none of your or governments' business. That's all."

He sounds more American than you, Unhappy Commenter. Why don't you go to France or Sweden? To the social welfare states which are falling apart demographically, and even faster than expected due to Muslim mass migration?

Paris is lovely. Cops everywhere and you still might end up on the wrong side of a semi driven by an ISIS symp, but hey, maybe they'll let you mooch off their welfare state before it crashes into dust. Or Sweden. You're (nominally) male so you don't have to worry about getting raped in Malmo - yet. Give it a go, since Americans west of the Hudson are such a disappointment to you.

I must warn you - there's lots of old people in Europe. The natives, that is. The Muslims are reproducing at a rapid pace but the non-Muslim French, Swedes and Dutch are pretty long in the tooth. I know how you hate old people.

Hyphenated American said...

"Hey, you're the one who brings up how being Russian, etc. colors your whole existence, how it defines you, how you cannot escape it and stop it from controlling your understanding of the world as if you're in a prison. Not me."

This is cute. Now quote me to prove that thesis of yours. If you cannot, please confirm that you were mistaken....

While you are doing this, here is also what you wrote about me:

""Glad to know that you think that a decent education should only be the reserve of the wealthy. ""

Please provide a quote from me that supports this claim. If you cannot, please confirm that you were mistaken.

If you ignore this request, or refuse to provide the quotes from my post to prove your claims, then you are liar, with a dignity of a child rapist. Agreed?

exiledonmainstreet said...

"It must be a computer program. A crazy program, written by some right-wing extremist. Cause real human beings, flesh and blood cannot possibly be this stupid."

Well, now there's a theory.

Although if you think American leftists cannot be that stupid, you haven't spoken to enough American leftists. Believe me, they are really that dense.

Good night also. I am sure that now we are both going to bed, Rage Boy will write about 10 more comments - just to ensure that "he won." Winning!! "I had the last word on the thread!"

His shrink will be so glad to hear the news!

exiledonmainstreet said...

Hyphenated American, Rage Boy has also accused me of being a fascist and a Coughlin type anti-Semite, although I have always made it clear that I am a strong supporter of Israel.

I have asked him for proof. He has none to give.

It is clear that Rage Boy, in his spite and rage, simply pulls stupid accusations and slanders out of his ass and throws them on the thread because he can't argue his way out of a paper bag.

Of course you will not get proof. You'll never get an apology either. He is too immature.

Largo said...

Was it a past incarnation of Ritmo who, to paraphrase, said that his method was basically to shit on a comment thread -- to fou the well for anyone (even those he had no beef with)?

tim in vermont said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tim in vermont said...

It's a lot of work, but you can engage ritmo. But if you don't actually listen to him, or are gonna just throw knee-jerk stuff back at him, all you are going to get from ole kerosene breath is a seeming unending stream of bile. You have to ignore a lot of insults too. You can't be thin skinned. But I would take him over ARM and Unknown Troll as a leftie commenter here you can engage any day.

He is one leftie who did not sell his soul defending the fucking Clintons, who needed to be gone.

tim in vermont said...

Good thing you posted this. Lack of Milo stories was making ARM sort of crazy, walking around the deck clicking marbles together, muttering about the time he proved with "geometric logic" who stole the strawberry ice cream.... Err, I mean that time he successfully disrupted a thread and made it all about him.

Paco Wové said...

"Was it a past incarnation of Ritmo who, to paraphrase, said that his method was basically to shit on a comment thread -- to foul the well for anyone"

Yes, I think your memory is correct. But if TiV thinks he can find diamonds in the sea of infant diarrhea, I guess he's welcome to try.

Anyway, what's important here is that ARM will get a chance to see that Milo fellow he's so fascinated by.

AReasonableMan said...

Whatever happened to that nice young man, Milo?

Paco Wové said...

Don't worry, ARM, you'll get to see him soon! Unless those beastly "anti-fa" people start a riot.

exiledonmainstreet said...

AReasonableMan said...
Whatever happened to that nice young man, Milo?

4/23/17, 8:19 AM

Milo? Oh, he's being falsely accused of wanting to molest children. Dull dishonest imbeciles who believe every lie the media feed them slander him thus.

AReasonableMan said...

I fondly remember the days when he was headlining CPAC and starring at Breitbart, a bright young media superstar bursting out in the right wing media universe. Those days seem so far away now.

AReasonableMan said...

exiledonmainstreet said...
Dull dishonest imbeciles who believe every lie


I agree. It is impressive how these people cannot accept that Milo's fall from grace was mediated by the right not the left. The left played no significant role whatsoever, if we exclude bathing in schadenfreude.

Gahrie said...

Whatever happened to that nice young man, Milo?

