Fascism + Solutions

[joeblast]

 

How about a neat sarcasm-less analysis of the above JB? I think it's important for people to 'get' things like this without getting caught out. I wouldn't even know where to start, however:-(

the L-R dichotomy is partly false because there are many overlapping aspects of it - like me for example - conservative in a fiscal sense that I dont think the government should be able to print the money that it cannot collect in tax receipts, institute all kinds of generous programs that are basically put on a credit card because there isnt the funding for them (and them everyone recoils in horror at the notion of them going away because they are flat out unsustainable from a financial perspective.) Republic-an in a sense that a Republic is a nation of laws and not mob-rule. Libertarian in a sense that I dont care what people do behind closed doors so long as they're not harming anyone (without their consent of course ) Liberal in the classic sense but rejecting the modern liberal sense that the government should step in and equalize everything due to the bloody favoritism that inevitably results (and not to mention it is simply an amalgam of fascism & socialism re-named and tidied up with new window dressing so as to be more palatable for the average uninformed.) That's somewhere along an A-T sliding scale, but on an L-R scale that could also lump me in with neocons who think there's no issue with securing the world's resources for our own use at whatever cost.

 

So the only true "middle path" here is some decent balance of individual and collective. At the extreme on the individual side we have true anarchy, at the extreme on the collective side we have true totalitarianism. The balance imho contains the yang-benefits of individualism and the yin of collective providing the space through which the individual's expression may manifest most potently. Too much State weight burdens the individual, not enough limits the extent of what the individual may accomplish (being that the collective built the roads, etc.)

 

All things relative are defined by their relational aspects, it is like speaking of Yang and denying the existence of Yin, it is...simply undefined. That's why on the A-T sliding scale, fascism and socialism arent that far apart, and A-T as seen through the lens of L-R is basically looking in a fun-house mirror.

[eye_of_the_storm]

The idea behind fascism was to ^ meet this middle

[joeblast]

ah yes, the perfect melding of state and corporate owned = simply leads to a differently styled oligarchy.

[ralis]

I have stated here before that the 'right wing republican tea bagger' opposition to unions and the dangerous precedent of such actions. In order not to repeat history as human primates so love , then stop harassing labor unions!

 

The authoritarian National Socialists and Italian fascists both outlawed labor unions so as to control and eliminate any opposition to authoritarian policies. The same precedent is occurring here in the U.S. with right to work states and several governors opposing and attempting to break some unions.

 

Labor unions are legal in that such unions are exercising free speech rights and the right to enter into a contract which both are Constitutional rights.

 

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/05/953017/-Is-the-Walker-Hitler-comparison-justified

 

 

 

Tobin Harshaw in the newspaper of record today offers that people who dare compare Wisconsin's Scott Walker to Hitler are engaging in uncivil discourse, especially considering that Hitler had written in Mein Kampf:

trades unions … are among the most important institutions in the economic life of the nation

Therefore, such comparisons stand as evidence of "the efficacy of political demonization in our post-Tucson nation." Harshaw cites fellow villager Ben Smith of Politico to back up his unstinting defense of Godwin's Law:

>>When will politicians ever figure out that you never – ever – invoke Hitler, Nazis or the Holocaust – in political attacks?

To counter this kind of response, a quote has begun making its way through the internet (you can see it here, but it's all over the place), attributed to Hitler himself on May 2, 1933:

We must close union offices, confiscate their money and put their leaders in prison. We must reduce workers salaries and take away their right to strike

Sounds a lot like what Scott Walker is trying to do in Wisconsin, well, except for the part about putting union leaders in prison. So far, he's only threatened Democratic state senators... There is a real question, though, whether Hitler actually said or wrote these words. I haven't been able to find it on the internet, and the historical record suggests the quote itself is apocryphal. However, the sentiment it expresses meshes perfectly with what Hitler actually did -- whether or not he ever said it.

Quotes from the grand-daddy of Nazi studies, William Shirer, on the flip...

 

It turns out May 2, 1933 -- the date of the quote attributed to Hitler -- was a pretty important day in the history of the Nazi regime's relationship with German labor. The day before, Hitler had staged a massive May Day rally -- the first held in Germany under official state auspices, according to Shirer -- at Berlin's Tempelhof airfield. Labor leaders from throughout the country had attended, and Shirer estimates the crowd reached 100,000 people. However, that night Goebbels wrote in his diary:

Tomorrow we shall occupy the trade-union buildings. There will be little resistance (William Shirer, Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, p. 179).

