By Here is a posting for all of you who think the Republicans have learned their lesson about spending and earmarks:
The Senate’s old bulls are preparing to beat back what they see as a direct affront to their authority: a movement by House Republican leaders and conservative senators to force Capitol Hill to end its appetite for pork….
But Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, along with other Senate leaders from both parties, say that earmarking is a constitutional right and senatorial privilege and show little interest in relinquishing the decades-long practice of inserting pet projects into appropriations bills…
“As I think all of you know, you can eliminate every congressional earmark and save no money,” the Republican leader said. “It’s really an argument about discretion.” [Via This Ain't Hell]
It is really going to be interesting to see what happens in the next two years if the Republicans are actually going to cut the amount of government spending or just pretend and then blame Democrats for not being able to?
“Tired of watching politicians make a mess? You can help clean it up. Earn your Masters in Public Administration online and begin your government career.”
8:22 pm on November 6th, 2010 1
They can start reducing the deficit by NOT extending the 700 billion dollar bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans.
8:34 pm on November 6th, 2010 2
It is impossible. Two sides of the same coin. We are firmly in the grips of a plutocracy. Republocrats like to watch us scurry about. They put on a good show for us but it's almost pointless. It doesn't matter who we elect; they are all in the same club. The fundamental change in our society and politics would require a major upheaval.
9:04 pm on November 6th, 2010 3
Here's an example: Millions of American Citizens and Illegal Aliens are out of work in America. The labor pool has floated across the oceans to China, India, etc. Why? FOR INCREASING CORPORATE PROFITS. The labor cost in India are 1/5 that for an American Software Engineer. That means instead of paying an American $100,000 in salary and another $25,000 in benefits, payroll tax, etc; you can pay some dude in India $20,000. Get the picture? THAT ISN'T GOING ANYWHERE, IT'S HERE TO STAY. NOT THE US CORPORATIONS ARE WHINING ABOUT PAYING CORPORATE TAXES AND THE ONLY TO INCREASE JOBS IN AMERICA IS TO CUT THE CORPORATE TAXES. HOW WILL THAT RETURN JOBS TO AMERICA? IT WON'T, IT WILL SIMPLY INCREASE THE PROFIT MARGIN. THE ONLY SOLUTION IS QUITE SIMPLE: LEVY TARIFS ON IMPORTED GOODS. "OH THAT WILL RUIN THE ECONOMY" YOU SAY. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT, YOU'RE BRAINWASHED! THE AUTO INDUSTRY DID IT TO FOREIGN AUTO MAKERS STARTING IN 1948 AND THE TARIFS ARE STILL IN PLACE.
Americans believe what their told. We are too lazy to comprehend what is going on and are satisfied with what were told. Don't forget, we're running out of oil, but there is no demand for an electric car. Companies can't compete with imports because their labor prices are too low. Americans won't do the jobs Mexicans will.
Wake up people.
9:33 pm on November 6th, 2010 4
If the Republicans can worry less about Obama and the past sins of the Democrats and worry more about THE ECONOMY and jobs, they will sweep the next elections.
Sadly, they will likely chase after a lot of ideological and partisan goal… which will accomplish nothing except to further enrage American citizens (not necessarily a bad thing) and ensure Obama's presidency is remembered as the worst in American history.
There seems to be little difference in Republicans and Democrats these days… except by which ideological route they achieve their goals for a larger, more controlling and more intrusive government… and the destruction of small business and the middle class.
…and, for the most part, the lifestyle they choose to legislate for the population, from gun control to conservation to healthcare to taxation, they craftily avoid for themselves.
I would like to believe patriotic Americans will march upon Washington DC with raised pitchforks someday and set things right… but the capacity for a population to accept a life of hopelessness and virtual enslavement to the "elite" as long as they have a TV can be demonstrated over and over again… starting in the Philippines, of course.
The Tea Party was a good start… but it has been hijacked by a radicalized Republican-backed Love God, Hate Muslims and Hate Obama agenda… losing its libertarian focus on smaller government, fiscal responsibility, etc.
I expect NOTHING good from government for the next 2 years… and, unless the Republicans (or, even more unlikely, the Democrats) can run somebody worth the skin they inhabit, it's likely the next 6 years will see miserable legislative gymnastics as everybody tries to keep the financial/housing/banking/stock/corporate/social security/military spending/health care/etc shell game going for yet another election cycle.
And, eventually it will be too late… although, in history, when untenable situations arose, the drums of war begin to beat.
It was nice knowing you, America. I hope we can meet again.
9:45 pm on November 6th, 2010 5
As long as corporations are "people" and can donate untold sums anonymously, our democracy is in serious jeopardy.
The GOP is too beholden to too many groups, such that they won't be able to reduce the deficit by much at all. The Waygook Effect is right: We need to end the $700 billion tax cuts for the highest income levels (those folks will still get a tax cut for their first 200 grand or so).
We as a society need to decide on a baseline quality of living and services — and I believe that the market failure of health insurance and the public health imperative of the government puts national health insurance on the baseline services side, along with decent public education — and then do our best to privatize everything else where privatization wouldn't be a market failure (e.g., production of antibiotics would be a public good to be funded).
If they really thought about it, that should appeal to a lot of Democrats and Republicans.
11:06 pm on November 6th, 2010 6
When i see Congress and the Senate take a 30% paycut, I will be hopefull. Not before.
11:13 pm on November 6th, 2010 7
US is beyond corrupt. You can buy elected officials with money to advocate your selfish goals, and it's all legal. And then you have the voters who demand entitlements as if they're entitled to be spoon fed. The elected are just giving what they're being asked to give which are generous entitlements. Without them there will be blood on the streets. Maybe you should stop blaming the government, but blame yourselves and your culture of entitlements, American people. It's no wonder why the US is in serious trouble, everybody is in it for themselves.
11:15 pm on November 6th, 2010 8
"We as a society need to decide on a baseline quality of living and services."
You will never get an agreement on this. As a cold heartless Basta** I believe in a helping hand to get back on your feet.
Many kind good people think that if you are too stressed out to work you deserve a house, a car, food money, and free health care without an end date because the rich are rich and that's not right.
11:19 pm on November 6th, 2010 9
This time we don't have to lead. We can sit on the sidelines and watch for a little while. Let's see how it works out for the Europeans.
Of course they are poor models for ourselves. They are (cue scary music) socialists. The French are the most socialist, and much more prone to taking to the streets and calling for revolution. They are in fits of protests right now. They won't tolerate increasing their 35 hour work week or their retirement age from 60 to 62, on top of national 10% spending cuts.
The Brits are much less socialist than the French and are proposing much more severe spending cuts. But British people are also much more stoic and much less prone to protest anything. They will likely take they hardships with the characteristic stiff upper lip.
But we, Americans. What can I say about us? Who knows? What we do know is we seem to be unwilling to sacrifice anything in recent times. During World War II, we went on a national austerity effort. There was rationing and everyone pitched in. But after 9/11, the president said, 'Go about your business. We'll handle it.' It was a job for the professional; the all volunteer military. Few Americans felt an obligation to sacrifice anything except for some of our civil liberties (the Patriot Act) and our values (enhanced interrogations). We wanted our tax cuts at the same time we were doing sham budgeting for wars with supplemental budget requests.
We were a credit card nation. Now, when asked to pay the bills everyone is pointing fingers and saying, 'not me.' Last year we heard nonsensical things about socialism and 'Keep the government off my Medicare!' And, had you noticed noticed, during the campaigns, anytime a candidate was cornered and asked what spending they would cut, they started talking about something called waste. Most economists will tell you that whatever waste there is is a pittance compared to the real elephants in the room; entitlements and defense spending.
So, what's my role in this? What am I willing to sacrifice?
* I am willing to pay more taxes. No one ever believes they make enough money, neither do I. But, I give to charities and I am will to give more in taxes. Why? Because I believe it is good for the country.
* Entitlements. I am a military retiree. That pay is based on the same system as Social Security. Last year, because of post oil price deflation, we had no COLA increase. This year we won't either because the CPI was flat again. I am willing to go a few more years without COLA increases. Why? Because I believe it is good for the country.
* Defense spending. Large parts of my 401(k) are from defense companies I've worked for. They have lost about 15% over the last 2 years because of the overall bad economy. I know that more defense spending will be good for my bottom line. But I also know that we can't continue spending the way we have been on defense. We need to, at least, bring it back down to where it was prior to 9/11, which was about 50% of what it is now. Why? Because I believe it is good for the country.
11:24 pm on November 6th, 2010 10
I tried to submit something on this but it is being blocked and I have no idea why.
We really do need a set of rules for what passes and doesn't pass the spam filter.
11:32 pm on November 6th, 2010 11
I keep saying: Move Fort Hood to the border. Use Mexico as a Live Fire Range.
Political Correctness has caused great damage in and to America.
Does anyone like the rich family that lives in the area? No. Does everyone what to be somewhat friendly with them? Yes. Who would love to see the rich family have some trouble? Everyone. Unless it gets too bad and starts brings down their Home value.
But America had a good run—before Political Correctness.
11:35 pm on November 6th, 2010 12
#9 Use your imagination and be creative. It's part of the challenge.
filter pwned
11:48 pm on November 6th, 2010 13
#7 Betty, I agree with you. Don't stop saying it.
12:00 am on November 7th, 2010 14
I find that Americans are not as c*cky and Korea bashing as they used to be. Is this the reason why?
I know, it's pretty embarrassing to admit the "dirty smelly filthy crap filled country" called Korea is doing much better than the US, with a much better hope for the future than any Americans can dream of.
I hear Hyundai is going to shift factory jobs to produce small cars to the US plants to take advantage of the cheap labor over there. Look at all the Korean factories going up left, right, and center, right in the United States. What do you guys mean when you say your jobs are getting shipped overseas to poor dirty countries like Korea with low living standards? Look around you, smell the coffee! You have been passed by already, and you are seriously behind!
12:07 am on November 7th, 2010 15
Tom's comment is worth comment… because it is correct.
America has become a land of entitlement.
We were all raised on the idea that we were all special… gifted… and destined for easy success as rock stars, CEOs and millionaires. We were all promised that we would make more by working less than our fathers and grandfathers. We would all wear suits and ties and tell people what to do.
And we believed it.
We deserved better cars and bigger houses and fancier electronics and higher class entertainment than the previous generation… and, even if we couldn't afford it, we bought it on credit… and upgraded on the corporate schedule pushed onto us through the media.
Yet still we wanted more. Free health care, more services, bigger retirements…
…and war, lots and lots of war… not just expensive overseas wars with expensive weapons systems but expensive domestic wars with few results… War on Drugs, War on Terror, War on Poverty.
And we wanted this done by paying less in taxes and opening free trade so we could buy Chinese goods cheaply at Walmart… and self-storage business boomed as even the McMansions filled to capacity with clutter.
And, like personal finances, we allowed the government to run bigger and bigger debt… but nobody cared because it didn't affect them. The rich stayed rich, the poor got their handouts and the middle class stayed in front of the TV glued to Dances With the Stars and did their Walmart shopping once a week to buy crap they didn't need with money they didn't have to impress people they didn't like.
And, pretty soon, handouts became the norm. Now, it is possible to use use Section 8 housing subsidy to live in a McMansion that a working family can't afford.
And, somewhere along the line, it became clear that more money could be made by holding your hand out than by actually working.
So, we allow non-Americans to divide our country and dilute our common culture and goals to "do the jobs Americans won't do"… because even the dumbest welfare queen knows it is better to make money parked in front of the TV than pick lettuce all day.
And the scope of entitlements grew… from the truly poor and disabled to those with dubious physical and mental issues, non-citizens, those who made chronic poor life choices, capable people who fell into some manufactured disadvantaged category, etc.
