Susan's Place Transgender Resources

what political orientation are you?

Hi Fiona,

That's a mighty good question, you have posed. Particularly where you come from. The heart land of 'R' territory. You're not the leak in the cabinet we are hearing about are you? LOL

Have fun.
Lotsa luv
Catherine

Quote from: CatherineSarah on October 17, 2011, 12:12:54 AM
Hi Fiona,

That's a mighty good question, you have posed. Particularly where you come from. The heart land of 'R' territory. You're not the leak in the cabinet we are hearing about are you? LOL

lol

Hi Catherine,

It's not that redneck here. they are quite a beleaguered demographic actually.
lol.

Fi

x

You could call me a liberal I guess. Mostly I believe that everyone should get equal opportunity and that no man woman or child should be left to die. I believe that taxes are a necessary evil to fund programs that benefit mankind that may get no money otherwise. I also believe that education is one of the most important things in this world. I lastly believe that every idea has its merits, and that we should test the weight of the merits of those ideas than to test the people who give the ideas (something called partisanship). Around here I might be called a liberal or a democrat, and admittedly I do lean more on that side, but not 100% of the time.

Quote from: fionabell on October 17, 2011, 12:22:13 AM
lol

Hi Catherine,

It's not that redneck here. they are quite a beleaguered demographic actually.
lol.

Fi

x

Aussie's have rednecks. I saw Mad Max and Crocadile Dundee.

  Moderate conservative, non-Tea Party.  I do not have many friends of the subset of h. cervix rufous though.
  Joelene

I'm running for President on the Sexy Underwear Party ticket  :laugh:  In other words, none of the existing political parties really appeal to me at this time  :P

I am a recovered libertarian/anarcho-capitalist lol.

Now I identify more as a queer anarchist. I believe in the ability and right of people to self-organize and maintain autonomy of body, identity and action as long as the exercise thereof doesn't harm others. I believe the state is an institution based on violence and theft thinly veiled by a mythos of legitimacy. Rather than perpetuating an oppressive and inherently violent institution, I support a community-driven society based upon mutual respect, solidarity, self-organization, and ethical (and environmentally sustainable) production and consumption.

As for my ideology of revolution, I don't think our society is ready for an immediate transition to a stateless community. I think that, firstly, oppression needs to be further eradicated. I don't trust self-organization until systemic racism, sexism, cissexism, transphobia, homophobia, ableism, neurotypicism, ageism, classism, fat-phobia and slut shaming are all eradicated and minimized to instances of personal prejudice. Secondly, I don't think it's feasible or ethical to pull government aid programs instantly while vulnerable people still depend on them. Only when viable alternatives are available for beneficiaries can I advocate ending government aid.

I am still working out my ideas of production and distribution. I have a little bit of a founding in economics (until recently I was majoring in Econ) as well as Austro-praxeological approaches to economics, but I haven't been able to apply this understanding to the problem of ethical community production yet. Syndicalism interests me, but I have more research ahead of me.

I don't believe in utopia, but I think the system can help people rather than comodify us and leave all but the elite vulnerable.

Quote from: V M on October 18, 2011, 12:40:38 AM
I'm running for President on the Sexy Underwear Party ticket

Also: this  :D

I am anti-capitalist, anti-consumerist. I believe in from each according to their means to each according to their needs. :)

I believe in free capitalism with as less state intervention as possible (no limits, no allowances, no need of health or retirement insurance etc, I can manage my money much more effective than state)

I believe in Christian Dior, Jean Paul Gautlier, and Coco Chanel.

QuoteI'm running for President on the Sexy Underwear Party ticket    In other words, none of the existing political parties really appeal to me at this time 

I'm voting for VM.


The poll left out Independent, so I picked Other.

I am a member of the S.U.P. ;D The Sexy Underwear Party!

Jennifer

Quote from: Mahsa the disco shark on November 15, 2011, 02:52:59 PM
I believe in Christian Dior, Jean Paul Gautlier, and Coco Chanel.

Elle, you go girl! I vote for this. Fabulous as always.

I vote conservative, but just because someone else isn't doesn't make me want to quarrel. We're all above that, aren't we? Besides, there are some parts of the left I agree with; namely gay marriage and better insurance coverage (such as more HRT, FFS, SRS, etc. inclusion in insurances), however not through nationalized healthcare.

Quote from: Jessica N on December 02, 2011, 01:30:35 AM
Elle, you go girl! I vote for this. Fabulous as always.

I vote conservative, but just because someone else isn't doesn't make me want to quarrel. We're all above that, aren't we? Besides, there are some parts of the left I agree with; namely gay marriage and better insurance coverage (such as more HRT, FFS, SRS, etc. inclusion in insurances), however not through nationalized healthcare.

Lol. So you're left when you can get something out of it.? :o ;D

Quote from: fionabell on December 02, 2011, 01:35:50 AM
Lol. So you're left when you can get something out of it.? :o ;D

LOL, I guess I should have given more examples, of ways I mix the two; my Roe vs. Wade stance comes to mind; a (wo)man can have an abortion if (s)he wishes. I can't be forgetting about pregnant fathers like Beatie, can I now? :)

I guess my view mix comes from an odd background, if I analyze it; my father is a total democrat (as is his family), whereas my mother is more conservative (and has Bible Belt family).

When it comes to economics I am fairly right wing/ conservative.  I have lived under a socialist style of government and watched the entire economy go into recession when the rest of north america was in one of the largest economic booms in history.   I saw just how corrupt a left wing party can be. 

Socially, I am quite liberal.   Religious fanatics scare me as do anyone trying to push their morality onto me.

The two types, social and economic left and right have to be separated.  Most people I know (even is a socialist country like Canada) lean to the right when it comes to economics.  On the other hand, most people I know (who are not religious fanatics) are quite liberal when it comes to social issues.  Unfortunately their doesn't seem to be a political party that hasn't let the loony fringe take over.

Hugs
Zaria

Gay.

I think I am socialist economically and socially but far right politically :icon_dizzy:

Put a little of anarchy, a little of social economy awareness, a little of patriotich sense of pride, a little of institutional respect, a little of cooperation belief, a little of equal rights declaration, a little of caring for the unlucky ones and a little of occupy movement you have pretty much me

I still have some myths as Che Guevara, Ghandi... People who had the courage to fight oppression and inequality, but although i recognize that capitalism is the best possible system, it's just that it was made a mess by monopolies and now we almost live like ghosts, our future choosen by the richer that don't even risk nothing, just make moneys out of moneys.

Most of the medias and the banks are big parts of this oligarchic control system, and we should fight it with new forms, maybe internet could help, but also internet companies live out of pubblicity, i guess we will fight better with non profit medias, and much patience

ANTI , no side after all there prime concern is THERE wallet .
Lobbyist and stuff organized crime.

Considering the options you gave, I'd say you left out just about everyone I know.  I do however find it interesting you applied the adjective "looney" to being a "lefty."  Does that say anything about your own proclivities?  Like all left wing people are looney?

