Comment Re:All this shows (Score 2) 334
Welcome the New boss, same as the Old boss, only, more "hip".
Welcome the New boss, same as the Old boss, only, more "hip".
Pretty good summary, I have to say, of mainstream 'liberals' and 'conservatives'.
I consider myself a Classical Liberal.
Distinction without difference, or at least too little difference to matter.
We all have the British Foreign Office to thank for most of this anyway.
Part of the problem *is* that it's not real money.
Overall it's just chits of debt to the federal reserve, if it were real money, you could run out, thus providing a sustainable feedback mechanism which would probably lessen the bad things that "capitalism" is being blamed for in this case, and others.
Corporations themselves rely on the states that define them. Liability shields and incestuous dealings with regulators (revolving doors and their attendant failures of regulatory oversight) abound in many industries.
In this instance you'd think the ridiculously low quality computers would be detected by the frequent audits of the private backers of the endeavor, if those backers had any sense. BP being a multinational plays by all the rules on paper, shit happens, since they just rent the land from the government, the landlord gets to pay the bills / suffer the consequences with little to no recompense when it all goes to hell.
I couldn't understand how she was re-elected. It just reestablishes my belief that the vast majority of people vote party line, and don't really care who is running for their respective party. I know there may be a few people who could be swayed, but in general, I find the philosophy of both parties to be pretty incompatible. I question anyone's sanity who can switch back and forth on a whim.
I couldn't understand how she was re-elected. It just reestablishes my belief that the vast majority of people vote party line, and don't really care who is running for their respective party. I know there may be a few people who could be swayed, but in general, I find the philosophy of both parties to be pretty incompatible. I question anyone's sanity who can switch back and forth on a whim.
Pretty incompatible? Both parties (R and D) gather money from the same corporate entities (that the government regulates) and set the rules of that legislation. The incompatibilities are window dressing for the most part. We are currently experiencing a (numbers for relative ordinal influence, higher being better) Financial Sector (+2) Military Sector (+1) government where before perhaps it was a Military Sector (+2) Financial Sector (+1).
Their bread is buttered by the same people, with a bunch of steadily willfully more ignorant proles to be kept in the dark by sports match-ups and mass media. Oh, and the entertaining fallacy that war is good for the economy. That one pays dividends for years.
Many NeoCons were actually communists and lobby for high regulatory measures and police state law enforcement. Many NeoLiberals are actually communists, and even hold dual party membership as socialists, and value the protective umbrella of high regulatory measures and police state law enforcement.
Protectionist steel tariffs was an early one.
The Old Right (Buchanan et. al.) had been very critical of him throughout his presidency.
Rush was also critical, but he was an unapologetic supporter of the war and mouthpiece for his buddy Cheney. Rush's show allowed a reasonable amount of dissenting opinion from his guest hosts. Neal Boortz became a Libertari-neocon.
"When the going gets tough, the tough get empirical." -- Jon Carroll