And this culture of entitlement somehow went from the poor to the lower middle and now to the middle class… who (perhaps rightly) feels that if a government program is available, it is foolish not to take advantage of it since everyone else is… and it leaves more money to pay on the credit cards… or buy that new flashy-noisy-crap-from-China that all my friends are buying.
Somewhere along the way, the values of working hard, working smart, regular savings, sacrifice today for future reward, getting a meaningful education, etc., were lost… and meMeMEnowNowNOW replaced it.
Yeah. That works for a decade or three depending on how the cards are rearranged to head off each new, and increasingly severe, crisis. But that probably won't work forever.
With the globalization that allowed cheap products to flood American markets and increase American buying power came the globalization of the job market… which leaves agriculture, services and retail. And even with the quick fix of cheap imported labor combined with more entitlements for I-Won't-Do-That-Job Americans, that probably won't work forever either.
There are solutions to much of this. They will be welcome by those who still believe in the American dream… but they will be painful for the loud minority of incapable people raised in an atmosphere of institutionalized dependence.
Most likely, the situation in America will have to get very, very bad before the public pulls itself away from the TV and truly demands change on such a scale that entrenched politicians can't subvert the rage.
So, maybe a completely screwed up administration or two is what is needed to bring it about quickly and get on the path to recovery while the culture of the American Dream is still alive… rather than a long "managed decline" where only the oldest people talk about the Good Old Days.
Whatever happens, it will be painful for all.
You may get your wish, Tom, of an American crash… but I'm not sure you are going to like it.
12:19 am on November 7th, 2010 16
I tried to say something about entitlements in my comment that was blocked.
While I am sure we are not going to crash and we are showing signs of recovering, we will also have to start coming to terms with the fact that we must get used to some new normals.
12:24 am on November 7th, 2010 17
Self explanatory:
GDP per capita
USA $48,000
ROK $27,100
nK $1,800 US
12:35 am on November 7th, 2010 18
"You may get your wish, Tom, of an American crash… but I’m not sure you are going to like it."
You have to forgive me for it Chickenhead, but I waited about two decades to see this day. I heard all the gloating and Korea bashings when Korea went through 1997 crisis with the IMF bailout. They said Korea will never recover again, and reminded how utterly hopelessly corrupt and crooked Koreans, as a culture was. I thought I would never see the day when I can Koreans have a better future and will have a better standard of living than your average American, at least not in my life time. But here I am, saying it. Redemption is sweet.
"While I am sure we are not going to crash and we are showing signs of recovering, we will also have to start coming to terms with the fact that we must get used to some new normals." -Joec
Unfortunately for America, there are just too many Americans who just don't get it, like this poster. I feel sorry for you Chickenhead, you deserve much better. Maybe you should abandon your American citizenship and save yourself.
12:39 am on November 7th, 2010 19
GDP per capita
USA $48,000
ROK $27,100
nK $1,800 US
That was about four weeks ago. Have you checked your value of your dollar lately?
How much of that "$48,000" is just debt? After all, I can take $10,000 out of my credit card and put it into my bank account and I'm instantly rich (for the moment).
The way the dollar is sinking, that per capita income position could reverse by next year.
12:58 am on November 7th, 2010 20
Keep hoping! I think you missed the point but that's ok. I'd suggest you wait for your gloating time until it actually happens though.
1:06 am on November 7th, 2010 21
I don't have to keep on hoping!
You guys are continuing to mess it up and doing the job on yourselves with your stubbornness to not change.
1:09 am on November 7th, 2010 22
Yes, in theory the GOP can reduce spending, once the Wars overseas wind down.
Nobody considered the costs involved when they started the wars. A substantial # of Vets are coming back and claiming disability, like 50%.
WW2, Korea, WW1, had nowhere the # of Vet claims. Maybe a sense of entitlement felt by the general population.
The cost of the Military to include the Veterans administration has skyrocketed.
For the same prewar costs, a much leaner force can be sustained.
The Dems already have a plan to spend the savings from ending the war, Social programs including Health Care. The Republicans can delay that.
Eisenhower warned of the out of control Military Industrial Complex!
I know of many people hired as GS because of the Army restructuring, all opportunists, buddies get jobs for buddies, GS11 above with LQA, legacy costs of the war for the next 50 years total in the millions.
Who's gonna pay for that? The "Good Money Mint Ferry"?
1:16 am on November 7th, 2010 23
"Who’s gonna pay for that?"
Bernanke. He's borrows from treasury, then he prints more money to pay back what he just borrowed. Then he starts all over again tomorrow when he prints $600 billion just like that.
What's $600 billion, or one trillion, or 10 trillion? Why not make it 100 trillion? 
This is just too funny. But it's awsome how the US is allowed to do that, after all, how many people can get into serious debt, then print monopoly money to pay it off, and start the cycle all over again? Yup. You guys are done.
3:23 am on November 7th, 2010 24
Tom 17 & 22, I do agree. The MSM and others are always quick to say a country or party are "done", untill it is America. Then the JoeC's of America simply say, well we are in trouble but we will not collapse.
America needs to collapse — for a while. To wake people up to reality. Nothing is free. Someone pays.
Ole tanker, you're correct also. I know a few that are making six figurs in Kuwait, doing the job an E4 could do for 20K. Also those that are actively increasing their disabilities from 20% to over 50, with the goal of reaching 100%.
It will be painfull for many. At least my stuff is paid for.
I wonder how much America spends on other countries. What would the saving be if America stopped that outflow of cash.
Then make welfair checks only on conditions of some form of work for the government. Park cleanup for example. urine test for government checks also.
Weigh-ins also. Fat people getting food stamps is just wrong.
Paycuts for Congress is number one on my list. Along with the bennies.
3:53 am on November 7th, 2010 25
Tom Wrong again.
*Here is how the US and Korea protect the auto manufactures:
"…As for actual import duties, the United States imposes a 2.5 percent tariff on passenger cars and auto parts coming here from Korea. Korean tariffs on the same products are 8.5 percent…."
At present, there is a 25% U.S. tariff on light trucks. Any wonder?
All this excludes NTBs (nontarrif barriers) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-tariff_barriers_…
Tom Wrong, another free lesson….
4:00 am on November 7th, 2010 26
You all are doomed from your own hubris. Just more agitprop from Tianjin Tom.
Tom, what about all those people around you in Toronto? They're suffering up there, too, yet your glee at how badly the US is falling pays no mind to the suffering of folks up there all around you. If I'm wrong and you are not Chinese agitprop, then you are a borderline sociopath. At the very least a pathological misanthrope.
As for some of the rest of you, I think it's quite dismaying that you place the blame for America's woes on the backs of the poor, those people with their hands out, as some of you put it.
The problem with entitled society is actually up on top, where the people who do squeeze money, benefits that will make them more money, or opportunities that "earn" them even more money, then take so much of that wealth — which was typically produced by the middle-class or the working poor, the ones you say always have their hand out with entitlements — and put it into things that do very little for the public good.
They earned it, you say, as if the guy who made a million bucks in 2010 actually worked at Starbucks or Safeway for 100,000 hours this year.
Retired GI blames PC, but he should look at the Gini coefficient of the US. We used to have a society where if you worked hard or had clever ideas or innovated well, you had an incentive to put it into action and make more money, maybe ten times more than in your regular job, but now the incentive is to game the system to earn 1000 or 10,000 times more. But what are you producing? Nothing. You're gaming the system.
Think of it as the difference between buying a home for you to live in, and buying a home you can flip and then use the money earned on that to keep flipping more homes. It's a Ponzi scheme. And it all fell down on top of us.
You're advocating redistribution of wealth, you might say, but no we already have that. We have redistribution of wealth upwards into the hands of the people who already have lots of it.
The Republicans get votes for their upward redistribution of wealth policies because they cry out, God! Jesus! America! Gun rights! to pull the wool over the eyes of people who will then vote for them even though ultimately a vote for the upward wealth redistributing GOP is counter to their own interests and the interests of the country. As a Christian, I find that appalling.
Jesus was a socialist, by the way.
Hey, Tom, what job did you have when the economy fell out from under us? I was in my 20s then; 1997 was the worst year of my life. But the knowledge that it was tough but we got through it has given me hope here in America, where the economic crisis has been biting me in the ass since 2009.
4:00 am on November 7th, 2010 27
You all are doomed from your own hubris. Just more agitprop from Tianjin Tom.
Tom, what about all those people around you in Toronto? They're suffering up there, too, yet your glee at how badly the US is falling pays no mind to the suffering of folks up there all around you. If I'm wrong and you are not Chinese agitprop, then you are a borderline sociopath. At the very least a pathological misanthrope.
As for some of the rest of you, I think it's quite dismaying that you place the blame for America's woes on the backs of the poor, those people with their hands out, as some of you put it.
The problem with entitled society is actually up on top, where the people who do squeeze money, benefits that will make them more money, or opportunities that "earn" them even more money, then take so much of that wealth — which was typically produced by the middle-class or the working poor, the ones you say always have their hand out with entitlements — and put it into things that do very little for the public good.
They earned it, you say, as if the guy who made a million bucks in 2010 actually worked at Starbucks or Safeway for 100,000 hours this year.
Retired GI blames PC, but he should look at the Gini coefficient of the US. We used to have a society where if you worked hard or had clever ideas or innovated well, you had an incentive to put it into action and make more money, maybe ten times more than in your regular job, but now the incentive is to game the system to earn 1000 or 10,000 times more. But what are you producing? Nothing. You're gaming the system.
Think of it as the difference between buying a home for you to live in, and buying a home you can flip and then use the money earned on that to keep flipping more homes. It's a Ponzi scheme. And it all fell down on top of us.
You're advocating redistribution of wealth, you might say, but no we already have that. We have redistribution of wealth upwards into the hands of the people who already have lots of it.
The Republicans get votes for their upward redistribution of wealth policies because they cry out, God! Jesus! America! Gun rights! to pull the wool over the eyes of people who will then vote for them even though ultimately a vote for the upward wealth redistributing GOP is counter to their own interests and the interests of the country. As a Christian, I find that appalling.
Jesus was a socialist, by the way.
Hey, Tom, what job did you have when the economy fell out from under us? I was in my 20s then; 1997 was the worst year of my life. But the knowledge that it was tough but we got through it has given me hope here in America, where the economic crisis has been biting me in the butt since 2009.
5:11 am on November 7th, 2010 28
#24,
Lemmy, so what does this got to do with what we're talking about?
5:50 am on November 7th, 2010 29
Agreed. Kushibo's comment sounds suspiciously like "To each according to his needs," and we all know how well that worked out for China, Russia, Cuba, etc. It's not the money spent on public assistance but the permanent dependence on it and the facilitation of higher fertility for poor women compared to their middle-class counterparts, who either tighten their budgets to accommodate a new child or get their tubes tied. Public assistance also devalues marriage and fatherhood. Unmarried women can game the system by collecting WIC, food stamps, and other benefits while getting cash payments from their baby daddies. The big problem isn't the money – it's the unstable home enviroments that foster children with severe behavioral problems, children who are likely to grow up to become drug addicts or prison inmates. We need to evaluate cause-effect relationships between public assistance and fertility choices of people without stable jobs or partners. Enabling people to make irresponsible choices isn't compassionate. Thank goodness the failing Vietnam War kept Johnson from running again. Imagine if he had had another four years to saddle us with even more social engineering entitlement programs.
My beef with Republican spending cuts is that they won't touch our bloated, unsustainable global military empire. Like Chickenhead, I have lost faith in both major parties, and last week I cast my first votes for Libertarian candidates. I have issues with some elements of Libertarian philosophy and with some Libertarian politicians themselves, but they are the only party that is serious about shrinking the size and power of our federal government.
6:04 am on November 7th, 2010 30
Sonagi wrote:
Kushibo’s comment sounds suspiciously like “To each according to his needs,” and we all know how well that worked out for China, Russia, Cuba, etc.