My politics can't be described in a simple word or phrase.  Actually I hate politics and I see politicians as people who only have to do one thing well, get elected.  And they do whatever it takes to achieve that goal.

I do however have beliefs about what I feel would be best for this country and its citizens.  Fiscally, I believe we need to prioritize spending based on what the citizens want.  I feel we need to eliminate any campaigning (advertising) for political pet projects and just take care of this country and its citizens first.  If there's money left over, pay off the credit cards until we're out of debt then put it in the bank and let it earn interest.  And when there's enough to splurge a bit, we take a little out and treat ourselves to something nice.

Socially I believe in the same civil rights for all.  No one deserves any more or less rights and/or privileges (unless they committed a crime against their fellow human being.)  I believe in the Principles of Democracy (http://www.america.gov/publications/books/principles-of-democracy.html).  I believe civil rights should never be up for a vote.

I also feel we need to put an end to campaign donations and an end to lobbying.  Both allow our elected officials to be swayed by the rich and powerful.  And they don't make up the majority of this country.  But they sure have screwed it up a lot.

Quote from: Julie Marie on December 02, 2011, 09:28:00 AM
I do however find it interesting you applied the adjective "looney" to being a "lefty."  Does that say anything about your own proclivities?  Like all left wing people are looney?

Here in Oz  -  ABSOLUTELY.  All us lefties are loonies for sure.  LOL

Be safe, well and happy
Lotsa huggs
Catherine

Quote from: Julie Marie on December 02, 2011, 09:28:00 AM
Considering the options you gave, I'd say you left out just about everyone I know.

I don't think there are enough poll options for that kind of open mindedness.

QuoteI do however find it interesting you applied the adjective "looney" to being a "lefty."  Does that say anything about your own proclivities?  Like all left wing people are looney?

Actually yes.

Were the unions and women's suffrage of the early 20th century looney? No.

Is the left looney today? 100% of them, and I brook zero compromise on that percentage.

I used to be a lefty looney. I'm still looney, I've just dropped the lefty. However I still clique with leftys even though I now disagree with them. I don't clique with conservatives. I clique with some far right(of course with a strained relationship considering who I am lol).

QuoteMy politics can't be described in a simple word or phrase.  Actually I hate politics and I see politicians as people who only have to do one thing well, get elected.  And they do whatever it takes to achieve that goal.

I hate politics too. not only the politicians, but the very essence of politics which is to divide people in two (and only two) groups. Politics to me, is choosing one of two sides and then compromising all your core principles and values in order to oppose the opposition.

Quote
I do however have beliefs about what I feel would be best for this country and its citizens.  Fiscally, I believe we need to prioritize spending based on what the citizens want.  I feel we need to eliminate any campaigning (advertising) for political pet projects and just take care of this country and its citizens first.  If there's money left over, pay off the credit cards until we're out of debt then put it in the bank and let it earn interest.  And when there's enough to splurge a bit, we take a little out and treat ourselves to something nice.

Socially I believe in the same civil rights for all.  No one deserves any more or less rights and/or privileges (unless they committed a crime against their fellow human being.)  I believe in the Principles of Democracy (http://www.america.gov/publications/books/principles-of-democracy.html).  I believe civil rights should never be up for a vote.

I also feel we need to put an end to campaign donations and an end to lobbying.  Both allow our elected officials to be swayed by the rich and powerful.  And they don't make up the majority of this country.  But they sure have screwed it up a lot.

Re: the bold. If we could do that, we might be able to have a democracy. :) :) :)

poll options

Looney lefty

Rabid right wing

And I just thought of...

Compromising conservative. :D

Kia Ora Fiona,

::) I would have to say the Greens-I live it[in regards to the environment] eat it[I'm vegetarian], voted for the Green party this election, and in the passed I often smoked it ! ;) ;D So yeah I'd have to say "Green" ...

Metta Zenda :)

Actually, there really isn't any left left in politics.  The Democrats have moved to where the Republicans used to be and the Republicans have moved into the insane asylum.  You only need to watch the Republican presidential debates to know that.   

Quote from: Julie Marie on December 02, 2011, 05:26:23 PM
Actually, there really isn't any left left in politics.  The Democrats have moved to where the Republicans used to be and the Republicans have moved into the insane asylum.  You only need to watch the Republican presidential debates to know that.

Kia Ora Julie,

::) Well if my "eyes" don't deceive me, according to your eye colour you're also a "Greenie" .... ;)

Metta Zenda :)

Quote from: Julie Marie on December 02, 2011, 05:26:23 PM
Actually, there really isn't any left left in politics. 

There never really has been. Only opportunity masquerading as socialism.

Quote from: Julie Marie on December 02, 2011, 05:26:23 PM
Actually, there really isn't any left left in politics.  The Democrats have moved to where the Republicans used to be and the Republicans have moved into the insane asylum.  You only need to watch the Republican presidential debates to know that.

And those on the right say the exact opposite.  The Republicans are where the democrats were 25 years ago and the democrats are so far left that they are facing backwards... 

Quote from: Zaria on December 02, 2011, 11:48:27 PM
And those on the right say the exact opposite.  The Republicans are where the democrats were 25 years ago and the democrats are so far left that they are facing backwards...

You know what that means don't you? Republicans and democrats are the same. Whoever Goldman Sachs is donating the lions share of campaign money, will be the next president.

Incidentally, the far right and the far left want basically the same things.

Both against foreign wars

Both want better wages and living conditions for the people

Both want a more cohesive society

Both are against zionism

The problems are consistent. However, their solutions are the opposite.

Quote from: Dàwkbua on November 15, 2011, 08:09:23 AM
I am anti-capitalist, anti-consumerist. I believe in from each according to their means to each according to their needs. :)

Ditto  freedom to make money can be construed as freedom to rip off your fellow human

Quote from: Julie Marie on December 02, 2011, 05:26:23 PM
Actually, there really isn't any left left in politics.  The Democrats have moved to where the Republicans used to be and the Republicans have moved into the insane asylum.  You only need to watch the Republican presidential debates to know that.

Isn't that the trth

Quote from: Medusa on November 15, 2011, 08:48:53 AM
I believe in free capitalism with as less state intervention as possible (no limits, no allowances, no need of health or retirement insurance etc, I can manage my money much more effective than state)

You sound like the tea party which is freedom to rip off as many people as possible under the guise of capitalism   RABID RIGHT grrrr

Quote from: Amazon D on December 03, 2011, 06:03:52 AM
You sound like the tea party which is freedom to rip off as many people as possible under the guise of capitalism   RABID RIGHT grrrr

The far right are actually against capitalism. It's the middle right that's into ripping everyone off, just like the middle left, and the far left for that matter.

It's amazing how little everyone seems to know about the right. The far right, like the far left, is based on principles not opportunism.

Of course in practice they both get hijacked by opportunists.

Far right example: Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe. They aren't really ripping everyone off , just ripping everyone up.