In a footnote, Shirer cites an April 21, 1933 document detailing the extensive plans for occupying the union halls and destroying their organizations on May 2. This document was entered into evidence at the Nuremberg trials, and shows that the planning for the May 2 destruction of the unions had begun weeks in advance. The Goebbels diary entry and the April 21 document make it unlikely that Hitler would have made a statement on the second about the need to destroy unions. Everyone in his inner circle already knew that was going to happen. Returning to the narrative, Shirer writes:

On May 2 the trade-union headquarters throughout the country were occupied, union funds confiscated, the unions dissolved and the leaders arrested. Many were beaten and lodged in concentration camps (ibid).

The first sentence of this passage is structured almost exactly like the quote attributed to Hitler. It is unlikely that Shirer would have been influenced by Hitler in his composition, and more likely that a modern writer would have been influenced by Shirer. The quote is almost certainly untrue, but Hitler's actions on the second of May did have the effect the quote points to.

Hitler publicly promised at the time that all workers' rights would be respected, but:

Within three weeks the hollowness of another Nazi promise was exposed when Hitler decreed a law

bringing an end to collective bargaining

and providing that henceforth ”labor trustees,” appointed by him, would ”regulate labor contracts” and maintain ”labor peace.”185 Since the decisions of the trustees were to be legally binding, the law, in effect, outlawed strikes. Ley promised ”to restore absolute leadership to the natural leader of a factory – that is, the employer . . . Only the employer can decide. Many employers have for years had to call for the ’master in the house.’ Now they are once again to be the ’master in the house’ ” (ibid, p. 180).

Hmmm, maybe the comparisons aren't so far off...

Now, no one is contending that Walker has anything comparable to the SA or the SS, nor that he has an overall totalitarian design for society; there are no brownshirts roaming the streets of Wisconsin cities and towns smashing windows and murdering the GOP's political opponents, nor blackshirts carting opponents off to concentration camps. The comparison being made is what Walker plans to do to labor unions. Here again, Shirer is instructive. In a section of the book entitled "The Serfdom of Labor," he writes of what life was like for the working class in Hitler's Germany:

Deprived of his trade unions, collective bargaining and the right to strike,

the German worker in the Third Reich became an industrial serf, bound to his

master, the employer, much as medieval peasants had been bound to the lord of the manor (ibid, p. 232).

Shirer continues on to discuss the role played by the Labor Front, the organization the Nazis developed to replace the free trade unions:

It was in reality a vast propaganda organization and, as some workers said, a gigantic fraud. Its aim, as stated in the law, was not to protect the worker but ”to create a true social and productive community of all Germans. Its task is to see that every single individual should be able . . . to perform the maximum of work.” The Labor Front was not an independent administrative organization but, like almost every other group in Nazi Germany except the Army, an integral part of the N.S.D.A.P., or, as its leader, Dr. Ley... said, ”an instrument of the party.” Indeed, the October 24 law stipulated that its officials should come from the ranks of the party, the former Nazi unions, the S.A. and the S.S. – and they did....

Wages were set by so-called labor trustees, appointed by the Labor Front. In practice, they set the rates according to the wishes of the employer – there was no provision for the workers even to be consulted in such matters – though after 1936, when help became scarce in the armament industries and some employers attempted to raise wages in order to attract men, wage scales were held down by orders of the State. Hitler was quite frank about keeping wages low. ”It has been the iron principle of the National Socialist leadership,” he declared early in the regime, ”not to permit any rise in the hourly wage rates but to raise income solely by an increase in performance,”215 In a country where most wages were based at least partly on piecework, this meant that a worker could hope to earn more only by a speed-up and by longer hours (ibid, p. 233).

The effect of Nazi labor policies? Well, it actually looks a little like what's happened in the US since the GOP began dismantling the New Deal under Reagan -- except that the Republicans have actually done a better job redistributing income to the top!