What horseshit. Other than saying a baseline of basic services should include national health care, I mentioned precious little else and I suggested most everything else could be privatized. How is that like communism? That's far more like a whole bunch of Western countries, not China, Russia, or Cuba.
Really, Sonagi, I sort of expected a more thoughtful response that smearing someone as a Marxist.
6:15 am on November 7th, 2010 31
Retired GI wrote:
When i see Congress and the Senate take a 30% paycut, I will be hopefull. Not before.
You do realize that things like that are just window-dressing meant to obscure what's really going on, right?
How about a system where Congress's salary is tied to the budget? They get their currently salary if the budget is balanced, but it goes up if they've gone in the black, and it goes down commensurate with how much of a deficit they're running.
6:28 am on November 7th, 2010 32
Fat people cannot live off stored fat alone. There are essential nutrients like vitamin C which are not stored in the body. If people do not get adequate daily protein, they will cannibalize their own muscle tissue to get the essential amino acids needed for the body's metabolic functions. It is people using food stamps to buy low-nutrient foods like chips, cookies, and sodas, including diet sodas, that is wrong. New York tried to ban junk food from the list of items covered by food stamps and got accused of patronizing poor people and infringing on their personal choices. The very purpose of food stamps and WIC is to ensure adequate NUTRITION. Before anyone starts in about junk food being cheap, let me quote a couple price comparisons:
one gallon of reverse osmosis filtered water = 39 cents
one two-liter of Coke = $1.80
one head of cabbage = 79 cents a pound
one pound of carrots = $1
one pound bag of frozen broccoli florets = $1.50
one 12 oz. bag of Doritos = $2.50
one 20-oz bag of Ore-Ida French fries = $2.69
one dozen medium eggs = 89 cents
one 10.5 oz. box of Fruity Pebbles = $2.59
6:31 am on November 7th, 2010 33
You guys can't even agree on where things are going wrong.
There's no unity, everyone for themselves, nobody wants to make a sacrifice, everyone looking at each other. 
So much for a culture based on individuality and innovation. I thought you guys were far better than us group think inferior lemmings with inferior culture? What happened? 
6:33 am on November 7th, 2010 34
That "precious little else" included the phrase "baseline quality of living." If that phrase did not mean guaranteed food and housing, then what did it mean?
6:37 am on November 7th, 2010 35
Sonagi wrote:
Hear! Hear!
(By the way, one of the baselines I had in mind was ensuring affordable access to healthy food supplies. Not sure if the Cubans do that.)
Accused by whom? I'm pretty sure if you follow the money trail, you'll see big corporate pressure from groups that see sales of their "food" products dropping as a result of such health-oriented policies.
The corporate tie-ins — often invisible and often a quid pro quo for campaign contributions — is why you see things like this:
While Warning About Fat, U.S. Pushes Cheese Sales
Full public funding of election campaigns, to include free television air time for candidates above a certain level of support (say, signatures, party affiliation) and harsh fines for giving money to candidates.
Get the corporations' self-serving interests away from our government.
6:49 am on November 7th, 2010 36
Sonagi wrote:
For starters, even if that's what I did mean (and it's not quite what I had in mind), isn't that practiced in loads of non-communist countries, including to some degree in the US (it is in Hawaii).
Baseline quality of living could mean a lot of different things, which I deliberately left out because… wait for it… I said it was something "we as a society need to decide."
We might reach a consensus (as most have) that decent free education is part of that baseline, and then we work on a national debate to decide how to do that (charter schools, ceilings on classroom size, etc.). A level or type of national health care might be part of it, and then we decide if we want something like South Korea, Taiwan, Canada, the UK, France, etc.
I would put affordable access to decent housing, healthy food, and public transportation high on my list of those things. Access to decent affordable housing doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as subsidized or free housing (ditto with the food). It might mean enforcing regulations that already exist, but in some areas it might mean subsidies for construction.
I'm not a Marxist. I am a big believer in the incentive of a more comfortable life as an incentive for hard work, innovation, and improvement of society. But that's hard to come by when the floor can fall out from under you at any time, hence the concept of a baseline (emphasis on its basic nature). Beyond that, if you want comfort, prestige, etc., you should work for it, but you should also have the opportunity to work. Just as distributing all the wealth to the poor is bad for society, so is distributing so much of it to the rich, which is what we do right now.
The guy "earning" $1 million didn't work 100,000 hours in Safeway; he used means he already had — many of which were probably handed to him or easily obtained in ways most others have no access to — to turn wealth into more wealth. That does not make for a healthy society either.
6:52 am on November 7th, 2010 37
I have a better ideal. Just nuke your place and start over from scratch.
6:52 am on November 7th, 2010 38
It is a pity there is so little debate in this country anymore. People go to their media sources that speak to the viewpoints they already have, and that's all they hear. The left believes corporations and the rich are all evil, and the right smears anyone who tries to help out the little guy as a socialist. Each side is represented not by thoughtful people in the middle but by screamers from the left or the right.
It's a sad state of affairs. Listen to PBS "Newshour"; it may be our last chance to listen to balanced journalism that actually takes the time to delve into the reasonable side of both sides.
6:54 am on November 7th, 2010 39
This is starting to get annoying. This is the second or third comment today that has gone in the spam filter. Let's try again.
It is a pity there is so little debate in this country anymore. People go to their media sources that speak to the viewpoints they already have, and that's all they hear. The left believes corporations and the rich are all evil, and the right smears anyone who tries to help out the little guy as a socialist. Each side is represented not by thoughtful people in the middle but by screamers from the left or the right.
It's a sad state of affairs. Listen to PBS "Newshour"; it may be our last chance to listen to balanced journalism that actually takes the time to delve into the reasonable side of both sides.
6:55 am on November 7th, 2010 40
My messages keep getting stuck in the spam filter. I think I'm going to just call it a day.
7:04 am on November 7th, 2010 41
Tom Wrong
Read what you wrote. I know Chinese have poor memories from all the melamine laced milk, lead painted toys and chemical contamination in their food and water, so don't worry.
7:13 am on November 7th, 2010 42
Still don't know what you are talking about Lemmy. Korea makes better cars so they sell better. America makes fun of other cars on their late night shows, but they don't know how to make good cars that people in the world would want.
8:08 am on November 7th, 2010 43
Tom Wrong, it must be the lead
9:54 am on November 7th, 2010 44
Kushibo,
The whole low-fat, anti-saturated fat, anti-cholesterol movement was founded on falsified science. Ancil Keys' Seven Countries Study cherry-picked the data. The data on all 43 countries in the original data set showed no correlation whatsoever between saturated fat consumption and heart disease. You might enjoy watching this video by Tom Naughton of Fat Head fame:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exi7O1li_wA
If the link doesn't work, search for "Tom Naughton Big Fat Fiasco" at Youtube. Retired GI should absolutely not watch this video because his head will explode when Tom Naughton explains that people overeat because they are fat, not the other way around.
10:40 am on November 7th, 2010 45
Okay. Color me skeptical that adding 40 percent more government-subsidized cheese to a pizza is not going to have some negative outcome on health, but even if I'm completely wrong on that, part of my point still stands: The cheese subsidies came about not because of a consensus that three times as much cheese in forty years would be good for Americans, but because of self-serving corporate interference that, you seem to be saying, just happened to be not so bad based on the well-rounded diet of people outside the US.
I'm not knocking government subsidies. They can go toward a public good, but they often seem to be based on what's good for politically influential corporations' or groups' bottom line rather than the welfare of the people. Our Constitution is about "promoting the general Welfare," not corporate welfare.
11:16 am on November 7th, 2010 46
"hey can go toward a public good, but they often seem to be based on what’s good for politically influential corporations’ or groups’ bottom line rather than the welfare of the people."
And this is the central problem of our entire government system, its become too corporatist. Every other problem will sort itself out due to the checks / balances in place, but the founding fathers never built in a mechanism to control the fourth branch of government. Both political party's are controlled by various corporations and monetary interests. Each candidate is picked not based on their experience or governing attributes but on their ability to get elected and further the monetary agenda of their party. And often each industry will put money into the pockets of politicians in both parties so no matter who wins the company comes out on top.
So no the GOP won't cut total government spending. What they'll do is tout a small cut on some program that everyone can see couple with some small tax cut. Then they'll raise taxes on something else and increase spending on some unheard of item with the effect that the net tax / budget grows instead of shrinking. The problem with the dreaded "EVIL!!!" Military Industrial Complex is unless your work in it you have no idea how it actually works. Its this terribly complicated beast that involved hundreds of projects and contracts. You got the good stuff like bullets / bombs / good / equipment and the mismanaged stuff like construction and procurement then the down right corrupt mess like whats happening in Iraq / Afghanistan. And each line item has its own pet congressmen pushing it. Weeding the good from the bad is a nightmare task that I don't envy anyone.
11:21 am on November 7th, 2010 47
28 Kushibo, I have a simpler way. Average income of the average tax payer.
Put "servant" back into Public Servant.
Screw the incentives. Do the job.
29 Sonagi, I never would wish to tell people what to eat. Fat, junk whatever. I know skinny people that live off chips and cola.
But if you're a big fat sloppy piece of fat barely walking on legs that spend most of their time in the recliner, I think you need to go hungry for a while.
If your disability is being too damn fat to walk, you need to take some responsibility for your fat self. Since that will not happen, Free "living" lesson plans to lose the lard and decrease the amount of welfare untill you get to a healthy weight. Don't FREAK OUT. Don't make it too difficult. There is a reason why fat people are thought to be stupid or (less educated). You're not the sharpest tack in the box to allow yourself to damage your health for the love of Pie and cheese. Educate them and cut their welfare as incentive untill they learn.
Give them a free treadmill
Walking works wonders.
I'm never going to weight what the Docs say I should. But one look and you know I'm "fit".
I've never seen a fat muslim woman. Humm. Maybe they don't let them walk in public.
11:30 am on November 7th, 2010 48
#30, TOM you asked what happened. Progressives happened — in both parties. But that doesn't mean I'm going to throw away my vote on a Libertarian with no chance of winning. That's like standing on the sidelines and watching the game rather than playing.
11:34 am on November 7th, 2010 49
Just a note here: Everyone is agreeing with TOM. BIG DAY, I think.
11:52 am on November 7th, 2010 50
Tom,
Korean cars are not necessarily better than American cars, the Korean business model is to get "Market Share", regardless of cost. American automakers have the Union overhead, much higher than in Korea.
We each have our own "Fishbowls"..think about it? Not too hard though. What works in America may not work in Korea, vice versa.Comparing the two Society's and Markets only goes so far.
1:10 pm on November 7th, 2010 51
It would take a few easy systemic fixes to dry up corporate money, but certain players have worked against it. Political parties should complete in the marketplace of ideas, not in the marketplace of corporate sponsorship. Obama was right in his State of the Union this year when he knocked the SCOTUS decision to make corporations "people" with free-speech rights capable of anonymous donations for political purposes. And I knew that long before he actually said anything.
A good system will allow individual citizens to donate a useful but low-level sum to each candidate in their area (say, $1000 per candidate or proposition) and that's it. No union money, no corporate money, and harsh fines for offering or accepting. Couple that with a set amount of free airtime (including prime-time) for the candidates' campaigns, and public funding of amounts similar to what we offer now.
4:26 pm on November 7th, 2010 52
Regulating free speech. I LIKE it!!!
5:09 pm on November 7th, 2010 53
Campaign donations are not speech.
5:36 pm on November 7th, 2010 54
What are the Security and Exchange Commission rules for corporate reporting? Do they have to disclose to their shareholders how much they paid in campaign contributions and where to?
Shareholders should know what their investments are going towards.
5:48 pm on November 7th, 2010 55
Campaign donations are not speech.
They sure as hell are. Money talks, baby!