I'm not sure where you would put those Republicans who, no matter what impact it might have on the financial strength of this country, staunchly refuse to budge when it comes to allowing tax rates to return the the levels they were when we could actually balance the budget.  I say they are far right.

I'm not sure where you would put those who want to install an electric fence at the Mexican-US border.  They too are Republicans, and some are running for president.  I'd put them as far out.

I've heard some of the wackiest things during the Republican presidential debates.  Yet the one person that actually speaks logic, is only holding about 1% of the votes.  You only have to look at the front runner flavor of the week to realize at least the Republicans being tallied for these polls are in a land far, far away.  And the guy who almost certainly will win the nod is one of the few who have not made it to the top of the polls.

When I think of far right or far left, I think whacky, illogical, nonsensical.  And based on everything I have seen in the past few years, from the Tea Party to the presidential debates, most Republicans qualify.

I know it seems I'm really spoiling for a fight here but I'm just intrigued as to how your minds work on all this. I've been arguing with right wingers on the net for about two years. They do all these muli-quote things and pick at everything you say.
Btw they really argue and argue and the Americans are the most insane, but I believe you lefty Americans are just as crazy. I'm not trying to be nasty, I'm saying all this lightly.

It's interesting to see the other side though. I promise I'll stop soon if people want me to and continue it on socialist sites. Unfortunately the socialist sites I've seen are to insane to bother with. If this was 1910 I'm sure they'd be a lot more sensible.

Quote from: Julie Marie on December 03, 2011, 07:19:23 AM
I'm not sure where you would put those Republicans who, no matter what impact it might have on the financial strength of this country, staunchly refuse to budge when it comes to allowing tax rates to return the the levels they were when we could actually balance the budget.  I say they are far right.

I'm not sure where you would put those who want to install an electric fence at the Mexican-US border.  They too are Republicans, and some are running for president.  I'd put them as far out.

It's quite reasonable and normal for a country to defend it's borders. What you have going on in The states with your southern border is way out and abnormal.

It's normal to give asylum to refugees but having an open border? :o  That's not left, right or middle. That's people in charge of your country who want more and more workers for cheaper and cheaper pay. And republicans will never protect your southern border.

Quote
I've heard some of the wackiest things during the Republican presidential debates.  Yet the one person that actually speaks logic, is only holding about 1% of the votes.  You only have to look at the front runner flavor of the week to realize at least the Republicans being tallied for these polls are in a land far, far away.  And the guy who almost certainly will win the nod is one of the few who have not made it to the top of the polls.

When I think of far right or far left, I think whacky, illogical, nonsensical.  And based on everything I have seen in the past few years, from the Tea Party to the presidential debates, most Republicans qualify.

:)

I do not live in usa.
Anyway your poll is to much influenced by your distorted perception of politics.

You can say that conservatives and left people are similar, but this is wrong. Don't judge politic by what they claim but do it considering what they've done.

Right people, almost everywhere in the world, don't support equal rights for us, are against social equity measures, defend rich people from a more right taxation, are against foreign people integration into society.

On these subjects left is just the opposite.

Right people are the ones that lead us, from Reagan to bush, to this actual economic crysis, where asian countries gained importance trough an illogic externalization of the work power, and now rule the world, where people makes just money out of money, only playing in the financil markets, in the sake of the ones who trie to build industries without ny money.

>> Right people, almost everywhere in the world, don't support equal rights for us, are against social equity measures, defend rich people from a more right taxation, are against foreign people integration into society. <<

Thats because you make the same mistake that most people do.  You don't separate social right/left and economic right/left.   I know many people who are very much economic 'right' who support equal rights for all and are supportive of immigration.  I am one of them. 
Capitalism may not be perfect, but it is more 'fair' than any other system out there. 

Hugs
Zaria :)

Quote from: Zaria on December 05, 2011, 11:26:11 AM
>> Right people, almost everywhere in the world, don't support equal rights for us, are against social equity measures, defend rich people from a more right taxation, are against foreign people integration into society. <<

Thats because you make the same mistake that most people do.  You don't separate social right/left and economic right/left.   I know many people who are very much economic 'right' who support equal rights for all and are supportive of immigration.  I am one of them. 
Capitalism may not be perfect, but it is more 'fair' than any other system out there. 

Hugs
Zaria :)

I am talking about political parties! People behave differently from their parties I knew this
:)

Well by most people I would be classified as right wing.

But economically I am leaning towards socialism, however real socialism and not the liberal junk that the left is standing for nowadays.

i agree with that so much. I'm kind of a natural born socialist but the nonsense that socialism is today is not socialism

I'm interested in your idea of working socialistic society
Can you please tell me about it

Who me?

all  ^-^
no offence

I will try to do my best to write it down in a condensed version but it is so much that need to be adressed if you want to make socialism to work in its true meaning that I find it hard to fit it in a few lines.

Right now I am out of time but will give it a try when I get home again.

We re in 2011, almost 12, real socialism should be abandoned for age! Anyway socialistic parties in europe have a democratic nature and just press toward a more equal society, sometimes too much weak aybe!

Ok sorry but the time is just not on my side right now :(.

Anyway. Socialism must come from within the people, otherwise it is doomed to go bad from the start.

Todays socialists dont know what the hell they are talking about. I mean socialism without nationalism? that is impossible. It is sad to see that they dont realize that. They are today promoting multiculturalism which only leads to anarchy and eventually a bloodbath. Why? because it shatters the societies.

We humans just are that way, we split into groups and fight with our own groups best interests in mind because its so deeply programmed into our brain. It is all about survival! it doesnt matter if you like it or not because the fact still remains. We are made to work that way and there is nothing we can do about it, but accept it and respect each other.


The reason why europe is going down the drain right now is that nationalism is considered bad, and global uniformity is considered good. Nationalism brings a sense of belonging in the society and that is a good thing! When people feel like they are one with the society and when everybody knows that they are working for the nations and peoples best interests then then you also start to care for others within the group.

But today we want to blend all of the worlds people faster than we can say "multiculti" and what we do is actually to break down the countries and societies from within!


The socialists today are actually helping capitalists and banks to gain more and more influence over the world! But they are to blind to see that.


It can be seen here in Sweden like in many other coutries. But I can from my own experience actually tell a very big difference from lets say the 90s and now.. Then we could leave our cars and houses open without being afraid that someone should steal all the valuables inside! You could walk in the night without being raped, murdered or robbed. We had good healthcare, one of the best actually.

Today? well you cant be safe even if you lock the house or car, you cant go out in the night without being afraid.. We are on the top regarding rapes per capita, we can read about murders almost everyday (something that was very seldom in the 90s) and the healthcare? well our elders are starving and the care is really bad in general.

It is sad actually.



Sorry about spelling and all the other faults made.. I wrote this in a hurry!

^I agree. Real socialism works. The problem is, anytime it's ever been tried, America bombs it into oblivion or sets up a trade embargo against the country.