Although millions more had jobs, the share of all German workers in the national income fell from 56.9 per cent in the depression year of 1932 to 53.6 per cent in the boom year of 1938. At the same time income from capital and business rose from 17.4 per cent of the national income to 26.6 per cent. It is true that because of much greater employment the total income from wages and salaries grew from twenty-five billion marks to forty-two billions, an increase of 66 per cent. But income from capital and business rose much more steeply – by 146 per cent. All the propagandists in the Third Reich from Hitler on down were accustomed to rant in their public speeches against the bourgeois and the capitalist and proclaim their solidarity with the worker. But a sober study of the official statistics, which perhaps few Germans bothered to make, revealed that the much maligned capitalists, not the workers, benefited most from Nazi policies (ibid, pp. 233-4).

The point of all this isn't to say that Walker is "just like" Hitler, or that Wisconsin is on path to a totalitarian future. (Although I do admit that seeing that video of police wrestling a Democratic state legislator to the ground, it does force you to wonder exactly what his ultimate plans are...) Rather, it is an instructive exercise to look at history in a true and dispassionate way. Hitler did have a labor policy that centered on denying workers their rights to bargain collectively, and he did move from there to profoundly disadvantage workers in their relationship with their employers.

The horrors of Nazi Germany extended much beyond the denial of basic rights to workers. Nevertheless, Shirer makes the argument that the destruction of the unions stemmed above all else from a political objective (see p. 183 of Rise and Fall), and there has also been a great deal of speculation that Walker's true objective in going after public employee unions has been the fact they provide the largest and most important political base for the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. Walker is seeking to cement a Republican majority in state politics, and to transform the basic relationship between workers and employers that has held for the last fifty years.

Is Walker a Nazi? There's no evidence that he is. Can the comparison between Walker's labor policy and Hitler's enlighten us to the dangers of the path Walker has chosen? Absolutely.

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2013 by ralis

[joeblast]

Keep skewin' the story, ralis Is it any wonder why you dont understand such things when you believe any misinformation out there that suits your bias?

 

-making union members pay for their healthcare or pensions is not "union busting"

-taking away their ability to shut down public services if they dont get their way is not "union busting"

-preventing unions from forcing a NRLB change through to shorten the amount of time an employer has to respond to some employees wanting to form a union is not "union busting"

-making them adhere even remotely to what everyone else in the private non union sector does as a matter of course is not "union busting"

-in a recession sometimes people have to take pay cuts - if you're a member of a union, that should not exempt you from it.

-why exactly do union stewards make so much frickin money again? I digress.

 

It is not "anti union," it is not "outlawing them," and when all else fails and you have no argument, play either the racism card, or the nazi card. That'll be sure to make someone agree with you!

[joeblast]

Meanwhile, it appears that Tim Geitner has basically been leaking every single fed notesheet to the banks before their release. Ya know, just another one of those things that up until Obama got into office would have been highly illegal to admit to doing.

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-18/did-tim-geithner-leak-every-fed-announcement-banks

[ralis]

 

Keep skewin' the story, ralis Is it any wonder why you dont understand such things when you believe any misinformation out there that suits your bias?

 

-making union members pay for their healthcare or pensions is not "union busting"

-taking away their ability to shut down public services if they dont get their way is not "union busting"

-preventing unions from forcing a NRLB change through to shorten the amount of time an employer has to respond to some employees wanting to form a union is not "union busting"

-making them adhere even remotely to what everyone else in the private non union sector does as a matter of course is not "union busting"

-in a recession sometimes people have to take pay cuts - if you're a member of a union, that should not exempt you from it.

-why exactly do union stewards make so much frickin money again? I digress.

 

It is not "anti union," it is not "outlawing them," and when all else fails and you have no argument, play either the racism card, or the nazi card. That'll be sure to make someone agree with you!

 

 

Obviously, you have no idea what you are talking about. Intelligent persons read, understand history and how it repeats itself. What I am referring to is human nature and how human primates behave. I posted 'real world data'. However, you do not. Just opinion and innuendo are usually what you believe as being absolute fact. Moreover, complaining about how much money union stewards make is not part of this debate. Read some history JB as opposed to believing every revisionist right wing hack and basing your opinions on such propaganda.

 

Your zero hedge posts are nothing more than opinions from a right wing hack.

Edited January 21, 2013 by ralis

[joeblast]

and your kos/huffpo is unbiased, veritable truth, I'm sure why, its just human nature to equate one's opponent with nazis ad hominem, last refuge of scoundrels that lose control of "a debate" and make it into an ear covering argument.

