what you and Anup Shah don't understand is that the USA is not responsible for the planet's financial condition we don't owe them squat
the rest of the planet will survive or die with or without our assistance what we have done, without a doubt, and should continue to do, is make sure that America is financially and militarily safe choose sides carefully and fund your own wars for non-Americans a global village my ass On Aug 16, 11:34 am, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> wrote: > Two things are clear. > > 1. Capitalism is a monumental disaster--www.globalissues.org/article/ > 26/poverty-facts-and-stats (pro-capitalist site) > > 2. Many people, especially Americans who have been subjected to > decades of propaganda, are unable to come to terms with this. > . > > On Aug 17, 2:02 am, plainolamerican <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > capitalism has failed > > ---- > > hogwash > > > Capitalism has been dominant in the Western world since the end of > > feudalism.[3] Capitalism gradually spread throughout Europe, and in > > the 19th and 20th centuries, it provided the main means of > > industrialization throughout much of the world.[4] > > > Criticism > > Main articles: Criticisms of capitalism and Anti-capitalism > > Notable critics of capitalism have included: socialists, anarchists, > > communists, some forms of conservatism, Luddites, Narodniks, some > > schools of nationalism and Shakers. Marxism advocated a revolutionary > > overthrow of capitalism that would lead to socialism before eventually > > transforming into communism after class antagonisms and the state > > ceased to exist. Marxism influenced social democratic and labour > > parties as well as some moderate democratic socialists, who seek > > change through existing democratic channels instead of revolution, and > > believe that capitalism should be heavily regulated rather than > > abolished, supplementing the market economy with a mixed economy. Many > > aspects of capitalism have come under attack from the anti- > > globalization movement, which is primarily opposed to corporate > > capitalism. > > > On Aug 16, 10:51 am, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > You can have fifty parties, in-fact there were 50 registered parties > > > registered in the last election, whom the corporate controlled media > > > on behalf of the corporate controlled government gave no coverage to > > > at all. The televised debates are always between party A and party B, > > > because they are the parties the corporations finance > > > > The only third party that stands a chance of media exposure under the > > > current set up is the Fascist Party of the USA. The predicament in > > > which the world and the US finds itself in is due to the fact that > > > capitalism has failed, not a political party. > > > > On Aug 17, 1:32 am, plainolamerican <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > When you go to the ballot box you have the privilege of casting your > > > > vote for the party of your choice (party A or party B). > > > > ---- > > > > hogwash > > > > > help save the USA - vote 3rd party! > > > > > On Aug 16, 10:29 am, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Dear SB, you do live in the idealized and sanitized world presented to > > > > > you by those that go out of their way to deceive you--the never ending > > > > > info commercial of the American dream, as sold by artful and conniving > > > > > snake oil salesmen. And yet you are half correct in what you say. Of > > > > > course the President does not run the country, we know that--he is but > > > > > a mere figurehead, a representative of those that do run the country > > > > > "we the corporations". The idea that the American people have any > > > > > influence in how the country is run is quite absurd. > > > > > > American Democracy in action > > > > > > When you go to the ballot box you have the privilege of casting your > > > > > vote for the party of your choice (party A or party B). Now, if you > > > > > decide you don’t like what the party you voted for is doing, all you > > > > > need to do is wait 4 years, whereby you can then cast a vote for the > > > > > other party. It becomes a little problematic when you realize this > > > > > party isn’t doing what they promised, because you then have to wait > > > > > another 4 years before the next election comes around. By this time > > > > > you have probably forgotten why you voted out your first choice in the > > > > > first place—that is, until they get back into power—and they proceed > > > > > to do exactly what they did the last time you voted them out—ditching > > > > > every promise they made to get you to vote for them again. But don’t > > > > > worry, there is always another election, by which time those in power > > > > > are counting on you getting dementia, Alzheimer’s, schizophrenia or > > > > > just plain dying. > > > > > > And so it goes, around and around and around, like a mad dog chasing > > > > > its tail. And people marvel over the fact that the suicide rate is > > > > > climbing and our children are getting out of hand. At this point I am > > > > > grateful they haven’t clubbed us all to death—and at the same time > > > > > maybe a little disappointed—I mean what do we have to do to get them > > > > > angry enough to get off their butts? > > > > > > On Aug 16, 12:59 pm, sILVER bELLE <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Get it through your heads. The President does NOT 'run the > > > > > > country'...."we the People" do via the HOUSE. House to > > > > > > SENATE....He ONLY GETS HIS