/fugetaboutit
6:10 pm on November 7th, 2010 56
What corporations do it give money to some obscurely named "non-profit" that in turn gives the money to the appropriate politician's campaign or directly to the party's campaign coffers. This way the company only has to write off the money like it would any other charitable donation. And because company's do that all the time with big money it won't raise any bells. Secretly the whole thing is directed and the politician knows where their money is coming from. The kicker is the money is tax deductible, so not only are corporations buying votes, their also using that money to reduce their taxed amounts.
9:07 pm on November 7th, 2010 57
You know, it's really funny. So many funny stuff going around in the US politics… so many of that funny stuff with fancy names to justify as legitimate, are considered illegal in Korea.
9:14 pm on November 7th, 2010 58
Indeed. People- or corporations- need to be told by the government where to spend their money. Now I get it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGwtG8nVpUU&fe…
9:16 pm on November 7th, 2010 59
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzr4aQG1PWM&fe…
9:40 pm on November 7th, 2010 60
But WAIT– there's MORE!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHfwQtwk8nw&fe…
12:22 am on November 8th, 2010 61
Sonagi,
From thoughts on welfare to theories on weight loss, I agree 100% with everything you said in your last 3 posts.
Despite our past differences, I think I'm in love.
Kushibo,
Apart from you defense of those with hands out for entitlements, I agree with most of what you said, too. If I was a girl, I'd…
Anyway, one thing I have noticed about welfare/subsidized/gub'ment housing is there are some pretty nice rims on a lot of the car, there is a cable TV connection to every residence, lots of cigarette butts in the yard/alcohol bottles in the trash and the rent-to-own companies always seem to be delivering a bigger TV and a stereo with larger woofers than the ones I have… and their places are warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer than mine.
Further, there are a lot of unfilled jobs that "Americans won't do"… because they aren't made to.
There is no defense for that… as, at least in urban environments, this seems to be the rule rather than the exception.
Do you disagree with this? Am I perceiving things incorrectly?
As Sonagi pointed out, the immediate financial cost of supporting this non-productive dead weight is small compared to the huge future social and legal costs which grows exponentially as dependent children create more dependent children with no hope of productivity as a group… and a future existence doomed to be an increasing drain on a shrinking productive minority.
I realize there are people who need assistance and a decent society should make it available… but, from my experience, most of the people on assistance have a strong back but don't really want a job.
1:13 am on November 8th, 2010 62
This is what America must do to fix itself.
1) US needs a revolution to get rid of both Democrats and Republicans. They both got their fingers up in your a**. You need to get back to the roots that your founding fathers founded your country on.
2) Break down the door to the Federal Reserves, audit them, arrest them for fraud, and dissolve them as an entity. They should not be running your country.
3) Outlaw all political shinanigans and bamboozles that are disguised as "campaign contributions", "political charities", "lobbies", and other fancy words that are what it really is, corruption. Everybody gets a new start from scratch, with a clean sheet of paper. That should be their last and only chance.
4) Stop making war all over the world. You are bankrupt, you don't have the money to wage war that is going into it's 10th year in Afghanistan and Iraq. Everybody told you not to get into those trouble spots, but your country did not listen. Take your troops home from Korea, stop bitching about Koreans and do something about it. It's really annoying to Tom to hear your whinings everyday.
5) Confiscate all riches, bonuses, bail outs, subsidies, that were given to the Wall Street criminals, and their banker grunts. Stop with this nonsense of bailing out failing institutions, remember what you preached to Korea in 1997? Practice what you preach!
6) Cut taxes drastically, stop bringing immigrant workers, send them all back. You need jobs, and immigrants taking lower paid jobs while the fat cats sitting on their butts decade after decade and passing on their bad habits is how you got into this mess.
7) And that leads to this point since there's no more tax money to redistribute to free hand outs… get rid of welfare, social security, and other generous social programs, and sell off public housings. Make your people save for the rainy day when they get old. Make people work cleaning toilets and picking fruits and working in McDonald's. Now they can't sit on their butts and collect their checks, unless they want to starve. Government should subsidize officially registered private charities, organizations, and churches so that they can set up things like soup kitchens and discount stores for the needy.
9) Organize community volunteer policing, volunteer paramilitary to combat rising crimes (Yes, crime will rise because of the fat cats with decades old bad habits who will not take all these measures lieing down). Bring back the prison gangs, and use them for public works. These are criminals and they need help, they need to be taught what hard work really means. And I don't care if the criminal was a Wall Street executive who defrauded people, or someone who killed somebody to get a piece of bread, they should be treated as criminals, not stuffed into a country club and call it a prison.
As you can see, my point… what is my point… yeah… change should happen first from the top and gradually work itself down. It's the leaders who should change first to show that everybody needs to sacrifice, not just the middle class, or the poor. Even the rich have to pull their fair share -and I mean everybody. I can't believe I'm lecturing you Americans on this thing. There was a time when Americans believed in hard work, humbleness, generosity, and reward for good work. Now you're just bunch of whiners and fat cat snotts who think they're born with the right to prosperity without effort, and think you're better than anybody when in reality, you are getting left in the dust.
1:22 am on November 8th, 2010 63
And I forgot
10) Stop calling yourself the "greatest country on earth", "best country to live", and other slogans that are not true. You should be creating new slogans instead, "we can rebuild this country", "we will work hard for better future", "we are not the best, we need to learn from others". Forget that you are/were a superpower, it messes up your heads into thinking that you can just print money, go to wars at a drop of a hat, and think all the problems will go away.
2:16 am on November 8th, 2010 64
Tom 2012
2:41 am on November 8th, 2010 65
63 tom, I was right there with you, untill you said "go to wars at a drop of a hat".
Gonna have to call you (ignorant and uninformed Chinese racist) now.
A pity. I was just starting to think you were ok.
As ChickenHead so simply stated, "2012".
Vote that Muslim raised, Community Organizer out. 53% of Americans sure proved you right back in 2008 TOM. Stu-pid! Not that the other guy was much better.
2:55 am on November 8th, 2010 66
"Tom 2012"
Thank you, I accept if the American people will have me, even though I'm a China nazi Chicom propaganda ministry (as Retired GI and Kushibo has outted me).
3:44 am on November 8th, 2010 67
GOP won't really be able to reduce the deficit. Unless they are willing to cut SSN and Medicare and subsidies for farms and oil companies. I won't even mention the $700 billion TEMPORARY tax cut.
Btw, #65, I rather like the Harvard educated, muslim raised community organizer, rather than a certain someone who went through what 4 colleges (?) to get a degree in communications.
4:02 am on November 8th, 2010 68
Tom Toronto wrote:
2) Break down the door to the Federal Reserves, audit them, arrest them for fraud, and dissolve them as an entity. They should not be running your country.
And Tianjin Tom tips his hand.
I won't get into the violence and revolution that Beijing agitprop Tom is advocating, but I'll just highlight — way up at #2 — Tom's disdain for the Fed.
Violence against the Fed? Where did that come from? Oh, well since the $600 billion "quantitative easing" plan to buy up long-term debt, the hypocritical Chinese are pissed. Quoting Paul Krugman:
This time, much of the noise is coming from foreign governments, many of which are complaining vociferously that the Fed’s actions have weakened the dollar. All I can say about this line of criticism is that the hypocrisy is so thick you could cut it with a knife.
After all, you have China, which is engaged in currency manipulation on a scale unprecedented in world history — and hurting the rest of the world by doing so — attacking America for trying to put its own house in order.
Now, I'm not here to argue for or against the merits of Dr Krugman's piece. I'm here to point out that this the Fed is really stuck in China's craw, and they've been making a lot of noise about, and along comes our Tom, in one of his posts where he pretends to be an unassuming grad student up in Canada, advocates violence against the Fed.
This is his m.o. If he is not actually agitprop, it is clear he is reading from their talking points, and it is possible to see nods to Chinese political points throughout his writings. Some of these are particularly glaring when they actually run counter to what even the chinboistas in Korea want (e.g., leaving the American sphere of influence only to put themselves under China's thumb), but some are more subtle, like this.
Up in Toronto, who is talking so angrily about the Fed? How about in Korea? What's up with that?
We all know.
4:05 am on November 8th, 2010 69
John 67, what do you call a doctor that was last in his/her class? Answer: Doctor.
You forgot the Military budget.
You forgot "social programs" other than SSN and Medicare.
You forgot alot.
McCain went to 4 colleges? I've been to 3 colleges. Humm. We were both in the Military, which means we both moved around.
Back to cutting SSN and Medicare. You missed something. (what is your degree in?)
Simple fact: Cut it now or lose it completely later.
Now why don't you report back to me on the other areas that can be cut. You do want to prove your point right? Perhaps you're simply spouting the popular Liberal lie—I mine line.
Most liberals run around stating this or that can't be done. That is way the House in in the Repubs hands now.
4:08 am on November 8th, 2010 70
69 mean – not mine. Just in case you couldn't figure it out.
4:12 am on November 8th, 2010 71
#68, listen to Kushibo, I am china agitprop! Long live China! Long live Mao!
I have tipped my hand.. 
4:19 am on November 8th, 2010 72
Tianjin Tom wrote:
1) US needs a revolution to get rid of both Democrats and Republicans. They both got their fingers up in your a**. You need to get back to the roots that your founding fathers founded your country on.
Please Mr Chinese Agitprop, stop trying to advocate revolution in our country. Unlike in your country, we actually value the lives of our people, so we'd rather not foment a violent overthrow of anything if it's not necessary.
You see, there are ways to fix the problem, within our great Constitution, that don't require revolution.
We've already talked about ways to cut out most of the influence of money in politics, but there are ways to change the structure of elections so (a) the Democrats and Republicans are more responsible to the interests of the people instead of the other way around and (b) third-party candidates with the functional ideas can compete with the Big Two in the marketplace of ideas and actually win if they come out on top.
In California, we voted to get rid of the party primary and to just choose the top two vote getters to run in the general election. This will most likely choose moderates over extremists, but it also opens the door for a widely favored third-party candidate to win where they otherwise would have had a much steeper uphill battle.
Barring that, another thing that should be adopted is the run-off election, basically a two-part election in case no one wins a 50+ majority. Right now, we allow people to take office if they've won a mere plurality (the highest number but less than 50%). This discourages people from "throwing away their vote" and instead choosing the lesser of two evils. When people feel compelled to choose the lesser of two evils time and time again, this encourages and allows the two parties to put up lessers of two evils!
Take my Congressional district, Hawaii-1, where despite being a firmly blue state and blue district, Republican Charles Djou won in an open race with just 40%, to replace Neil Abercrombie who had resigned his seat in order to run for governor.
Djou won because Democrats Hanabusa and Chase couldn't get their act together and field a single candidate. The overwhelming number of residents vote Democrat, yet the Republican won (though he was defeated a few months later, when he faced a single Democratic candidate in the regular general election, Hanabusa again).
It doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican, the plurality-wins situation has the same effect. If you're an independent, or a third-party supporter, then this is your chance to field a strong candidate who might beat one of the Big Two and then go on to win the election. And by being present in Washington, that's when the third parties can make a difference.
Similarly, we need to get the states to scrap the winner-take-all system for the electoral votes. Note that I'm not advocating getting rid of the Electoral College. Instead, I'm pointing out that the winner-take-all system is NOT in the US constitution, but it does discourage people from "throwing their vote away." Imagine a large state like California. Maybe in a few of the Congressional districts there are some places where a Libertarian, a Green, or even a Tea Party member actually has majority support… why should those voters "throw away" their vote. What if they could vote for whom they want and that gets represented at the Electoral College? Initially, it might not mean much, but when voters realize they can actually vote for whom they want and it might stand a chance of counting (perhaps even winning) then they'll vote for whom they want, not the lesser of two evils.
4:31 am on November 8th, 2010 73
Tom wrote:
#68, listen to Kushibo, I am china agitprop! Long live China! Long live Mao! I have tipped my hand..
Tom, if you were actually the nationalist Korean you portray yourself as, instead of those annoying
emoticons, you'd be getting pissed of at me right and left. You'd be attacking me at almost every turn, but it's pretty clear you're afraid that you will reveal more of how your official bio is b.s.