Examples

Nazi Germany(national socialism)

Cuba

Lybia

(China isn't socialist, it's non-democratic capitalism)

Quote from: Carolina1983 on December 21, 2011, 02:26:11 PM
The socialists today are actually helping capitalists and banks to gain more and more influence over the world! But they are to blind to see that.

this is it. Marx would be appalled.

Quote from: fionabell on December 21, 2011, 02:46:36 PM
^I agree. Real socialism works. The problem is, anytime it's ever been tried, America bombs it into oblivion or sets up a trade embargo against the country.

Examples

Nazi Germany(national socialism)

Cuba

Lybia

(China isn't socialist, it's non-democratic capitalism)

Nazi Germany as an example of good society?  :o  Just that small detail with killing millions of our people and begin WW

Cuba ? It is just a museum of Soviet politics.

Is killing and imprisoning peoples with different thinking part of Real socialism? Or is it just a fault of government each of this paradises?

Quote from: Medusa on December 22, 2011, 01:55:38 AM
Nazi Germany as an example of good society?  :o  Just that small detail with killing millions of our people and begin WW

Cuba ? It is just a museum of Soviet politics.

Is killing and imprisoning peoples with different thinking part of Real socialism? Or is it just a fault of government each of this paradises?

Well everything can be made to look evil in propaganda! My relatives lived in Germany and they told me that it was actually a very good society to live in. The people where all seen as equally important regardless of your status! And they also made vacation obligatory, and animal rights etc. It was a society well ahead of their time! But nobody did ever talk about it loud after the war because then you would be seen as a hater and got the label "nazi" put on you which meant no job and no money.

They did not recognize the Germany that is portrayed in so called documentaries etc. And yes there was a conflict between jews and the Germans because the jews did work for their groups own interests and not the Germans. You can even see that the jews declared war on Germany 1933 which did not help the situation.

After WW1 Germany was supressed and made to pay huge ammounts of money for a war they did not even start, and there was land stolen by Poland and others in which later germans was harassed (the reason why Hitler invaded poland).

Which are your people? Germany did not start WW2 but Poland and England did. And besides, who firebombed cities where only children and women resided in? oh yes the good allies did! Who used torture to make the germans confess things they never did? yes the allied forces did. Who raped and plundered millions after the war? yes the allied forces did. Not everything in this world is black and white and that is also the case of WW2. Something that people actually are starting to understand here in europe nowadays.

Germany opposed the bankers will and that resulted in war and destruction.

Never underestimate the power of propaganda! The US and their allies are very good at it.

And why then Germany attack other countries?
Why they want Sudets it newer was their land. Truth is that German occupants at Czechoslovakia was better and more polite than Red Army after them which was just a group of barbarians.
And concentration camps was just propaganda ?

Sorry Carolina but I was born in the immediate post-war period, and we were aware that  the Third Reich was far more evil than people today can possibly imagine. We grew up with people who had suffered directly.

Being Jewish meant having an ancestor as far back as it was possible to verify such. That meant you were a form of human virus to be wiped off the face of the earth, along with anyone else who didn't fit into their mad scramble around whoever was the current local Alpha-Male.
Economically it was laissez-faire capitalism taken to the extreme, coupled with monopoly or duopoly manadated by government.

Sorry for the rant, but that sort of apologetics for a retreat to a pre-Christian Dark Ages needs to be exposed for what it is.

As for myself I am an amalgam of Conservative, Anarcho-libertarian, Monarchist,very moderate Green.

Quote from: justmeinoz on December 22, 2011, 06:05:21 AM
Sorry Carolina but I was born in the immediate post-war period, and we were aware that  the Third Reich was far more evil than people today can possibly imagine. We grew up with people who had suffered directly.

Being Jewish meant having an ancestor as far back as it was possible to verify such. That meant you were a form of human virus to be wiped off the face of the earth, along with anyone else who didn't fit into their mad scramble around whoever was the current local Alpha-Male.
Economically it was laissez-faire capitalism taken to the extreme, coupled with monopoly or duopoly manadated by government.

Sorry for the rant, but that sort of apologetics for a retreat to a pre-Christian Dark Ages needs to be exposed for what it is.

As for myself I am an amalgam of Conservative, Anarcho-libertarian, Monarchist,very moderate Green.

Well I must say that I disagree. The victors write history! If the Axis won I bet that everybody would condemn the allied forces because they where the ultimate evil. There is always two sides of the coin. The Nüremberg trial for example was full of fake evidence and also forced confessions obtained from torture. And confessions obtained under torture can never be used as evidence for anything.

Pure good and evil only exists in fairytales.


I am not ignorant belive me, I have spent years and years of researching this because of my relatives and because it is a part of my history too. I still get the Nazi stamp on me because one of my relatives fought in the SS! I am so sick of it.

And if we are going to talk about concentration camps, yes they existed and many countries used them then and do even to this day.. Even the US! They are used to concentrate a potential threat and keep it away from the society, when there is war you dont want anyone to break the country apart from the inside. But I am not saying that I like the idea because of that. Many innocent has to suffer and that is not acceptable!


Before anyone calls me a hater I need to say that I do not hate anyone or like violence, both sides did horrible things during the war and that is not something that we ever should forget.. Ever! War is hell and I hope that we will not have to experience those horrible things that people had to go through at that time.

And I also grew up with people that had endured the hell of war. But from the other side of the conflict, I do not say that those people you know did not suffer. I am just saying that there was also another side.

One of them survived intense bombings in a city where there was only civilians, the Americans bombed the city to ashes and she was one of the few that survived. Just to be raped and severely beaten up by the russians later, her friend was dragged in the hair behind a tank naked, they drove and laughed until she was only a rag of blood and flesh. Many others got the same or worse treatment. 

And regarding the German armys decision to engage other countries. It is all about military tactics!

This thread has derailed. And I think that I may be the cause =/, so I am sorry about this and hereby I leave this discussion.

Quote from: justmeinoz on December 22, 2011, 06:05:21 AM
Sorry Carolina but I was born in the immediate post-war period, and we were aware that  the Third Reich was far more evil than people today can possibly imagine. We grew up with people who had suffered directly.

which means that you were affected more by war propaganda than her.

Quote
Being Jewish meant having an ancestor as far back as it was possible to verify such. That meant you were a form of human virus to be wiped off the face of the earth, along with anyone else who didn't fit into their mad scramble

There were many Jewish officers in the nazi army. If you were quarter Jewish that was considered ok.

However, the Nazis did not want the Jews wiped from the earth. Hitler  supported the state of Israel and merely wanted them deported form Gemany.

Quote from: Medusa on December 22, 2011, 05:43:55 AM
And why then Germany attack other countries?
Why they want Sudets it newer was their land. Truth is that German occupants at Czechoslovakia was better and more polite than Red Army after them which was just a group of barbarians.
And concentration camps was just propaganda ?

They were reclaiming land which was lost to them in ww1. Poland was terrible to the German part of Poland, known as the polish corridor. 

The nazis knew that war would inevitably come to them. They'd chosen to cast off the shackles of international finance. They knew the capitalist west would come for them.