WAY IF HE BUYS VOTE. THEN HE CAN BE > > > > > > IMPEACHED. > > > > > > > sILVER bELLE > > > > > > > > Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 17:27:25 -0700 > > > > > > > Subject: Re: What is behind the opposition to the Obama > > > > > > > healthcare plan? > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > > > Hello Keith, > > > > > > > > It’s not a matter of health-care being a right. Who decides it is > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > right? > > > > > > > > This doe not mean that what socialists say should not be heavily > > > > > > > scrutinize and criticized—it should—if it cannot stand up to > > > > > > > scrutiny > > > > > > > it is just another baseless, worthless ideology (like free-market > > > > > > > neo > > > > > > > conservatism). > > > > > > > > The type of socialism I advocate (which is straight forward > > > > > > > orthodox > > > > > > > Marxism—not to be confused with radicalism) is this. A government > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > the people, by the people, for the people—sound familiar? > > > > > > > > This means a government where the will of the people is enacted > > > > > > > by the > > > > > > > representatives of the people themselves. The people decide what > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > want done and their representatives carry it out. Under this type > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > governance, the people would decide how much should be pooled > > > > > > > (taxes) > > > > > > > and how it should be allocated. If the people decide that enough > > > > > > > funds > > > > > > > should be allocated for universal health-care it becomes a > > > > > > > right—if > > > > > > > they decide on other measures, then these measure become the norm > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > society, because it reflects the wishes of society. > > > > > > > > You can’t get blood from a stone—you can only allocate funds > > > > > > > according > > > > > > > to what is available—it should be up to the members of society to > > > > > > > decide this—instead we have a situation in America (and every > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > western country) where finance capital own the government and the > > > > > > > media > > > > > > > —we have a dictatorship of finance capital. > > > > > > > > Silly accusations about, socialism, fascism etc, etc are > > > > > > > pointless and > > > > > > > designed to confuse and obfuscate —For any type of socio-economic > > > > > > > relations to be able to operate effectively, a democratic, all > > > > > > > inclusive system of governance, directly responsible and > > > > > > > accountable > > > > > > > to the people, must exist. > > > > > > > > If this is what you consider utopian, we may as well go back to > > > > > > > living > > > > > > > in caves. That is what conservatism is founded upon. No > > > > > > > progressive > > > > > > > thought or action and fidelity to out dated, antediluvian > > > > > > > tradition. > > > > > > > In other words if nothing changes the current status quo remains > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > same, and those in power hang on to their power. The inquisitions > > > > > > > were > > > > > > > founded on the same type of warped morality, so the clergy could > > > > > > > continue to live like parasites of the backs of their flock. > > > > > > > > The next change in human socio-economic relations, will included a > > > > > > > second enlightenment, sweeping aside the backward traditions and > > > > > > > mysticism (especially organized religion) that is still employed > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > keep the masses in the thrall of narcissistic Neanderthals and > > > > > > > reprobates. > > > > > > > > On Aug 16, 12:57 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello Secret, > > > > > > > > > Well said. This is where those socialists get confused, in > > > > > > > > their quest for > > > > > > > > Utopia. Health Care is not a right. > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 10:44 AM, [email protected] < > > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 12, 7:13 am, plainolamerican > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > What is behind the opposition to the Obama healthcare plan? > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > those of us who should not be forced to pay for the > > > > > > > > > > healthcare of > > > > > > > > > > others > > > > > > > > > > > your healthcare is your responsibility > > > > > > > > > > it is NOT an entitlement that WE should have to pay for > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 12, 3:29 am, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I agree. > > > > > > > > > > Those that work have health care and in the few times in my > > > > > > > > > life that > > > > > > > > > I didn't, I got it for free anyways, we are talking the > > > > > > > > > 1970's here > > > > > > > > > now I'm sure it's easier to get for free now anyways. > > > > > > > > > > The way I see it is working people get health care, thru > > > > > > > > > insurance and > > > > > > > > > non-working people don't. So if we wnat to give health care > > > > > > > > > to non- > > > > > > > > > working people the working people will have to pay for it, in > > > > > > > > > the form > > > > > > > > > of some type of tax. > > > > > > > > > > Personally I vote against ANY and ALL tax's, you should too. > > > > > > > > > > Having the government handle health care will only make > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