And Tom, you never did answer my question about all those people around you up in Toronto… your wish for the US to sink into the Earth would toss them into the economic abyss, too. Why so much glee? Do you really loathe the Canadians around you as well? Are you actually a sociopath?
4:40 am on November 8th, 2010 74
To 69
John 67, what do you call a doctor that was last in his/her class? Answer: Doctor.
John: Huh? I don't get why you mention that.
You forgot the Military budget.
John: GOP cutting military?
You forgot “social programs” other than SSN and Medicare.
John: Sure there are other social programs but SSN and Medicare take up the biggest slice no?
McCain went to 4 colleges? I’ve been to 3 colleges. Humm. We were both in the Military, which means we both moved around.
John: I was referring to Palin. Sorry I wasn't clear on that.
Back to cutting SSN and Medicare. You missed something. (what is your degree in?)
John: Are you talking about cutting public education? If you are, than you are surely digging your own grave. History.
Simple fact: Cut it now or lose it completely later.
John: Yes cut the TEMPORARY tax cut.
Now why don’t you report back to me on the other areas that can be cut. You do want to prove your point right? Perhaps you’re simply spouting the popular Liberal lie—I mine line.
Most liberals run around stating this or that can’t be done. That is way the House in in the Repubs hands now.
John: Let me remind you GOP ran the house for 8 years.
4:42 am on November 8th, 2010 75
#74
Correction
John: Let me remind you GOP was in the WH for 8 years before Obama.
4:43 am on November 8th, 2010 76
69 Retired GI
I intentionally LEFT OUT a lot to make a simple point, that GOP won't really be able to reduce the deficit unless they are willing to offend their main source of votes/$.
Seniors
Military/industrial complex
Oil companies
Super Rich.
4:44 am on November 8th, 2010 77
That is a real stupid question. Of course, I, as a jjankke agitprop from Tianjin, want to see America fail. Any other dumb questions?
4:46 am on November 8th, 2010 78
69 Retired GI
I sincerely hope GOP can reduce the govt spending, but I really don't see it happening. Interested in your ideas.
6:12 am on November 8th, 2010 79
Tom wrote:
Of course, I, as a jjankke agitprop from Tianjin, want to see America fail.
Again, it is you introducing and using ethnic slurs, in an attempt to attribute them to others.
GI Korea, surely constant use of racial or ethnic slurs should be a reason for banning someone.
6:17 am on November 8th, 2010 80
Tom wrote:
That is a real stupid question. Of course, I, as a jjankke agitprop from Tianjin, want to see America fail. Any other dumb questions?
Not stupid questions at all. If you really are just a regular Korean student studying up in Canada, then how do you square your glee at the fall of the US, which is also the fall of Canada, with your compassion for those around you? Going by your bio, the Canadians didn't insult you when you were a KATUSA, so why would you want to see them hurting so badly?
7:07 am on November 8th, 2010 81
John, here is one idea that is lost on all liberals. The Gov-ment is composed of three branches. President (WH) being only one.
Nancy Harry Barney Chris. All Dems and in charge since Jan 07. About the time the economy started to sink.
Palin? Seriously? Last I checked she didn't run for POTUS. But since you can't get over her, I will address her. She is EASILY the equal of Big Joe.
Which means your argument against Palin is not a Rational one.
Just be honest and say that you, a Liberal, are NOT tolerant or excepting of those different than you. Big Joe is about useless. He is Obama's token white boy.
Seriously, you didn't get the doctor joke?
9:21 am on November 8th, 2010 82
@ 81
Retired GI, so what do you think about my prediction GOP won't be able to reduce govt spending that much, mainly because it doesn't want to cut its own legs by angering older voters? Let's stay on the topic shall we?
Ok I just won't talk about Palin. GOP folks seem to love her though…
Who's the Big Joe that you say Palin is equal of?
DIdn't get the doctor joke.
9:26 am on November 8th, 2010 83
@81
Joe Biden. Need more coffee.
I really disagree Palin is equal of Joe B.
So can GOP really reduce govt spending? My prediction is no.
9:27 am on November 8th, 2010 84
@81
As I said in post 78, I'm still interested in your ideas as how GOP can reduce govt spending.
9:41 am on November 8th, 2010 85
Tom was ok until he said 'stop calling yourselves the greatest country….'. He had valid fact based points until that opinion. I have posted FACT based statistics over and over showing the majority of the world is still trying to get into America. Too bad, you were on a roll.
Comment #1: It's not a tax cut, it's a deferred tax hike. Get the facts right.
Point: Unless you have or run a small business, you can shut the hell up about tax cuts. Talk to a business owner and they will NOT hire a new person if it will costs more in health care and taxes. In fact, if you raise taxes they will get rid of employees to make up the difference. Fact of life, plain and simple.
Point: Entitlements cost money. Yes, covering existing conditions is good and I support it, but don't lie to me and tell me it won't cost more. If you cover more, it costs more, plain and simple fact of life.
To the subject thread: No, I don't believe the Republicans are serious. Congress believes it is elite and smarter than the people, and without some serious re-adjustment, they will make Bejing Betty right and destroy the country.
To see the elitist, watch this at mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rABVd1hN4ls&fe…
11:00 am on November 8th, 2010 86
John / GI,
No one can see properly when their blind, especially when its a self inflicted blindness. First thing you must understand is that politicians have ~no~ beliefs. They take on the popular beliefs of whatever group supports them or the popular beliefs that they think will advance their own interests. To understand a politician you gotta look at where their support base is coming from and how their getting their support in the first place. What you usually find is a metric fck ton of money from various groups who don't want to be out in the spot light, so instead their hire politicians to do the politicing for them. Don't demonize individual politicians, their just humans following their own self interests, same as you and me. They put their pants on one leg at a time.
The recent recession has been in the making a long long time and neither political party is directly responsible for it. Its the direct result of what happens when you have secret money being passed around coupled with self-serving financial interest being responsible for their own regulation. It was the unavoidable result of a very predictable pattern.
The reason is tore the global economy apart was the 1999 repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act. The specific part I'm referring to is the prohibition of a bank holding company from purchasing private financial companies. This repeal was sponsored by Sen. Phil Gramm (R, Texas), Rep. Jim Leach (R, Iowa), and Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R, Virginia) and was a fairly big "win" for the GOP. This repeal allowed commercial banks to merge with other financial interests to make mega financial conglomerates. AKA "too big to fail". Potential profits were huge because the banks could skirt other regulations by going through other financial companies, all of whom were owned by the bank in question.
That law was passed with the specific goal of preventing another depression like financial disaster. The housing bubble would of still popped but the banks themselves would be directly responsible for the lending / paper on the mortgages and wouldn't of been able to sell it off to someone else as an "investment". The situation would of been much like other bubbles, bad only for those who invested in it and not to the entire global economy. People must also realize that bubbles are a natural byproduct of an active economy. Someone realizes a good way to make money and makes lots of it. Someone else follows the first guy, then another guy, then another. Soon you have a wave of people trying to make money based on the first few people's success, this results in false demand which cause's prices to skyrocket further giving the impression of success. Smart people get out the moment prices skyrocket because the demand is false and once the supply side of the equation balances out the demand whomever is left standing is SoL and takes a big loss. It wasn't the foreclosures that killed the economy, it was the banks selling those mortgages as packaged "investments" to other financial institutions when then later created investment funds based on the repackaged mortgages. Once the bubble popped and all those people who bet that their house's value would go up, the banks couldn't pay good on AAA rated investments which caused the funds to depreciate which caused other banks / companies to lose money. And if a AAA rated investment can't be trusted then ~no~ investment can be trusted.
11:19 am on November 8th, 2010 87
John you missed my point about Joe. I don't think he is worth a chit. Ditto Palin. They were/are both figureheads. Joe is there because obama wanted to appease the white vote. Additionally, Joe is such a worthless piece of dribble that Obama didn't feel a threat from him, as he would have from Hilary. She would have been all up his six o'clock.
Palin was also a token and pretty much for the same reasons. VP's are never supposed to be in charge of anything. If God forbide, Joe should have to take the seat, he would have plenty of help. Same for Palin. I don't vote for VP's. I vote for the POTUS. Liberals had to go after Palin because they really couldn't go after McCain. Rino that he was, he still would not have listened to Nancy and Harry like Obama does. The Liberal Congress needed someone that they could influence. That was not McCain. It was No Experience Obama.
53% of American Idol watching Americans voted for an open ended promise of "change". Hou do you like the change? I don't see any Change. Nancy has increased the debt by four trillion since 2007. Obama has done NOTHING to change that. Bush couldn't do anything with the dems in charge of congress. Just as Obama will not be able to do anything with the Repubs in charge. Gop couldn't stop Nancy. Didn't have the votes. The dems were in charge since 2007. Many of the uneducated try to make Politics the same as American Idol. Two people, pick your BFF. Isn't that simple. But many Americans are simple enought to believe it is.
How can the GOP reduce Gov-spending? They already started. They took the House away from Nancy. Next defund the so called health care plan. Then take a BIG butcher knife to the Military. I can help there IF they do it. Start by getting away from this "contractor" BS. Then restructure the rank system. I know of one rank that gets paid to drink coffee and offer advice to an Officer that really don't want to hear it. Great job!
Then these deadbeats that have never had a job and are third GEN welfare need to be cut loose. I know it is easy to say, but hard to do. But these congressmen make six figures. They NEED to be doing the difficult. Their pay needs to be dropped to a more realistic "civil servant" level.
I know you're going to say that none of this is possible. You just wanted to hear if I had any ideas or was just bitching.
The good thing about the tea-party is that those just elected know that they better be able to prove that they were doing what they were elected to do, or they will not get the same support.
Obama WILL veto everything that the new GOP congress tries to do. That is a given!
But if they can show that he and the Dem controled Senate were the reason, that is what is wanted.
Marcus #85 is correct. "Congress believes it is elite and smarter than the people". But new blood is STARTING to arrive. Not a moment too soon.
Oh, I voted for Carter. I voted GOP ever since. If you Liberals can ever get another John F Kennedy, I'll vote dem.
But understand this: When I say JFK, I'm not talking about young and pretty. I'm talking about a "Proud American Veteran". Hell, I'll settle for a Proud American!
Obama isn't Proud of America.
11:55 am on November 8th, 2010 88
@87,
Demonizing someone is the first sign of fanaticism, you might want to take a step back, turn off the TV and actually do research. Omaba got elected for the same reason Bill Clinton did, he was young (relatively speaking) and charismatic. Like other Presidents before him he's merely a figure head, he is a face people can see and recognize. Congress has the real power with respect to legislation not the PoTUS. And besides, its the money behind the Dems that call the shots on who votes what and which legislation gets sponsored. Just like the money behind the GoP does the same for them.
Plus I ~highly~ doubt Obama will veto anything. That repeal that happened in 1999 went through the house at 343-86 (Republicans 205–16; Democrats 138–69; Independent 0–1) and the senate at 54–44 (53 Republicans and one Democrat in favor; 44 Democrats opposed). 53 votes only, meaning the Dem's didn't try a minority block via filibuster. Ever since the last election the GoP has filibustered nearly every bill made, even those that were originally GoP ideas. Its the GoP that use obstructionist tactics not the Dems. If anything it'll be a GoP sponsored idea that some Dem's use to sponsor a law that gets the entire GoP to filibuster. The current administration has been open to suggestions and cooperation from the GoP since Obama was elected, hell the "change" he was talking about in his campaign messages was a change away from partisan tactics.
I don't like the Dem's nor the extreme tree-hugging liberals, but lately the rhetoric coming from the GoP sounds more like madness then actual reason. If the truth of the matter doesn't fit they can and will just make sh!t up and pass it off as truth to their believers who then eat it up. Sounds more like a modern day cult then a political ideology. Hopefully some sense will come back to the Republican party and I might think about rejoining.