[ralis]

 

and your kos/huffpo is unbiased, veritable truth, I'm sure why, its just human nature to equate one's opponent with nazis ad hominem, last refuge of scoundrels that lose control of "a debate" and make it into an ear covering argument.

 

 

Your silly little remarks never make sense in any debate. Of course what you want is a Utopian Ayn Rand society where persons have some mythological framework of so called absolute freedom. On the other hand if unions want freedom to negotiate a contract then that is not allowed and opposes your authoritarian values.

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2013 by ralis

[ralis]

JB,

 

Your little 'Tea Bagger' movement is becoming small and irrelevant. Demographics are changing as all things must change. The only way the right wing party is in control of Congress is by gerrymandering.

 

Did you bother to read the quotes in the article from William L. Shirer's work? Do you read history? Your posts indicate otherwise.

Edited January 21, 2013 by ralis

[joeblast]

putting aside ralis wiping his lunch off the screen after another bout of uncontrollable kneejerk nazi references and supporting-leftism-despite-all-evidence-they're-every-bit-as-bad-as-neocons-when-in-charge...not to mention forever upholding the L-R false dichotomy, and oh yes, rich trumka is america's buddy, right

 

Meanwhile, it appears that Tim Geitner has basically been leaking every single fed notesheet to the banks before their release. Ya know, just another one of those things that up until Obama got into office would have been highly illegal to admit to doing.

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-18/did-tim-geithner-leak-every-fed-announcement-banks

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-19/presenting-50-point-sp-500-move-courtesy-illegal-geithner-leak

 

Now we know why the fed waits 5 years to release such information, because the banks have already made their money and ran with it....5 years ago...by the time any of this information makes it out. I'd love to see more FOIA requests on this.

 

Looks like Timmy belongs in jail.

 

 

MR. LACKER.

Vice Chairman Geithner, did you say that [the banks] are unaware of what we’re considering or what we might be doing with the discount rate?

 

VICE CHAIRMAN GEITHNER.

Yes.

 

MR. LACKER.

Vice Chairman Geithner,

I spoke with Ken Lewis, President and CEO of Bank of America, this afternoon, and he said that he appreciated what Tim Geithner was arranging by way of changes in the discount facility.

So my information is

different from that.

So as if the banks werent already making enough money off of manipulated market mechanations, now they've secured in place a treasury secretary that notifies them of just about every significant central bank move ahead of time, so if there's a problem they can cover their asses as best they can, while everyone else gets the surprise trip to the cleaners.

 

Nice going, OWS - you got completely fooled! Run to the government to help you against these big banks...and the two entities will just laugh at you behind closed doors and try to think of something to placate your sense of incredulity. So long as you folks think the government is going to help you fix this, the government will make sure that the can will be kicked down the road...that is, until it cant any longer and reality will have to shine some disinfectant on the ponzi - yet when that happens, those at the top of the ponzi have already extracted their wealth from the equation, courtesy of things just like this.

 

But, keep focusing on union rights...and nevermind that debt clock...or the lack of a budget for the entire obama presidency...because deficits dont matter, right?

[joeblast]

anyone realize Mali was added to the list of countries with us troops on the ground? (like, by last summer?)

[zerostao]

today we are transporting french troops into mali

and i reckon we are positioning ourself all over afrika.

hey, the way the budget is working out, the only thing we will be able to fund in 20 years is the pentagon.

 

edit> what can i do? besides i am trying to decide if i am to go to huntington mar 1 to see little big town or to lexington mar 2, to see george strait. i am leaning towards little big town, to be honest. i am blind and silent in regards to fascism, much safer that way. nothing in appalachia ever changes anyways.

solution!! go see little big town and george strait, it seems obvious now, doh!

Edited January 22, 2013 by zerostao

[ralis]

putting aside ralis wiping his lunch off the screen after another bout of uncontrollable kneejerk nazi references and supporting-leftism-despite-all-evidence-they're-every-bit-as-bad-as-neocons-when-in-charge...not to mention forever upholding the L-R false dichotomy, and oh yes, rich trumka is america's buddy, right

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-19/presenting-50-point-sp-500-move-courtesy-illegal-geithner-leak

 

Now we know why the fed waits 5 years to release such information, because the banks have already made their money and ran with it....5 years ago...by the time any of this information makes it out. I'd love to see more FOIA requests on this.

 

Looks like Timmy belongs in jail.