He's fucking still hanging out with Anthony Wiener!

exiledonmainstreet said...

tim in vermont said...
"You have to ignore a lot of insults too"

So we're supposed to swallow insults in order to work at engaging Ritmo? I'd be willing to do that if my job was teaching teenagers with mental and emotional handicaps, but why should I show such forbearance toward an Internet commenter? Yeah, he doesn't like the Clintons, which gives him an automatic edge over most of the other leftists here, but the second Trump was announced as president all the people here who Ritmo had been agreeing with for months suddenly became fascist idiots. It was probably a great relief for him to redemonize us. It must have been uncomfortable to be allied, even temporarily with such horrible types, anti-Semites and whatnot.

Robert Cook is so far left he thinks Obama was conservative but at least Cook never resorts to personal insults, so I return the courtesy.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"It is impressive how these people cannot accept that Milo's fall from grace was mediated by the right not the left"

I've had no trouble whatsoever accepting that. The Establishment Republican cucks are not much different from the left, chuck being Exhibit A on this blog. What I called you out for was repeating a lie that that been circulated by both the left and the cuck right.

Angel-Dyne said...

ARM: I agree. It is impressive how these people cannot accept that Milo's fall from grace was mediated by the right not the left. The left played no significant role whatsoever, if we exclude bathing in schadenfreude.

If replaying the Milo vs. the Cucks soap opera over and over in your own mind is what you need to do to protect yourself from having to think about the leftist thugs on the street, and the enablers of these brownshirts in public office, then you do what you gotta do, honey.

Just keep taking slow, deep breaths and repeating to yourself "it's the right that's been shutting down free speech in this country and all over the West", and all the scary, decades' worth of evidence indicating otherwise will stop nagging away at your conscience.

AReasonableMan said...

If you think that you were 'calling me out' you are an even bigger idiot than you appear already. You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. These are Milo's actual words:

"PaulsEgo: The whole consent thing, for me, is, it’s not this black and white thing that people try and paint it. Are there some 13-year-olds out there capable of giving informed consent to have sex with an adult? Probably. But I was also a 13-year-old. I hung around with 13-year-old guys, you know, when I was 13, and there were some of them that still thought girls were f*cking icky at 13. Like not many, but like, they were just coming out of that phase. I don’t know that I was ready at 13 to get f*cked in the *ss by a 28-year-old black drag queen is what I’m saying. So, you can’t, the reason these age of consent laws exist is because we have to set some kind of a barometer here.

Yiannopoulos: I completely understand…

PaulsEgo: We’ve got to pick an age and go, okay, look, this is the age where we can reasonably be assured you’re an adult, you can give informed consent, you understand the risks of pregnancy, all that bullsh*t.

Yiannopoulos: Of course, of course, and I think the law is probably about right, that’s probably roughly the right age, I think it’s probably about okay, but there are certainly people who are capable of giving consent at a younger age, I certainly consider myself to be one of them. People who are sexually active younger. I think it particularly happens in the gay world, by the way. And in many cases, actually, those relationships with older men — this is one of the reasons I hate the left, this sort of stupid, one-size-fits-all policing of culture, this sort of, this arbitrary —

Ben: You know, Milo —

T.J.: Let him talk.

Ben: Oh, I’m sorry. I’m sorry. I was just —

Yiannopoulos: This arbitrary — I’m just gonna — I’ll be quick. This arbitary and oppressive idea of consent which totally destroys, you know, the understanding that many of us have of the complexities and subtleties and complicated nature of many relationships. You know, people are messy and complex, and actually, in the homosexual world particularly, some of those relationships between younger boys and older men, those kind of coming-of-age relationships, the relationships in which those older men help those young boys to discover who they are, and give them security and safety and provide them with love and a reliable — a sort of a rock for when they can’t talk to their parents. Some of those relationships are some of the most —

Unknown: It sounds like priest molestation to me.

Ben: It sounds like Catholic priest molestation to me.

Yiannopoulos: And you know what? I am grateful for Father Michael. I wouldn’t give nearly such good head if it wasn’t for him.

Ben: Oh, my God. Oh, my God, I can’t handle it.

Unknown: What is wrong with you, Ben? Come on?

PaulsEgo: It’s funny because Ben gave me some homework on you, Milo, he gave a few videos to watch to brush up on my Miloisms, and one of the things you said in one of these clips was that transgenderism is the new, you know, frontier of, you know, rights, my wording is bad here, but, um, you know, it’s the new frontier of social progress and the next thing in line is gonna be pedophilia – and yet, here you are talking about how, look, you know, some of these kids that get diddled by these priests, I mean, it’s a good thing for them! They’re getting this love! Now they are also getting a d*ck —

Yiannopoulos: You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to someone 13 years old who is sexually mature.

PaulsEgo: OK, ephebophilia or whatever.