12:02 pm on November 8th, 2010 89
"He had valid fact based points until that opinion. I have posted FACT based statistics over and over showing the majority of the world is still trying to get into America. "
Total number of Korean emigrants migrating out of Korea.
http://res.heraldm.com/content/image/2010/10/17/2…
Out of that, how many emigrated to the US? A whopping 390, which is quite a contrast to ten years ago, when 8000 a year emigrated to the US.
Contrast these 900 traitors with about 5000 who come back to the ROK, so what do we have here? A reversal in migration pattern for Korea.
12:32 pm on November 8th, 2010 90
O.K Here is the deal.
I am going to get medieval on the next person who pollutes a serious debate with further rambling speculation on Tom's motivations or background.
His points are either right or wrong, silly or serious… and they can be ignored or should be addressed.
1. America does need a revolution… not a violent overthrow of government… but a revolution in thinking. America needs a revolution in accountability… both personally and with the expectations of national leadership.
2. Break down the door to the Fed? Hmmm… I don't think so. I don't know if they are the enemy they are made out to be in certain circles or if they are just doing their best to keep the country going with the impossible hand of debt that a spendthrift government keeps dealing them.
3. Campaign finance reform? Absolutely. Lawmakers owe everyone but the voters.
4. Stop making expensive war? Sure. A military presence isn't a bad thing to protect America's interests… but two seemingly non-productive wars have accumulated a mountain of debt and have distracted America from focusing attention in other areas of the globe.
5. Confiscate Wall Street bonuses? I'm not big on confiscation and government mandated forfeiture. On the other hand, something isn't right when a company positions themselves as "too big to fail", has their hand out for money and then pays big bonuses when the handout is considered a profit. This sounds like fraud… and should be treated accordingly.
Failed institutions should be allowed to fail. They don't vanish… but are bought up by investors who do not wish to fail. Corporations ARE much like welfare queens. If they know they can get a handout, they don't feel they need to work so hard. If their only choices are to succeed or fail, they do their best to succeed.
6. Cut taxes (and regulations) to small business and stop encouraging illegal workers. Fantastic. Big business always supports more regulations as they can afford to understand and comply with them.
There is an entire industry based on compiling the massive number of daily additions and changes in government rules and regulations manufactured by unelected bureaucrats that companies are forced to comply with. Small business cannot afford a staff to understand and implement these.
7. Move "entitlements" from government to the private sector. Absolutely. Make them hard enough to get that only people who really need them will "work" to get them.
When it is easier to get a job than an "entitlement", shockingly, more of these slackers will get jobs.
Less government intrusion will result in more people working for themselves and more small business hiring a few more people.
8. Higher taxes on cars? Well, America larger than Korea and cars are needed. On the other hand, a better public transportation system is possible and necessary and there are many, many options that work WITH car ownership instead of against it.
9. Use prisoners for work. Hmmm… there is already a FOR PROFIT industry using cheaper-than-illegal-alien prison labor. And, believe it or not, this industry is a big supporter of "tough on crime" legislation that makes more prisoner… which has resulted in a massive American prison system filled with non-violent offenders for relatively victimless crimes such as minor drug use.
So, while this idea is on the right track, it should be approached with openness and caution.
The majority of Tom's statements were very correct and should be considered by all Americans.
…NOW…
I don't give two funks if Tom is the ghost of Mao plotting Great Leap Forward v2.0. If his points are valid criticism of the USA they should be thoughtfully considered and addressed by honest Americans… as this helps America more than burring one's head in the sand and pretending there are no problems.
Repeatedly shifting focus from Tom's valid points to speculation on Tom's political motivations while ignoring important American problems is more damaging than anything a potential Chinese agitprop could do from a Canadian cyber cafe.
If Tom was TRULY interested in the failure of America, he was say, "Good job, guys. Keep up the good work!" and everyone would go back to discussing the size of Korean girls' boobies.
America needs more aggressive Chinese agitprops forcing Americans to take a look around.
12:48 pm on November 8th, 2010 91
#88, I agree with so much that you said.
Which makes it even stranger when you say that Obama was not Partisan. WTF?
Oh and I don't demonize. I say they aren't worth a chit. Sorry. I am but a simple man. I'm sure Big Joe and Barry would make great drinking buddies for me.
But that's about it. Just not Leadership material.
Where would you like me to find information? Really, I would like to know!
What is your preferred source?
12:49 pm on November 8th, 2010 92
1:04 pm on November 8th, 2010 93
1:28 pm on November 8th, 2010 94
Sorry Tim, but no. Your statistics directly contradict the reality of actual applications to the U.S.
Even then, my point was "the world", not just Korea. You lose, again. America is STILL the place to be.
2:27 pm on November 8th, 2010 95
Chickenhead wrote:
Repeatedly shifting focus from Tom’s valid points to speculation on Tom’s political motivations while ignoring important American problems is more damaging than anything a potential Chinese agitprop could do from a Canadian cyber cafe.
To whom or about whom are you speaking? You certainly did not describe me: While pointing out Tom in Toronto's disingenuous motivations for being here — something which overall does erode the ability to have meaning discussion on this blog, this one post perhaps being a slight exception — I have also addressed the important American problems you say we ignore at our peril.
So who the fu¢k are you talking about?
4:17 pm on November 8th, 2010 96
"So who the fu¢k are you talking about?"
Who the fu¢k am I fu¢kin' talkin' the fu¢k about? I'll tell ya who da fu¢k I'm fu¢kin' talkin' about, you fu¢kin' fu¢k. I'm fu¢kin' talkin' 'bout the fu¢kin' fuck who's gonna get fu¢kin' fucked so fu¢kin' hard the fu¢kin' fu¢ker's gonna feel fu¢kin' fucked. You fu¢kin' got dat you fu¢kin' fu¢k?
I usually say that in a Joe Pesci voice when someone asks me a question like that… which either diffuses the situation… or I have to drive a pen through their neck and make 'em cry like a little fu¢kin' girl. Is that little fu¢kin' girl I hear cryin' down there?
Tut, tut, Kushibo, what's with all the hate and denial? It's like you and Tom switched places. He is becoming more relevant while you focus on nonsense like he did with imaginary USFK/GI traits.
But, in response to your question, I was thinking of posts 73, 79 and 80… your previous three.
Three in a row with nothing but encouragement for the Bad Side of Tom… the side that needs to be ignored so it will go away… keeping only the Good Side of Tom that makes valid observations from a semi-outsider of problems with America and Americans and proposes solutions that we can agree with or reject for valid reasons.
It really doesn't matter if Tom is actually Zombie Mao with a Five Year Plan to eat your braaaaaaains… but, as I stated before, I am going to pester those who invite the zombie into the discussion.
4:59 pm on November 8th, 2010 97
Tommy Tang, 390…really. REALLY?
Here's the link you want. http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/pub…
17,000 Koreans became US Citizens in 2009.
22,000 Koreans became US Citizens in 2008.
17,000 Koreans become US Citizens in 2007.
See a pattern here liar? When the 2010 numbers come out the estimate is around 17,000. Where on earth are all of these South Koreans comming from? Could it be SOUTH KOREA?
Keep up the lies loser.
5:49 pm on November 8th, 2010 98
My earlier post on this, that was in the blocked filter had been released.
#90
I kind of understand much of that except, "7. Move "entitlements" from government to the private sector."
The most costly entitlements are Medicare and Social Security. How would that work? We've just seen how corporate health insurance and Wall Street investments programs can also go terribly wrong.
6:18 pm on November 8th, 2010 99
The last time the Republicans were in power they didn't do spit, they just became a mirror image of the Democrats but spent a little bit less. As a result the American people kicked their pipers out. Hopefully they have learned their lesson this time, if not let history repeat itself. The earmarks & excessive governmental intrusion into our lives needs to stop. Subsidies, corporate welfare, welfare, bailouts, & foreign aid need to stop. There is nothing in the US Constitution that authorizes the federal government to be involved in socialized healthcare. Kushibo I disagree with you, since corporations are run by people they therefore have the right to spend money to air their views just as you have the right to spend money to print leaflets or to buy ads on tv, radio, or newspapers. I do believe that if someone works for the government that it should be illegal for them to get a job with the corporations that they have been regulating or working with like military contractors after they no longer work for the government. The bottom line is that if the political leaders don't do their duty to uphold the constitution then throw the sob's out.
6:33 pm on November 8th, 2010 100
Tom Langley wrote:
Kushibo I disagree with you, since corporations are run by people they therefore have the right to spend money to air their views just as you have the right to spend money to print leaflets or to buy ads on tv, radio, or newspapers.
Tom, those individuals who make up the corporations do have the right to spend their money just like me irrespective of what the corporation does. See, they have the same right as me as individuals.
A corporation is not a person. It is an artificial entity created by one or more persons and it shouldn't have the same rights as an actual person, no more than my cat should.
Should we allow my cat and your corporation to vote, too? Of course not, and it is in the interest of protecting our representative democracy to not allow the extralegal activities of corporations, such as by treating them as people.
8:41 pm on November 8th, 2010 101
ChickenHead – "Repeatedly shifting focus from Tom’s valid points to speculation on Tom’s political motivations while ignoring important American problems is more damaging than anything a potential Chinese agitprop could do from a Canadian cyber cafe.
If Tom was TRULY interested in the failure of America, he was say, “Good job, guys. Keep up the good work!” and everyone would go back to discussing the size of Korean girls’ boobies."
I personally have no problem with this statement other than the fact that any of his valid points are alway's followed by or mixed with anti-American/pro-Korean rhetoric. If he was making valid points in a neutral fashion without the underlying "us vs them" and "inferiority-esque complex" statements, then I'm sure more people would be willing to engage him in conversation.
Two Face loses face with his Minjok gaurdian stance which is present in almost every one of his postings. It's always some reference as to why Korea is better than the west…. blah, blah and blah. Some think he's a Chinese agitprop, others, just some Korean who was jilted by a white male lover during his time in the military. Personally, I could care less who or what he is. The bottom line, he loses validity via his underlying pro-Asian rhetoric and others call him out on it because it is extremely pertenant to the reasons and nature of what and why he says the things he does.
8:45 pm on November 8th, 2010 102
"To whom or about whom are you speaking?"
He was speaking to you.
"17,000 Koreans became US Citizens in 2009.
22,000 Koreans became US Citizens in 2008.
17,000 Koreans become US Citizens in 2007."
Read your own link, moron where it says:
"must have resided in the country continuously for at least 5 years"
That's right. So if I emigrated 30 years ago, and waited until 2009 to become a citizen, I would be counted in that 2009 figure. Your link is not the ones that show how many people get emigration papers to emigrate to the US per year. Even jjankke hater Kushibo would agree with me.
8:49 pm on November 8th, 2010 103
Tom wrote:
Even jjankke hater Kushibo would agree with me.
Fu¢k off, Tom. Stop attributing ethnic slurs to me.
GI Korea, surely this kind of thing is grounds for removal, no?
8:49 pm on November 8th, 2010 104
Zilchy, I only have extreme concern for America.
8:52 pm on November 8th, 2010 105
#102, you do hate Chinese, admit it. You keep going on and on about Chinese trying to agitate America, you are a sino fear mongering agitator.
8:58 pm on November 8th, 2010 106
Kushibo, read what the Time Magazine says. It says today's China is quite very similar to 1850 USA who ripped off British intelectual property rights, sold cheap copy cat goods all over the world, and had its own fair share of human rights problems including black slaves and atrocities against the native Indians. It was quite interesting to read this because it turns out your forefathers were acting like the Chinese of today.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,…
Also read William Pesek who says USA and Japan didn't practice what you preached to the Koreans back in 1997.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-07/g-20-nee…
Korea let bad companies go under (remember Daewoo and Hanbo steel?), yet when it came to America's turn to lead by example, they did exactly opposite of what they preached to Korea.