Concentration camps were invented by the British in the Boer war. The Americans put the American Japanese in concentration camps too.

Quote from: Medusa on December 22, 2011, 01:55:38 AM
Nazi Germany as an example of good society?  :o  Just that small detail with killing millions of our people and begin WW

England declared war on Germany. Yes it was a great society. The workers were getting great pay and affordable housing. They invented the personal car too, and the motorway. Killing millions of people, last time I checked it was Winston Churchill and Stalin and Roosevelt who have the higher death tolls than the Nazis.

Quote
Cuba ? It is just a museum of Soviet politics.

Is killing and imprisoning peoples with different thinking part of Real socialism? Or is it just a fault of government each of this paradises?

America kills and imprisons a far higher percentage of people than cuba does. And who knows what it is, because with the trade embargo that America has on it how can it possibly be what the Cubans want it to be?

Quote from: fionabell on December 22, 2011, 02:08:39 PM
England declared war on Germany. Yes it was a great society. The workers were getting great pay and affordable housing. They invented the personal car too, and the motorway. Killing millions of people, last time I checked it was Winston Churchill and Stalin and Roosevelt who have the higher death tolls than the Nazis.America kills and imprisons a far higher percentage of people than cuba does. And who knows what it is, because with the trade embargo that America has on it how can it possibly be what the Cubans want it to be?

+1

I am impressed by all this mixture of historical ignorance with discrimation.
Especially because it comes from this community.

If nazis would have won we would be burning in big gassifiers and crematories, and no, no other nation did the same. Germany declared war on Poland. Russian stalinism had nothing to do with socialism, just with dictatorship, as Cuba experience, as Libia. Nothing to be proud of. Really. Big masses of people being poor, few corruped politicians, this was tgeir model.

Too much ignorance and discriminatin ( even against muoticultural society, based on what i dont know, maybe people build their little self esteem not in what they can do, probably because they can't do much, but in hate against other people, that have the only guilt of being different )

Quote from: Sweet Blue Girl on December 22, 2011, 03:46:20 PM
I am impressed by all this mixture of historical ignorance with discrimation.
Especially because it comes from this community.

If nazis would have won we would be burning in big gassifiers and crematories, and no, no other nation did the same. Germany declared war on Poland. Russian stalinism had nothing to do with socialism, just with dictatorship, as Cuba experience, as Libia. Nothing to be proud of. Really. Big masses of people being poor, few corruped politicians, this was tgeir model.

Too much ignorance and discriminatin ( even against muoticultural society, based on what i dont know, maybe people build their little self esteem not in what they can do, probably because they can't do much, but in hate against other people, that have the only guilt of being different )

The nazis had something against feminine gays and trans. The reason they did is because the SA, the brown shirts were led by macho gays who had the same prejudice against "queens" then as they do today.

The SA were a private army of thugs funded by money embezzled from the military by an German officer. They are responsible for the thuggish Nazi image we have today. Their numbers were greater than the German National army at that point. It was on their display of force that the Nazis rose to power. And they were gay.

They were headed by an ex ww1 veteran called Ernst Rohm. He was openly Gay and the leadership in the SA was completely macho homo.They used to beat up along with communists and Jews, feminine gays and Transgender.

Hitler had them all killed on the night of the long knives.

I'm not saying the rest of the Nazis loved queens but you really should research the time before you assume what happened.

Btw Libyans were not poor, they were far better of than most western countries.

Nazi Germany was built on a Utopian dream, and couldn't have happened unless the population was forced into it. Not the sort of thing I'd like to be involved in myself, but neither is the current system we live in. :)   Btw I believe America today is far right of Nazi Germany in terms of social Darwinism. The economical model in America today is identical to the fascist economy model(which is not the same as Nazi Germany's because it wasn't true fascism).

Quote from: Sweet Blue Girl on December 22, 2011, 03:46:20 PM
I am impressed by all this mixture of historical ignorance with discrimation.
Especially because it comes from this community.

If nazis would have won we would be burning in big gassifiers and crematories, and no, no other nation did the same. Germany declared war on Poland. Russian stalinism had nothing to do with socialism, just with dictatorship, as Cuba experience, as Libia. Nothing to be proud of. Really. Big masses of people being poor, few corruped politicians, this was tgeir model.

Too much ignorance and discriminatin ( even against muoticultural society, based on what i dont know, maybe people build their little self esteem not in what they can do, probably because they can't do much, but in hate against other people, that have the only guilt of being different )

My own country was worse regarding discrimination than Germany was at the time. You cant compare present day with that time! If Germany won we would not burn in ovens more than we do today.

So being against multiculturalism is hating other people? :D oh my you are seriously indoctrinated. I WANT diversety on this planet and you dont get that if you mix all of the different people. The only thing you will accomplish is to create a rootless and chaotic society! There is nothing good about multiculturalism, nothing! I respect all different kinds of people on this planet and they all have the right to live and prosper. But that dosent mean that we all should live under the same roof.

Many generations before me payed with blood sweat and tears to build up the wealthy nation I grew up in, it was something we now take for granted. Then we let in all the worlds people to use us and use our money and now we are getting poorer and poorer, I am now a second class citizen in my own country. Do you think that its ok? my son is worth less just because he is a ethnic swede. And I was told twice that I could not get the job I applied for because they preferred immigrants before us Swedes, even if my grades are more than good they would choose a less qualified person because of their ethnic origin.

If it would be the other way around people would cry rivers and protest. But discriminating whites is ok because we deserve genocide!


In my view everybody should be proud of what they are and their heritage. What in earth is wrong with that? please tell me that.

Quote from: Sweet Blue Girl on December 22, 2011, 03:46:20 PM
I am impressed by all this mixture of historical ignorance with discrimation.
Especially because it comes from this community.

If nazis would have won we would be burning in big gassifiers and crematories, and no, no other nation did the same. Germany declared war on Poland. Russian stalinism had nothing to do with socialism, just with dictatorship, as Cuba experience, as Libia. Nothing to be proud of. Really. Big masses of people being poor, few corruped politicians, this was tgeir model.

Too much ignorance and discriminatin ( even against muoticultural society, based on what i dont know, maybe people build their little self esteem not in what they can do, probably because they can't do much, but in hate against other people, that have the only guilt of being different )

So Libya was really that bad? strange.. Because I know people who worked there for many years and they actually told me that people where happy and that it was a much better country before this so called revolution. Now there is killings going on in the streets and people are being afraid to go outside their homes. Khadaffi was killed in a way that I cant understand. Did you see the vid from the killing? they where like animals. Even if you are the most evil person on earth you deserve a trial. Libya was not tied to the bankers and that made them bad. They got bombed and now the get loans to rebuild their country, we havent seen that before have we?.. Yey freedom! Or? wait..


US, UN, EU etc are the bad guys. They are only doing things because of the money.

free-thinking communist

well let's have a good new year and stop talking about politic. It generates too  much nonsense...