Yiannopoulos: Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty. Pedophilia is attraction to people who don’t have functioning sex organs yet, who have not gone through puberty, who are too young to be able to understand the way their bodies —

Unknown: Ann Coulter.

Yiannopoulos: That is not what we’re talking about.

AReasonableMan said...

T.J.: Ann Coulter.

PaulsEgo: Sure, granted.

Yiannopoulos: You don’t understand what pedophilia is if you think that I’m defending it, ’cause I’m certainly not.

PaulsEgo: No, no, no. I’m not saying you’re defending it, I’m saying you’re walking the borderline.

Yiannopoulos: No it’s not. You said I was defending it, and you’re wrong.

PaulsEgo: OK, OK, fine. I retract my statement, Milo. I retract my statement. I shan’t slander you further. But you are advocating for cross-generational relationships here, can we be honest about that?

Yiannopoulos: Yeah, I don’t mind saying, I don’t mind admitting that, and I think particularly in the gay world – and outside, the Catholic Church, if that’s where some of you want to go with this – I think in the gay world, some of the most important, enriching and incredibly, you know, life-affirming, important, shaping relationships very often between younger boys and older men, they can be hugely positive experiences for those young boys, they can even save those young boys from desolation, from suicide, from drug addiction, all those things, provided they’re consensual. Provided they’re consensual.

Paco Wové said...

ARM — AlwaysRememberingMilo. Don't worry, ARM, if the lefty thugs let you through, I'm sure Milo will autograph your picture of him.

AReasonableMan said...

Angel-Dyne said...
Just keep taking slow, deep breaths and repeating to yourself "it's the right that's been shutting down free speech in this country and all over the West", and all the scary, decades' worth of evidence indicating otherwise will stop nagging away at your conscience.


I don't find the people who protest Coulter or Milo's talks the slightest bit scary. They are too stupid to be scary since all they are doing is advancing the financial agenda of the other two idiots. Coulter and Milo are not serious people. These are Coulter's book titles.

Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism

If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans

How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)

In Trump We Trust


She is an empty-headed provocateur, an attention whore. There is no real free speech issue here, since she already gets a bigger megaphone than most people, as did Milo until the right took it away.

It is reasonable for the university to deny giving the imprimatur of their organization to someone who wants to speak on campus about how all Jews and gays should be rounded up and placed in gas ovens. Personally, I would let them speak but the institution is not obligated by any law to host such a speaker. Where exactly you place the line on these issues is a matter for debate within the institution.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

It's a lot of work, but you can engage ritmo. But if you don't actually listen to him, or are gonna just throw knee-jerk stuff back at him, all you are going to get from ole kerosene breath is a seeming unending stream of bile.

Thanks, Tim!

There are tons of conservatives and even Republicans I respect and engage with well. It just takes a willingness on their part to show me that they're either decent people or have something to contribute. I don't suffer fools gladly however and get just as over-the-top as they're willing to go (check out mainstreet's comments and let me know if anyone really thinks they're in any way civil or engaging. And unfortunately HA was just letting off a whole lot of personal stuff and no longer interested in engaging in a way that taught him or me anything. It's hard to engage people who are that obsessed with their agenda).

But the thing is, if someone is that fixated with their agenda that they refuse to see beyond it and engage with me as a person, I find it dangerous and disingenuous to give in. When people are like that, they are immune to looking kindly upon anyone who chooses to "take the high road." They won't give in or give an inch, even for the second to indulge the mere possibility that a fellow citizen's a good, decent, interesting or whatever person who simply has a different view. If people aren't willing to see and deal with you as a human being, then it's wrong to offer the same. Or maybe it's not like that in all cases. But excessively indulging people that distracted by the aim of dehumanizing you does no one any favors.

I remember a quote by Bill Clinton at the end of the intern scandal when he was asked by reporters in the Rose Garden if he was willing to forgive his political tormenters. He was about to walk away, then slowly turned back around and said, (something along the lines of): "I think anyone who wants to be forgiven, needs to be willing to offer it in return."

You can think what you want of Bill Clinton and his foibles and abuses and shortcomings and all that. But I'd be damned if that doesn't completely sum up the way to treat people whose only interaction with you is political.

Thanks.

AReasonableMan said...

Paco Wové said...
lefty thugs


Fortunately the right only contains upstanding citizens like Nathan Damigo.

Daily caller said...
"Damigo is an Iraq war veteran and a convicted felon. He served five years in prison for armed robbery after pointing a gun at the head of San Diego taxi driver Changiz Ezzatyar. Damigo took $43 from the driver. He also reportedly said the driver “looked Iraqi.”

Prison was a lonely time for Damigo, he told the Los Angeles Times last year.

“That’s when I finally started looking at the more intellectual roots and started researching books and literature on race and identity,” Damigo said.