Yeah, so I like pointing out your failures, it makes me gloat and makes me grin ear to ear. Because you guys did the same thing when Korea was down and out in 1997. It's a sweet revenge time for all the Korea bashings I read back in those days, in public posting sites like the Korea Herald. Pesek thinks you guys have less than 10 years left to sort all your problems out, if you're lucky. You are not a Japan, you don't have any savings to hang on for two decades. But you won't change because your pride is made up of stubbornness.
8:58 pm on November 8th, 2010 107
No, Tom. I have a great fondness for China, to which I've traveled dozens of times, and Chinese people, among whom I have many friends, particularly here in Hawaii where there are loads of Chinese students at my university. I have befriended quite a few Chinese people who have a high amount of interest in Korea and Korean culture, some of whom actually having lived in Seoul or elsewhere in Korea.
What I hate is Beijing's government policies, its oppression of minorities and refugees, and its attempts to pull Korea into its orbit. I also loathe that it tries to turn students abroad into propaganda tools (see here and here… yeah, if I'm going to put up with your crap, I'll at least get some links out of it).
And I would never use the ㅉ-word that you used. Whether you are agitprop or not, this is a particularly egregious online behavior of yours, inserting racial and ethnic slurs, especially in a way where you try to attribute them to others. That alone should be grounds for you to be banned. Could you get away with that kind of thing at your uni in Toronto?
9:00 pm on November 8th, 2010 108
Yeah, so I like pointing out your failures, it makes me gloat and makes me grin ear to ear. Because you guys did the same thing when Korea was down and out in 1997.
"You guys"? I was in Korea in 1997 and 1998, having just lost my job and struggling to make ends meet.
So just shut the fu¢k up, agitprop.
9:15 pm on November 8th, 2010 109
Your continuous use of f word is extremely offensive and I think you should be banned.
9:20 pm on November 8th, 2010 110
We should only believe and say what the government allows.
We should spend our money to take care of failed corporations and support people who don't want to take care of themselves and can't make good choices for their own lives.
I like it!
9:34 pm on November 8th, 2010 111
Your continuous use of f word is extremely offensive and I think you should be banned.
Take it up with GI Korea.
But I'll quit using quasi-profanity if you quit using ethnic and racial slurs. Deal?
9:55 pm on November 8th, 2010 112
Deal!
10:13 pm on November 8th, 2010 113
Right Tom, every year 17,000 South Koreans become US citizens but somehow they all emigrated in the "past" and only 390 do so each year.
You are such an idiot. When faced with facts you double down on lies and stupidity. That must work very well on your Chinese genius buddies.
The truth is that very few Koreans put "immigration" on their visas as their reason to enter the US since they would not get a visa under limitations. So there is no hard number on emigrants only those who become citizens and 17 or 22 or even more 1000s do it every single year to the US since the early 1900s.
How many US emigrate to Korea, not so much, even few than your hometown china.
10:47 pm on November 8th, 2010 114
Hamilton, only 390 did so this year. Last year was a little more. Each year, the emigration is rapidly shrinking.
Look at this graph again.
http://res.heraldm.com/content/image/2010/10/17/2…
The number you have is deceiving because it includes all the people who emigrated in the past, and it takes at least minimum of 5 years to get a citizenship paper. Typically, first generation Korean immigrants to the US do not get citizenship
right away. They wait years and decades, then they diddle, then they decide to go for it. In fact I know couple of Korean immigrants who emigrated 15 years ago, who finally decided to get citizenship. Then there are several I know of who still hold onto their Korean citizenship because they want to go back to Korea someday. What I'm saying is, yes, ten years ago, the US was doing OK and it was attracting many emigrants from abroad including Korea. But look at the pattern now, the US is not a hot destination for NEW emigrants from Korea anymore. There are now more Koreans who used to live in the US, coming back to Korea. The days when Koreans who thought the US was land of milk and honey, and who were packing their bags without even researching the real conditions in the US, is quickly dissipating. That's my point.
Those thousands of Koreans who are turning US citizens, should dwindle to 0, once the back log is cleared.
11:25 pm on November 8th, 2010 115
Tommy boy you are tripling down on lies. Go peddle them with your Chinese buddies who will believe anything. Your source is crap, my source has no bias.
Here's a number for you, 17,000 each and every year sometimes more, a lot more. Choke on it chinaboy.
11:33 pm on November 8th, 2010 116
That's right Hamilton, keep burying your head in the sand and keep shouting "USA number one! USA number one!"
11:42 pm on November 8th, 2010 117
Tommy Boy if I did that I couldn't be heard above the 10s of 1000s of Chinese finally free from your craptastic choad of a country. I might not even be heard above the great 17,000 new Americans every year from South Korea who could vote with their feet at any moment and return home.
Instead I get lectured by the liar team Tommy chang and the chinese circle jerks.
12:55 am on November 9th, 2010 118
"So who the fu¢k are you talking about?"
Who the fu¢k am I fu¢kin' talkin' the fu¢k about? I'll tell ya who da fu¢k I'm fu¢kin' talkin' about, you fu¢kin' fu¢k. I'm fu¢kin' talkin' 'bout the fu¢kin' fu¢k who's gonna get fu¢kin' fu¢ked so fu¢kin' hard the fu¢kin' fu¢ker's gonna feel fu¢kin' fu¢ked. You fu¢kin' got dat you fu¢kin' fu¢k?
I usually say that in a Joe Pesci voice when someone asks me a question like that… which either diffuses the situation… or I have to drive a pen through their neck and make 'em cry like a little fu¢kin' girl. Is that little fu¢kin' girl I hear cryin' down there?
Tut, tut, Kushibo, what's with all the hate and denial? It's like you and Tom switched places. He is becoming more relevant while you focus on off-topic nonsense.
But, in response to your question, I was thinking of posts 73, 79, 80, 102, 107, 110…
All off-topic encouragement for the Bad Side of Tom… the side that needs to be ignored so it will go away… keeping only the Good Side of Tom that makes valid observations from a semi-outsider of problems with America and Americans and proposes solutions that we can agree with or reject for valid reasons.
It really doesn't matter if Tom is actually Zombie Mao with a Five Year Plan to eat our braaaaaaains… it has no bearing on America and Americans being right or wrong.
I encourage valid, even-if-bitter, criticism and the introduction of unpleasant facts… as it forces me to tune my ideals and values closer and closer to reality.
There is no failure in that.
Any man who refuses to change his thinking when the facts change is not a man. Irrelevant attacks on the messenger rather than the message is a tactic of intellectual cowards and the perpetual wrong.
1:00 am on November 9th, 2010 119
" fu¢kin’ fu¢ker’s gonna feel fu¢kin’ fu¢ked. You fu¢kin’ got dat you fu¢kin’ fu¢k?
I usually say that in a Joe Pesci voice when someone asks me a question like that… which either diffuses the situation… or I have to drive a pen through their neck and make ‘em cry like a little fu¢kin’ girl. Is that little fu¢kin’ girl I hear cryin’ down there?"
4:03 am on November 9th, 2010 120
Kushibo, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. Groups have the right to air their views on issues that effect them as groups, for example the Sierra Club, the AFL-CIO, the Democratic party, the Republican party, the Communist party, the KKK, & corporations. The individuals in these groups ALSO have the right to speak as individuals. Liberals are afraid that people are too stupid to make up their own minds when faced with massive amounts of paid advertising. The recent losses in CA of Meg Whitman for governor & Carly Fiora for senator despite spending millions of dollars of their own money should put those fears to rest. Tom, I agree with Chickenhead that oftentimes you have many valid points but your excessive Korean chauvinism & xenophobia distract other posters from your valid points. While the other Tom can be very annoying I don't believe that he should be banned as that's what free speech is about. The answer to speech that you object to are not bans but is more speech. Kushibo, BTW Jesus was NOT a socialist. Jesus wanted rich people to VOLUNTARILY give their money to the poor, socialist want to INVOLUNTARILY take rich peoples money & redistribute it. All this use of the f word is really f'ing pissing me off.
6:21 am on November 9th, 2010 121
Tom Wrong again, that's not water in your eyes it is urine.
8:57 am on November 9th, 2010 122
Kushibo, I believe that just as individuals have the right to buy ads on tv, radio, newspapers, or the internet; groups such as political parties, environmental groups, labor unions, & corporations should have the same rights. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. The 10th circuit court of appeals just ruled in a Colorado case that a $200 spending limitation for small groups was unconstitutional. I disagree with those who want the other Tom banned. Fight free speech with more free speech. Tom, Chickenhead is right that you have many valid points but these tend to get lost because people focus on your excessive Korean chauvinism & xenophobia.
9:25 am on November 9th, 2010 123
#120 Mr. Langley – "Tom, Chickenhead is right that you have many valid points but these tend to get lost because people focus on your excessive Korean chauvinism & xenophobia."
Tommy Boy,
You set the tone for your on-line persona long ago. What valid points you do make are over-shadowed by your "Korean chauvinism $ xenophobia". Your intentions as to what you say are just as important as what is actually said. My guess is that most users will continue to "call you out" as you continue to use childish emoticons and self -serving rhetoric in your supposed valid points. ChickenHead seems to be trying to make the best out of your situation, but most of the others see through the bullshit.
11:30 am on November 9th, 2010 124
I don't mind you people calling me out! This is a free forum, you can give your opinion, you are welcome to criticize me. I am open to criticisms or whine fests about Tom. I hardly welcome your oppositions and objections about my low opinions about you guys!
11:49 am on November 9th, 2010 125
@91,
The only requirement to be a PoTUS is to be elected by the representatives of the citizens of the USA. Obama was elected therefor he meets the requirements. Its how elected leaders work. And contrary to what Fox news and the GoP keep saying, Obama is a moderate Democrat. His recommendations are usually centered around moderate bipartisan concepts. The fact that the GoP refuse's to work with the Dems in an attempt to manufacture failure is out of his hands.
Example #1, Monstrous Healthcare law
Original intent from Obama was to have Dems and GoP sit down at a table and work out moderate healthcare reform. Obama was pro public option but said it wasn't a requirement. He said all options should be considered and wanted the GoP to lay out their ideas. At first they all sat down and the GoP gave lots of ideas, some of which were put into the law, then once the public started warming to the idea the GoP jumped ship. Then the GoP started threatening filibuster unless the Dems dropped the whole legislation idea and start from scratch after a year of negotiations. This was an attempt to declare a failure for the Dems and create a talking point for the upcoming 2010 elections. The Dems had to make dirty deals with all their party members to get the votes to over ride the GoP filibuster. And thus a relatively simply idea supported by the majority of American citizens (healthcare reform) was mangled and twisted into the monstrosity it is now. Obama had very little to do once it was passed to congress to actually create the law.
Example #2, DADT repeal
As the PoTUS Obama could easily alter Military policy to remove DADT. All it takes is a stroke of his pen to have the US Military cease separations for DADT, its a policy memo. Many of the more extreme liberals wanted him to immediately do this once in office and are rather angry right now that he didn't. Obama instead asked the military to review the mater and give him recommendations. And while Obama is personally for repeal of DADT and homosexuals serving openly he has the good sense to listen to the more experienced Military leadership.
Example #3, Wars in Iraq / Afghanistan
The extreme left wanted immediate cessation to both wars. Dems are traditionally anti-war and anti-military spending. Instead of making a arbitrary deadline and forcing the Military to withdraw (as the left wanted him to) he asked the Military leadership to give him recommendations. They produced a time line for how long it would take them to wind down the wars and lower the US Military presence and again he had the good sense to actually listen to his Military leadership. Since then he has supported the US Military unconditionally while still requiring reports and situational updates.