I agree

Nazis were the good guy, they made friends everywhere they went
Italian's fascists too, we just tried to give pizzas and pasta everywhere
And also stalin was a good man, he still kept a teddy bear of when he was child with him
The real bad people were Churchill, Roosvelt shame on them, they attacked the poor germany because of envy
by the way, also Poland tried to invade Germany first, and so did France, and about hebrews, well their death was just casuality of war, indeed Churchill and Roosvelt killed many innocent people much more than Germany did, even Japan's people who did nothing, just made photos all the time.

And the worse is that history is repeating! Usa and Eu against Gheddafi, Saddam.... poor guys!!! Lybia was the richest country of the world! Indeed the only Gheddafi owned so many industries outside Lybia, especially in Itally, and he was the poorest of all of them, being in politic just for compassion, so you can guess the others Lybians how much rich they were, and Saddam...well he was a saint, gassifing his own cousin, just tring to make him happy, it was Usa who switched hilarious gas with nervine...

Quote from: Sweet Blue Girl on January 02, 2012, 06:22:03 AM
well let's have a good new year and stop talking about politic. It generates too  much nonsense...

I agree

Nazis were the good guy, they made friends everywhere they went
Italian's fascists too, we just tried to give pizzas and pasta everywhere
And also stalin was a good man, he still kept a teddy bear of when he was child with him
The real bad people were Churchill, Roosvelt shame on them, they attacked the poor germany because of envy
by the way, also Poland tried to invade Germany first, and so did France, and about hebrews, well their death was just casuality of war, indeed Churchill and Roosvelt killed many innocent people much more than Germany did, even Japan's people who did nothing, just made photos all the time.

And the worse is that history is repeating! Usa and Eu against Gheddafi, Saddam.... poor guys!!! Lybia was the richest country of the world! Indeed the only Gheddafi owned so many industries outside Lybia, especially in Itally, and he was the poorest of all of them, being in politic just for compassion, so you can guess the others Lybians how much rich they were, and Saddam...well he was a saint, gassifing his own cousin, just tring to make him happy, it was Usa who switched hilarious gas with nervine...

It doesnt help when you switch the black and white thinking the other way around.

So you think that the US is the greater good? as said before, propaganda is a good way to get the people behind you and is also the most important weapon in a war.

Churchill hated Indians and only entered the war for Britans sake. He also gave Bomber Harris the go ahead to carpet bomb civilians. Churchill did say once that 'History will be very kind to me - I intend to write it'. He also supported the Soviet rape squads sent in to defile the women and children in the last days of the Third Reich. Out of a civilian population of 2,700,000, 2,000,000 were women. It is small wonder that the fear of sexual attack raced through the city like a plague. Doctors were besieged by patients seeking information on the quickest way to commit suicide, and poison was in great demand. Oh what a deliberation.


The Franklin Roosevelt government instructed its soldiers that marriage with the inferior Germans was absolutely forbidden, but those having illegitimate children by German women, whose husbands and boyfriends were conveniently dead or held as prisoners or slave laborers, could count on allowance money. And, according to Time magazine of September 17, 1945, the government provided these soldiers with an estimated 50 million condoms per month, and graphically instructed them as to their use. For all practical purposes, our soldiers were being told: "Teach these Germans a lesson -- and have a wonderful time!" Such were the great crusaders who brought "democracy" to Europe.

Under direct orders from Dwight Eisenhower, they killed more than a million German POWs. They looted 12 million people of their homes, goods, food, and even clothes and drove them from their homelands. They took one-fourth of their farmland, they took their ships and their factories and their farm implements and then told them to live by farming. They abused and starved to death more German babies than there ever were Jews in Germany. They raped and debauched hundreds of thousands of German, Austrian, and Hungarian girls and women from eight to eighty. They brought to their death five times as many Germans in one year of peace as died during five years of war.

Of course the Allies where the ultimate good guys..

And besides, Mussolini is not at all hated in Italy. Those who hate him are either communists or people who have swallowed all the anti-propaganda without question.

War is  a cruel thing i know.
What you continue to say is plain and simple, if German would have won we World would be a better place.

Instead I am just trying to make you see that, between all the contraddictions of Usa and British 1940's society, that fortunately time has solved letting us see and hope a better place, especially for us different people, these two countries along with resistence forces inside Italy and French, and with Russia, whose democracy is still a puzzle, have guaranteed us freedom and a little of self respect and identity.
Now you can add what you want, our democracy are still full of privilegies and sometimes very unfair, but totalitaristic regimes are based and founded just upon the idea of the negation of the citizen identity toward his appartenence to the nation, and can only live as long as they proclaim theyr hate on others (muslims, hebrews, christians, gay, transgender, polonian, french, americans, it really doesn't matter who or when ).
That's why luckily totalitarism is a thing of the past, and our next goal is try to improve democracy, allowing more respect for the people and less for the money.

As for Italy, you really know nothing about it, Mussolini memory is full of shame, and he is remembered with prode just by few naziskins or ignorant people here. Communism never took place in this country, luckily, and we had our trouble with right politicians tring to create a populistic regime (that was, in our case, like a totalitarism just based on the control of media and not on the control of police repression forces), it just led us to an unfair democracy and a closed society, from wich now we must move on.

By the way multiculturalism is a great resource, if you're not closed minded, all human history is luckily based on mixture of races, it is called evolution. It all depends if you just see the problems or the advantages, multiculturalism means more ideas, more need to improve, more competition, that if all the rules accepted, means a more dinamic society (that is basically why Usa in just 10 years won the second world war, become the leader of the world, and why now Cina wants to do the same). Democracy and capitalism balanced with rules is all we can hope for the future, unless we want to live in a shamefull past.

Well I think we may have to agree that we disagree.

And yes I do think that we would have had a better Europe if the communists lost. Because they are the ones who has been destrying our nation from within since WW2, even to this day those DDR scum and spies sits in this country and are destroying the nation piece by piece from within. 

I agree that you cannot compare the 40s with present time, so why do that with Germany then? as I said before Sweden was actually worse when it came to people with mental issues or those who was disabled. So why do you think that Germany was a more evil nation than for example Sweden?

Btw there is no freedom in Europe, if we are trulty free where is it? you cannot think and say what you want. And the EU for example doesnt give a ->-bleeped-<- about what the people say. EU is full of ex Soviet officials (thank you Allied forces for letting them rule)!


Tell that multiculturalism is good the girls that are raped and killed just because they happen to be white and seen just as a pice of meat without any rights by the immigrants, before we did not have many rapes at all, now we are in the top of the statistics and all the assault rapes have been done by immigrants both here and in Norway. This is a great problem here, and it came with the experiment called multiculturalism.

Tell that its great to the elders that doesnt get any food because the government think that the immigrants should have all the money they ask for and the elders should be happy if they get one slice of bread a day!And the illegal immigrants get healthcare for free while we others have to pay the highest taxes in the world and still get piss poor service because we happen to be natives.

Tell it to the children that are bullied, abused and afraid to go out because they happen to be white and natives. It is strange, people come here and then hate us who live here and pay for them. Is that the way you say thank you?