 

So as if the banks werent already making enough money off of manipulated market mechanations, now they've secured in place a treasury secretary that notifies them of just about every significant central bank move ahead of time, so if there's a problem they can cover their asses as best they can, while everyone else gets the surprise trip to the cleaners.

 

Nice going, OWS - you got completely fooled! Run to the government to help you against these big banks...and the two entities will just laugh at you behind closed doors and try to think of something to placate your sense of incredulity. So long as you folks think the government is going to help you fix this, the government will make sure that the can will be kicked down the road...that is, until it cant any longer and reality will have to shine some disinfectant on the ponzi - yet when that happens, those at the top of the ponzi have already extracted their wealth from the equation, courtesy of things just like this.

 

But, keep focusing on union rights...and nevermind that debt clock...or the lack of a budget for the entire obama presidency...because deficits dont matter, right?

 

 

 

I guess you are still in the L/R crowd and shilling for the far right wing. This is the kind of immaturity that continually divides this country that you are part of.

 

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/22/glen-beck-stages-misfits-inaugural-ball-complete-with-earth-haters-hate-mongers-and-bible-thumpers/

Edited January 22, 2013 by ralis

[Birch]

Ralis, what's with the 'human primates' thing? I'm guessing your term is loaded.

 

[ralis]

Ralis, what's with the 'human primates' thing? I'm guessing your term is loaded.

 

 

That is what humans are. Behavior, genetics and biology. I believe there is only 1% difference in genetic makeup between chimps and humans. That 1% is what makes us somewhat different. The other 99% is the same. Dr. Timothy Leary coined the term 'socialized primates'. There are many recent studies on primate behavior and the similarities to humans. Also investigating herd behavior or primitive tribalism is another place to start reading.

 

All humans behave according to socialized groups for whatever reason. Politics, religion, race etc. Political groups are easily studied. Especially at this time with the intense polarization of the two party system here in the U.S.

 

The religious right is a classic example of group primate behavior both historically and currently. Some of the most egregious crimes have been committed in the name of organized religion.

 

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/22/family-research-council-slams-obama-speech-lgbt-people-already-have-enough-rights/

 

 

Edited January 22, 2013 by ralis

[Birch]

 

That is what humans are. Behavior, genetics and biology. Dr. Timothy Leary coined the term 'socialized primates'. There are many recent studies on primate behavior and the similarities to humans. Also investigating herd behavior or primitive tribalism is another place to start reading.

 

Primitive tribalism? Herds? Ok, I seem to have a problem with this conceptually. I've met people who talk like this and their attitude towards their fellow humans tends to be awful. Right there with the 'sheeple'. Although I'm sure you're not concerned with offending me personally (I don't care BTW) but your disdain is showing.

[ralis]

Primitive tribalism? Herds? Ok, I seem to have a problem with this conceptually. I've met people who talk like this and their attitude towards their fellow humans tends to be awful. Right there with the 'sheeple'. Although I'm sure you're not concerned with offending me personally (I don't care BTW) but your disdain is showing.

 

 

Read and observe for yourself. My academic background is in science and that is my approach. The research is solid in this area.

 

Humans are a tiny blip in the geological record. Yet, are the most destructive to themselves and the biosphere. Humans create imbalance by destructive impulses. One example is overpopulation. That problem has been exasperated by the advent of chemical fertilizers, namely synthetic nitrogen manufactured by natural gas. With the addition of urea to the soil, crop production has increased per acre. I don't remember what the % increase is. That has fostered in part, increased population growth. Natural herd populations live in balance with nature and when environmental problems occur, the population is decreased or in many cases, extinction. There have been 5 mass extinctions. Humans may be in the 6th.

 

Honestly, humans in general are unable to use their evolved brain and remain unevolved.

 

I will continue with my remarks in a few days.

Edited January 22, 2013 by ralis

[Birch]

 

Read and observe for yourself. My academic background is in science and that is my approach. The research is solid in this area.

 

Humans are a tiny blip in the geological record. Yet, are the most destructive to themselves and the biosphere. Humans create imbalance by destructive impulses. One example is overpopulation. That problem has been exasperated by the advent of chemical fertilizers, namely synthetic nitrogen manufactured by natural gas. With the addition of urea to the soil, crop production has increased per acre. I don't remember what the % increase is. That has fostered in part, increased population growth. Natural herd populations live in balance with nature and when environmental problems occur, the population is decreased or in many cases, extinction. There have been 5 mass extinctions. Humans may be in the 6th.