A book by former Ku Klux Klan imperial wizard David Duke touched Damigo deeply."

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Yeah, he doesn't like the Clintons, which gives him an automatic edge over most of the other leftists here, but the second Trump was announced as president all the people here who Ritmo had been agreeing with for months suddenly became fascist idiots.

Only the second that they proved as unwilling to criticize and hold Trump accountable as the leftists you complain about were willing to do to Clinton.

Do you not see the abject hypocrisy in your statement? How the heck do you expect anyone to work at a level so much lower than you're willing to work at? You identify a bar, set it, and then automatically violate it.

Standards for others but not for you? Nope, that's not something that others can work with. It's why your Congress's approval ratings and Trump's are in the gutter. One-way standards for respectful engagement are nonsense and automatically disqualify for you for respectful treatment in kind.

How complex is that? It's like you can't even understand basic kindergarten manners. The sense of entitlement of habitual golden rule violators is legendary and not a negotiable road block. You remind me of both Hillary and Trump with the way you choose to behave. And I give the benefit of the doubt to neither.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Just as a short summary:

The fact that Trump ran on and won based on an economic appeal to how hollowed out our country is - despite having the GDP per capita or otherwise or not that we do - is all a Trump supporter needs to know to understand that GDP is NOT the only metric of a nation's power, wealth, or whatever it is that they thought made our victory in WWII ready-made and inevitable.

Entire industries needed to be shifted away from their purpose. This took time.

Now, today Republicans bitch and moan endlessly about how how catastrophic and disruptive it would be to shift our energy industries to renewable sources. How it would just be completely disastrous! and horrible and not possible and all the rest.

But in WWII we shifted all of Detroit (and several other industries) completely to weapons, military etc. manufacture within something like a year or so. It wasn't inevitable and took a lot of effort - but it was done. And in a fraction of the time it would take to transition our energy sector in a way to keep the planet sustainable and habitable. This, we cannot do. But somehow, we didn't need to shift America's manufacturing sectors 180 degrees in WWII.

The Republican mindset exemplified by mainstreet and Soviet American is nothing if not completely incoherent.

Eventually even the word "incoherent" is an act of charity. Full of s#$%^ is so much more accurate.

AReasonableMan said...

What ever happened to the nice woman, exile? After repeating calling me a liar she disappears when faced with the prospect of defending Milo's actual words. And, I don't give shit what he says because to me he is just an empty-headed provocateur with a financial agenda.

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to someone 13 years old who is sexually mature."

That is true. It's "ephebophilia or whatever." Milo did not say he wants the age of consent changed or that he wants to fuck 13 year olds. He said that he thought, in his case, that it was a positive experience for him.

For the record, I think Milo's comments were stupid and ill-advised, but there is no evidence that he has molested minors.

And Milo's comments are very similar to ones made by George Takei during interview with Howard Stern:

"On the Howard Stern Show, Takei shared details of his first sexual experience with the host and co-host Robin Quivers, who gleefully enjoyed his retelling of how he, as a 13-year-old boy, was molested by an “18- or 19”-year-old counselor at summer camp at Lake Arrowhead in Los Angeles.

Takei, who said he lost his virginity to the older man, talked about how he found the counselor sexually attractive in retrospect, and described him as “experienced.” He said it was the first time he’d ever done anything sexual and did not know he was gay at the time.

Stern and Quivers poked and prodded at Takei about his experience, speaking of the sexual assault by the older man as if it were an episode of an erotic Letter to Penthouse.

Takei hasn’t made any public comments about Milo’s current crisis, but he doesn’t appear to be a fan of the conservative shock jock: A few days prior to the emergence of Milo’s video, Takei attacked Bill Maher for having Milo on his HBO show."

Takei is still shilling for Taco Bell and Target. But then, he's liberal.

https://heatst.com/entertainment/george-takei-spoke-glowingly-about-being-molested-as-young-teen-by-older-man/

"It's OK when we do it."

The real white elephant in the room is the question of how many gay men have had the same experience? If it is common, is it a good idea to let gay men be Scoutmasters? What you would say about a straight guy who was dying to take 13 year old Girl Scouts out on camping trips?

exiledonmainstreet said...

"It's why your Congress's approval ratings and Trump's are in the gutter."

Trumps approval ratings have been climbing and are now at 49%. That's not great, but it's not in the gutter.

President-Mom-Jeans said...

"I guess your ancestors weren't smart enough to get out while the getting out was good. Pity."

It is statements like this that make me wish that Bitchmo would get a General Pinnochete style helicopter ride

AReasonableMan said...

exiledonmainstreet said...
For the record, I think Milo's comments were stupid and ill-advised,


And equally self-evidently, ARM did not distort the meaning of those words or published reports of those words.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 235   Newer› Newest»