Sweden was a wealthy nation not too long ago, with the most tolerant society in the world and a healtcare to be proud of.. And now? we cant even go out at night without fear, and the healthcare is all but good now these days because the money have been drained.

The city here where I live was a great place just 5 years ago, then the politicians decided to ship a whole boatload of African immigrants here. Now you cant even recognize the place. You cannot go out at night alone anymore and there is alot of rapes going on. 5 years ago we had NONE. So why is this good? I have yet to meet a person here that do like the multicultural experiment. We are getting tired of this and it will not end in a good way if it continues this way.

Multiculturalism is an evil invention and leads to violence and other horrible acts. Just see how Europe is doing now these days, it is a wonderful development isnt it? girls being raped and people killed and plundered as an every day occurence.

I feel no hatred for other cultures or people. But to force them on each other is not right!


You have however no clue about the human species because there has not been any mixing like whats going on these days. Never! The mass movement of people that we have now is a completely new phenomenon. It has nothing to do with evolution. Here the school grades are goin straight down at the same pace as the immigration, why ? please tell me.

We are right now creating our shameful past.

The US only won because they had the banks on their side and the Russians + all the communist partisans all over Europe.

Ok, I understand that there's no possibility of finding a common point, because you deny every scientific historical reconstruction, proposing your personal point of view of the past. I remember you that indeed history is a science and is based on documents, datas, while politic is an art, based on persuasion. You talk of history by your particoular political point, I talk of history just saying historical facts.
You have the right to be against anybody, included yourself, unless you don't encourage violence against them, this is the gift that our democracy left you. It is the first time i encounter a nazi Ts. I know many of us are into role-playing, it's kinda like an experience similaar to dress as a female, build a different world in wich one can be herself, but I did not knew about nazi-role-plaing.

Quote from: Sweet Blue Girl on January 02, 2012, 11:51:56 AM
Ok, I understand that there's no possibility of finding a common point, because you deny every scientific historical reconstruction, proposing your personal point of view of the past. I remember you that indeed history is a science and is based on documents, datas, while politic is an art, based on persuasion. You talk of history by your particoular political point, I talk of history just saying historical facts.
You have the right to be against anybody, included yourself, unless you don't encourage violence against them, this is the gift that our democracy left you. It is the first time i encounter a nazi Ts. I know many of us are into role-playing, it's kinda like an experience similaar to dress as a female, build a different world in wich one can be herself, but I did not knew about nazi-role-plaing.

I am actually very interested in politics ( also very active in that arena) and have been for many years. I am also interested in history so I am not totally lost ;). But yeah we have totally different viewpoints on things.

Sorry about me bringing up personal experiences here, but I only used them as a example. And they are not only my experiences but a whole lot of people in this country feel that way. So we are all delusional?

Now you are saying that I am a Nazi  >:(. Well I am not! I am just a person who does not accept told facts until I have made up my own mind about it. That includes taking information from both sides and study those facts with skepticism. You do know that many researchers doesnt out inconvenient facts because that would make them end up without a job?. Some even get imprisoned!

And I am not hating others. It is hatred and violence that I am against. I am against internationalism and do not like that banks rule the world.

I respect every man on this earth and everybody should have their right to live in peace and as they want as long as they do not harm other people by doing it. We all have our place in this world! If that makes me a Nazi to you so sure.

In reality I am not. But that doesnt mean that I see them as the ultimate evil in this world either!

Quote from: Dàwkbua on November 15, 2011, 08:09:23 AM
I am anti-capitalist, anti-consumerist. I believe in from each according to their means, to each according to their needs. :)

The foundational premise of Marxism.

Quote from: justmeinoz on December 22, 2011, 06:05:21 AM
Sorry Carolina but I was born in the immediate post-war period, and we were aware that  the Third Reich was far more evil than people today can possibly imagine. We grew up with people who had suffered directly.

Being Jewish meant having an ancestor as far back as it was possible to verify such. That meant you were a form of human virus to be wiped off the face of the earth, along with anyone else who didn't fit into their mad scramble around whoever was the current local Alpha-Male.
Economically it was laissez-faire capitalism taken to the extreme, coupled with monopoly or duopoly manadated by government.

Sorry for the rant, but that sort of apologetics for a retreat to a pre-Christian Dark Ages needs to be exposed for what it is.

As for myself I am an amalgam of Conservative, Anarcho-libertarian, Monarchist,very moderate Green.

The anti-semitism of the Third Reich is alive and well in Hamas and Hezzbollah.

"Libertarian" wasn't on your list, Fiona.

Without getting into some of the heavier political theory, or the economic aspects of libertarianism, it should suffice to say that libertarians value limited government and individual liberty above all other things.

I would describe myself as fiscally conservative, socially open-minded, and a strong traditionalist.

I'm a rational anarchist.

"A rational anarchist believes that concepts such as 'state' and 'society' and 'government' have no existence save as physically exemplified in the acts of self-responsible individuals. He believes that it is impossible to shift blame, share blame, distribute blame...as blame, guilt, responsibility are matters taking place inside human beings singly and nowhere else. But being rational, he knows that not all individuals hold his evaluations, so he tries to live perfectly in an imperfect world...aware that effort will be less than perfect yet undismayed by self-knowledge of self-failure." - Robert A. Heinlein

I live in the land if the independents, both Federal & State pollies belong to the independent category, pity they don't act like independents.

So I had to vote other.

Depends on the situation but mostly Liberal

Objectivist.

"My philosophy, Objectivism, holds that:

[Re: Metaphysics] Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man's feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.

[Re: Epistemology] Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses) is man's only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.

[Re: Ethics] Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.

[Re: Politics] The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man's rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church."    -The Objectivist Newsletter

I did a test and I was reasonably far left for economics and dead center in between libertarian and authoritarian

Voted other

right wing

I have no clue what I am :(

I put other mainly becuase when i vote i usually put the Australian Labor Party and the Liberal/Nationals Coalition last on the ballot. Usually Inderpendents get vote 1

I wonder if the Australian Sex Party will last long

Center Left. 

I don't like any of the two major political parties (in the US). I think it is atrocious that in a country of 300 million people, we have only developed TWO "parties"...and both of them are owned by "Wall Street."

>:(

I also think it's atrocious that all of us are hog-tied to the idea of enforced diversity. Annual "classes" on diversity? Sounds like indoctrination + propaganda to me. Can't associate (or not associate) with whomever you want? Sounds like a proletariat paradise to me...

I despise the ignorance of the average American...and I suspect most people in the world are about the same level.

George Carlin pic I came across recently:

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1186.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fz368%2Fhazel_eyes1911%2Fdemotivational-posters-u-s-voters.jpg&hash=ed24cbec71bb929d9aed1da268f9b274a7cddc0b)

I don't mind capitalism, but when it subjugates everything to The Almighty Dollar..."Houston, we have a problem."