 

Honestly, humans in general are unable to use their evolved brain and remain unevolved.

 

I will continue with my remarks in a few days.

 

I'm not far away from you in my reading interests Ralis, however I don't subscribe to several of your views. I'm sure you'll offer a variety of arguments. Thing is, from what starting position will you lead off? That of 'humans in general are unable to use their evolved brain and remain unevolved'? Can we have it both ways? Can we have an evolved brain that stays unevolved? Under what circumstances? Can we have an evolved brain that 'evolves' further? Under what circumstances and within how long?

 

 

 

 

 

[joeblast]

Ralis, what's with the 'human primates' thing? I'm guessing your term is loaded.

Its how Statists justify the need to exert control over the population. Individuals cant possibly make good decisions for themselves and need to be corralled into making the correct choices, of course after being herded into the range of narrowed down and "acceptable" choices.

 

Its why little Susie there was suspended for talking about shooting her friend with soap bubbles - we have to make sure that we stay on top of indoctrination efforts, so that kids can be led to the correct choices. How terrible would it be for Susie to learn that guns are part of our upbringing as a nation, the very last resort against a tyrannical gov....wait a sec, we can just toss that entire meme, because we all know that governments, especially ours, proceed carefully with only the best interests of the people in mind - this is displayed each and every day with the preponderance of wise and judicious decisions that come from all levels of our government. This is the entire reason peace and prosperity came to the nation, of course - that and the Unions, who do all they can to protect and always have the little worker's interests first and foremost in mind whenever they make a decision. Unions are why we have weekends, after all!

 

Now run along, play nicely, and stay away from all those big bad politically incorrect things out there, they are the entire reason why there is danger in the world - so keep paying your dues and taxes and nevermind what may be going on behind that curtain, they are only esoteric little internal mechanations to keep you safe

[eye_of_the_storm]

Read and observe for yourself. My academic background is in science and that is my approach. The research is solid in this area.

 

Humans are a tiny blip in the geological record. Yet, are the most destructive to themselves and the biosphere. Humans create imbalance by destructive impulses. One example is overpopulation. That problem has been exasperated by the advent of chemical fertilizers, namely synthetic nitrogen manufactured by natural gas. With the addition of urea to the soil, crop production has increased per acre. I don't remember what the % increase is. That has fostered in part, increased population growth. Natural herd populations live in balance with nature and when environmental problems occur, the population is decreased or in many cases, extinction. There have been 5 mass extinctions. Humans may be in the 6th.

 

Honestly, humans in general are unable to use their evolved brain and remain unevolved.

 

I will continue with my remarks in a few days.

 

Well you can thank (gov sponsored) $cience for fking up the planet then eh?

 

We've had the solutions... your friends keep killing my friends though.

 

so many great ideas have just "disappeared"

 

so many great ideas unexplored / ignored / shutdown

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ralis]

I'm not far away from you in my reading interests Ralis, however I don't subscribe to several of your views. I'm sure you'll offer a variety of arguments. Thing is, from what starting position will you lead off? That of 'humans in general are unable to use their evolved brain and remain unevolved'? Can we have it both ways? Can we have an evolved brain that stays unevolved? Under what circumstances? Can we have an evolved brain that 'evolves' further? Under what circumstances and within how long?

Note the arrogant smart assed remarks by JB. This attitude is what I am referring to. Just further divides into polarized groups.

[Birch]

Note the arrogant smart assed remarks by JB. This attitude is what I am referring to. Just further divides into polarized groups.

 

You don't think anything he's saying has any basis in truth? I find anyone attempting discourse on such huge topics pretty arrogant. Myself included.

[joeblast]

Note the arrogant smart assed remarks by JB. This attitude is what I am referring to. Just further divides into polarized groups.

Hey, I figured since I couldnt get a real reply out of you I might as well try sarcasm. You dont even try to have any semblance of debate, all you have are vitriolic remarks - and perchance you do put up something, its scantly relevant to the discussion. But that's ok, since in Progressive-land you get to call whatever you want whichever you want, it doesnt matter, them's just words and can be changed at a whim. Or wait, was that only in regards to the constitution?

 

So tough to follow when one can call anything Marklar :lol;

[eye_of_the_storm]