When you actually separate the PoTUS from the rest of the Dems you see he's not this crazy super left socialist natzi that is painted on Fox news. He's a reasonable person who leads moderate democrat. Remember Fox news is owned by a single man, a man who is extreme republican. The GoP's entire political strategy is (was) to block any and everything the Dems attempt to do regardless of its effects. They do this by using alarmist tactics and large amounts of hyperbole "death panels, ect.." to generate fear amongst their supporters. Fear leads to irrationality which further leads to people blindly following the generator of that fear. The liberals are doing the same thing for AGW. Anything said from a GoP funded source needs to be carefully picked over to get through to the truth. Same thing for anything sourced from a liberal funded outlet.
I mostly pick my information up from web sources (I don't watch TV anymore), usually from independent sites or direct quotes (without edits / cuts / spin). I ignore political "opinion" pieces as their usually just trash filled with lies, hyperbole and stretched truths (both Rep and Dem). I was a moderate republican before. When the extremists took over the GoP and it became a huge mess I switched to independent. I don't like the Democrats and I disagree with much of their ideology, but I hate being blatantly lied to and ostracized because I'm not conservative enough even more.
11:54 am on November 9th, 2010 126
I have worked with many Katusas, mostly spoiled children. Some have a Superior attitude because they had used the system. Parents had paid someone off to get them the "easy" time of service.
Why can't we keep on topic??
Tom, the spoiled "Boy" wants all the attention.
I just as soon give him an e-tool and have him dig a foxhole, spend a night in cold rain, sleet, and snow, see what life is really like.
Tom, honestly, what was the most uncomfortable night you ever spent, in your life??
3:21 pm on November 9th, 2010 127
"Tom, honestly, what was the most uncomfortable night you ever spent, in your life??"
I imagine it was last night under a 300lb white Canadian lumberjack who also cuts wood. Tonight will be his next uncomfortable night. It's expensive studying in Canada!
8:39 pm on November 9th, 2010 128
China's credit watch agency drops USA's sovereign credit rating to A+, from AA.
http://www.segye.com/Articles/NEWS/INTERNATIONAL/…
12:00 am on November 10th, 2010 129
This just in, China's best univerity rated #2 in China for the first time!
http://www.chinasucks/muststeal/fromWest/Article….?
In other news the collective Chinese cyber bully known as Tom still studying in West since although it totally sucks, still has the top 5000 universities other than 2 in Korea and 3 in Japan.
12:57 am on November 10th, 2010 130
Hamilton, I understand your skepticism about China's government run agency and their credibility. But here's my point. As much as they lack credibility (I agree with you there), they're far more accurate than your American credit agencies who have no credibility whatsoever. What does that say about your country's credibility?
Yes that's right, it's…:lol:
9:57 am on November 10th, 2010 131
Kushibo, why would GI Korea ban Tom? Tom is an asset to the ROK drop; he's a major click-driver.
11:49 am on November 10th, 2010 132
Ok I'm getting tired of this filter BS nuking my posts.
11:52 am on November 10th, 2010 133
Kushibo, why would GI Korea ban Tom? Tom is an asset to the ROK drop; he’s a major click-driver.
Wouldn't that be "click magnet"?
7:54 pm on November 10th, 2010 134
kushibo 130, Tom keeps the thread going. He clicks and induces others to click: he drives the clicks. (I could say the same about Chickenhead.) GI Korea tolerates strong opinions, strongly expressed.
1:22 am on November 17th, 2010 135
good molly ROK Drop , i look your blog , that a nice blog and greatly. Great for everyone. useful Classifieds and US-ROK Alliance content. i going to visit to read and comment your site.
6:17 am on November 17th, 2010 136
Missing TOM. Good points and BS. Glans #134, you were wrong about GI Korea. He "Bowed" under Kushibo's pressure.
8:28 am on November 17th, 2010 137
Retired GI wrote:
I think you overestimate my influence and underestimate GI Korea's own misgivings.
9:38 am on November 17th, 2010 138
Retired GI 136, kushibo 137, I can't see how GI Korea would be afraid of either Tom or kushibo. I think he made a decision that he thought was best for the ROK drop, and I respect him. All who comment here should express their opinions clearly but should refrain from insults.
9:59 am on November 17th, 2010 139
In another thread here, you made a point of bragging that *YOU* had made the Moderation of TOM happen.
Now you don't like the way that sounds and you get all humble pie on me.
I can either believe YOU here, or believe YOU in the other thread. Make up your mind. Take a stand. Don't be an obama zombie.
So which is it? You have power with GI Korea to get individuals moderated.
Or you were talking chit. But if you were talking chit, that means that GI Korea is the one with thin skin. Not likely —- I should hope. If you're talking chit you can't be believed. You're walking back on the previous clame of power to get something done. (Get TOM moderated) What are we to think?
Either way, GI Korea Moderated TOM. Fact! So my comment #136 still stands. You did call for it often and bragged about it afterward.
Conclusion: GI Korea did as you wished him to do.
10:19 am on November 17th, 2010 140
#138, Who is going to decide just what is or is not an insult? Is the word "fag" a distastful word or an insult?
Should refrain from insults? Who will define? I know people that get offended by the smallest things and so do you. Then there are other, stronger individuals that just roll with it.
You can respect whoever you wish. Not the issue.
Moderation will please some people. Like a student running to the teacher and pointing his finger.
Do it enough and you have a bunch of like-minded people with comments little better than, "I agree with you." Old wives sitting around a table having tea and talking about their dead husbands. But then again, old wives like that.
10:39 am on November 17th, 2010 141
Retired GI wrote:
You're getting a bit senile there in your retirement, RGI. I did not "brag" that I had made moderation of Tom happen. What happened was that you said, "The one known here as TOM played you. He won. I watched with a smile. You trusted that he would do as he/she said. I knew he was setting you up." And I replied:
I was not bragging about anything, just pointing out that your interpretation that he had won when he actually got himself "moderated" for a week, as is so often the case, was way off the mark.
Oh, and far from being an Obama zombie, I didn't even vote for the guy.
10:45 am on November 17th, 2010 142
Another Retired GI mixing up of facts:
Wrong again. When Tom was throwing out racial and ethnic slurs and attributing them to other people, I asked if that itself wasn't a ban-worthy offense.
GI Korea responded, quite a bit later, that Tom's "trolling" had earned him moderation. So neither was the result because of what I asked about, but what GI Korea did do he did for a different reason.
11:05 am on November 17th, 2010 143
On an interesting note, something pretty amazing happened in Alaska. A write-in moderate GoP candidate won the election instead of the party nominated conservative candidate. Means there might be a ray of light for the GoP party after all.
12:08 pm on November 17th, 2010 144
#143
Thanks. The signal to noise ratio had been getting rather low.
12:11 pm on November 17th, 2010 145
143, yep there is hope for the GOP (if) RINO=hope.
12:16 pm on November 17th, 2010 146
JoeC wrote:
As far as my contribution was concerned, sorry.
I'm not so sure how much of a ray of light Senator Murkowski will continue to be for the GOP. Won't she be more of the bring-pork-home-to-Alaskans kinda politician? I suppose an argument could be made that Alaska, which contributes a lot to the economy through its natural resources but requires a lot in order for people to maintain a livelihood in such a harsh environment, might deserve a bit more pork projects than others.
I don't know enough about Murkowski or the lawyer from Fairbanks to know how I feel about this. I know there was a strong personal rivalry between Murkowski and Sarah Palin, but don't know how that is affected by actual political positions. But I do want to congratulate her; winning a statewide election by write-in is an amazing feat, and I guess it highlights one important problem in our two-party primary system: those who vote in primaries are often so far left or right of the majority population that they often put in candidates that are unpalatable to the general population.
12:18 pm on November 17th, 2010 147
Retired GI, what examples do you have of Murkowski being a Republican In Name Only?
I guess RINOs = hope to the Democrats.
12:24 pm on November 17th, 2010 148
Ok Kushibo. Your desire to be seen as helpless and open minded is accepted. You're a sweet kitten and often a *victim* of TOM. He manipulated you at every turn.
You had nothing to do with with it and it was all GI Korea's idea.
Happy?
12:29 pm on November 17th, 2010 149
Happy? Only if you say it with feeling.
Seriously, dude, for all your bluster, you really spend a lot of time caring about what you think other people are really thinking behind their words.
Now let's just go back to the main topic. I'm genuinely curious what policies or votes of Murkowski has you calling her a RINO.
12:49 pm on November 17th, 2010 150
Retired GI 149, each commenter decides what to say. GI Korea decides what can appear on the ROK drop.
Back on topic: Repuplicans, including Lisa Murkowski, will prevent spending that might promote employment and recovery.
12:59 pm on November 17th, 2010 151
149, "you really spend a lot of time caring about what you think other people are really thinking behind their words."
Yes Kushibo, I do. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I have always thought that was the idea behind communicating. My sister-in-law once told me that, "not everything has a meaning". I disagree. Every action has a meaning.
Example: I come to Rokdrop. That has a meaning. It is the only blog I go too. That has meaning. I call myself Retired GI. Also has meaning, even if an incomplete meaning.
As for Murkowski, I'm not a student. Only heard her speak one sentence in an interview. I didn't like the "meaning" of that one sentence. It told me all I needed to know. Additional information was that she refused to accept the GOP decision. So she doesn't care about her party. She is in it for herself. Something tells me that the good of the country, party, state is not foremost in her mind. Perhaps I'm wrong. Either way, What I think about her is not important.
She is in.
My political knowledge is still growing. For example, I'm glad Obama is the POTUS.
1:30 pm on November 17th, 2010 152
I have written elsewhere about some of the peculiarities of Alaska.
It has the image of a tough independent place, where everyone pulls their weight, so I don't know how much demand they will be for Murkowski to bring home bacon. Their past senator, Ted Stevens was well know for that though. Remember the "Bridge to Nowhere"?
Their other national figure, Sarah Palin, is another peculiarity. Apparently, someone in the McCain campaign looked around and noticed a governor who ran an energy producing state — check, was popular — check, could cite a lot of conservative rhetoric — check, and was a woman — check. That's as far as they went. 'Let's get her.' For those who don't know, Alaska gets a portion of the oil revenue taken from the state. Ms. Palin had the good fortune of becoming governor just at the time oil prices were sky rocketing. While sucking for the rest of the country, I can see how one can become a popular governor when you can fund all your programs and still hand out larger oil revenue checks to all your constituency. She said she quit in the middle of her term because all the legal attacks were becoming too much. I wonder if, the fact that oil revenues had come back down to sane levels, the national economy had tanked and state governors, including her, were gone to have to start making hard choices on what spending get cut, had anything to do with it.
That's where the GoP in the House of Representatives will be next year. They are going to be expected to produce complete spending programs instead of being able to pick apart what others propose. They will have their Tea Party members holding them to the fire. They have already dictated to their seniors, 'no earmarks.'
It will also interesting to see what happens in the states. The GoP also picked up many governor seats. Since they can not expect to get anymore federal assistance, they too will have to make the hard choices.
Let the pain begin.
It's not very likely many of them will be very popular two years from now.
1:51 pm on November 17th, 2010 153
In regards to Tom notice I said he was going to be moderated not banned. He is still free to comment but his comments will be approved first. So far he has decided to not comment. He is being moderated because he was consistently taking threads off topic with his trolling.
He is only going to be moderated for a week and hopefully when he is allowed to comment freely he will keep threads on topic.
2:11 pm on November 17th, 2010 154
154, so GI Korea, you're saying that Kushibo stretched the truth when he said he got TOM "moderated". Kushibo had NOTHING to do with it.
3:05 pm on November 17th, 2010 155
If Michelle Bachman (R-Minnesota), Steve King (R-Iowa), and Lynn Westmoreland (R-Georgia) really want to cut government spending, they can do it very well on the Appropriations Committee. But they don't want to serve on the Appropriations Committee!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45250.h…
5:43 pm on December 3rd, 2010 156
Intriguing plan. I'm suprised I wouldnt notice this on typically the large news sites very first. Nicely played!