My politics are driven by my philosophical/religious beliefs and as a Quaker, I am firmly opposed to violence in any but an absolute last resort and so I'm drastically opposed to violence against innocent people. I tend to self-describe as a left libertarian, meaning I share the social goals of most who self-describe as leftists but I'm only willing to get there via non-violent means and modern governments are practically defined as violent entities, i.e. the silver bullet solution to all problems--threaten people with punishment so they behave how they're supposed to whether that's making people behave (socially right wing) or forcing people to be charitable (economicly left).

I'm really impressed with the number of people who have expressed some kind of small "L" libertarian viewpoint, meaning not necessarily a member or even a fan of the official Libertarian party but opposed to violent solutions.

George Ought to Help (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGMQZEIXBMs#)

IMHO

2 dalebert: nice, I would love that society, but democracy give so much power to "Olivers" which want to force "George" to give him money
And in this sad time of ACTA and other sad events, it will be just worse  :(

straight up Independent

I vote privately rather than rally. The biggest subjects I support are the Military being a responsible one that supports its troops rather than agendas, continued Space Exploration, improving Education, and Civil Rights- particularly OUR Civil Rights (thanks Obama! would've had to revert to an M on my license in Florida even though it was already F in Texas for four years if it wasn't for the Passport Loophole! and thanks again for including Amanda Simpson! Though I suspect the best is yet to come in the next four years... ;) heard a rumor from a friend, if it happens I'll be VERY happy

updated 02-13-2012 13:51 for better clarity

A follow-up video by the same people who did George Ought to Help. Once again, it explores the actual results of efforts that were grounded in good intentions but have unintended consequences. I believe this is to be expected from any attempt to use violence or the threat thereof to fix problems.

Edgar the Exploiter (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFbYM2EDz40#)

The biggest subjects I support are the Military...

You realize that the 'on the books military spending' - I say that because billions and billions more in military spending are hidden, and what is not hidden is put 'off books' and sold off as debt -  is higher than our TEN next closest competitors.  Combined.  We build weapons systems that the military does not want, build ships the Navy does not need or want, and suffer coast overruns that would make the devil's own bookkeeper blush with shame.

Quote from: tekla on February 12, 2012, 04:17:09 PM
The biggest subjects I support are the Military...

You realize that the 'on the books military spending' - I say that because billions and billions more in military spending are hidden, and what is not hidden is put 'off books' and sold off as debt - is higher than our TEN next closest competitors.  Combined.  We build weapons systems that the military does not want, build ships the Navy does not need or want, and suffer cost overruns that would make the devil's own bookkeeper blush with shame.

I guess I should clarify that- I do NOT Blindly support the Military, I support having a Responsible Military that protects our own country first, then our allies if needed, and should be made available to assist with humanitarian aid during peacetime and natural disasters, but should NEVER be used as an unprovoked power play in world politics. Warring actions should NEVER be used unless absolutely necessary. However, if the need arises, the response better be precise and not drawn out- which as we've seen in 'Nam and Iraq always leads to unneeded collateral damage. Plus, those who wield such force must take full responsibility and be held accountable for such actions and the potentially worse outcome they can cause...

I think our troops should have what they need to get a job done right the first time and have the proper medical care and treatment they deserve, including coverage for PTSD and even GID... There are a good percentage of TG's that went in and did their time and still don't regret serving their country, just that they couldn't do anything openly about their transitions, like my democratic ex-partner... I would've too if my dysphoria wasn't so severe before 9-11, even though I despised the dips***** in office back then ever since the mistake that was DADT. But now I'm getting off-subject...

I think that we should have available whatever supplies and equipment our forces need to do their jobs more efficiently, but think it is ridiculous to go with the highest bidder just because they have a better "reputation" with the pork and/or are "made in america" versus elsewhere and just licensed to be "produced in america".  I DO NOT think that there should be an Imperialistic agenda anywhere for any reason whatsoever, nor do I think we should have an Absolute Isolationist agenda either.

You're right about most of the off-the-books projects that have shot through the roof and all the way to alpha-centauri- those are indeed outlandish... But there are some projects "out west" and "down south" that have to stay off the books (which are in the trillions rather than billions)... which I can't talk about...

Quote from: fionabell on December 03, 2011, 02:32:38 AM
Whoever Goldman Sachs is donating the lions share of campaign money, will be the next president.

With Citizens United, we now have a billionaire battle waging in the Pub presidential race.  Which billionaire will get their candidate elected?  Who needs all those people at Goldman Sachs when you can find one billionaire to do the same thing?  And if you get elected, you only have to pay one guy back.

I think the average donation for the Pubs is something like $150,000 while the average for O is like $30.00. 

"of the people, by the people and for the people" - Abraham Lincoln

a) I'm sure that the people at Goldman (and most of their corporate brethren) will continue to do what they have always done, which is support both sides, that way - either way, it's a WIN for them.  That, BTW is the way 'corporations as institutions' "think".  As such they have mostly been a wash except in obvious vested interest stuff like say gun manufacturers and gun laws.  In terms of corporate money I don't think the effect will be as huge as it's been for those who have seemingly unlimited sums to spend on a personal (and hence, unaccountable) level.  It's been pretty much a loose affiliation of millionaires and billionaires with either political/cultural axes to grind, or a hugely vested interest financial-wise, or both.

b) Citizens United is - among some pretty outstanding legal gymnastics combined with total bonehead thinking that produced decisions like Dredd Scott and  Korematsu - pretty close to the worst SCOTUS decision ever.  Ever.  Not only in the issue of 'person-hood' (gee corporations have 'person-hood', they are about to give it to fetuses and zygotes, and I'm sure that 'potential person-hood' will be conferred upon eggs and sperm, and 'virtual person-hood' on internet stuff.  Why hell, just about the only persons who won't be 'persons' under the law anymore will be adult human beings) but also regarding transparency - ie. just who is giving this money out.  So far we know, but that's because it's new and they are not used to it yet.  The Fosters and Sheldons of the future will not be nearly as clumsy and as obvious.  Those two need a "Yakkaty Sax" soundtrack, but the next bunch you will never see.

Now I don't get to see much of this, as we're not having an election out here really.  Really.  Unless you turn on national news you'd never know there was a big election coming up in Cali.  No big ballot stuff yet.  DiFi is up for re-election and I don't even think that less than one year away the 'Pubs have even found anyone to run against her.  (She's never lost a single election in her career, no one ever wants to run against her.)  So I haven't seen the barrage of ad's that CU is ginning up in states that 'currently matter' (Iowa matters for a few hours, one night, every four years - and at that they couldn't count this year) in this clown-car primary the Republican Party is treating us to. 

Then again.  Look at what $10 million buys you.  Newt Gringrich?  Really?  Ten fricking million dollars and all you get is some short and squat little replica of the Pillsbury Doughboy who's a serial adulterer and on a personal level easily one of the most unlikable people ever, and who's current wife looks like Stepford model 0001, and has a background oozing with corruption, slime and backhanded deals.

You used to be able to buy a lot better quality politician for $10 mil.