Random Political Thoughts

[Catsmile]

Forbes appears to be a poor source. I wouldn't have said that until yesterday when I noticed that the 500 list, which I happened to be looking at when you posted the other article, couldn't add up to the anything close to 110 trillion. One of the two, or both, articles must be in error. So yeah, I don't buy that the magazine is reporting factual information. It appears they're not. It does not alter my question, we all know Bill Gates is rich, so let's figure out if he's nefarious or not.

Um, no, I'm not taking 1 percent of 71.5 billion or anything of the sort. I said that the sum of the numbers fortunes listed in the 500 list, which is the 500 richest people in the world, is not going come up to the purported $110 trillion. It's very simply elementary mathematics. But I think you knew exactly what I was saying and wanted to try to construct a red herring.

It was an ad hominem, a classic one, and I called you on it with another ad hominem. Let's not be fucking stupid.

Sorting through your bifurcated, sycophantic, factless, diatribes, masquerading as intellect, must be how girls feel when you are going for second base. Fingers frantically, fumbling, futilely, with her bra. How beta, ew.

Social intercourse with you is tedious, and unproductive at best.
I have not the will, or desire to back track if the bread crumbs are to far apart for you to follow. Giving rise for you to imply false ideas on my part.

It seems, you can't read, do math, and you have no integrity. The article speaks for itself, and at this point Forbes has more credibility than you ever will. Remember math is math, quit whining and face facts.  Math is not a red herring.

You are correct the top 500 are not worth $110 trillon, nor did the Forbes article I posted imply such. That was some flawed math you pulled out of thin air, of your own accord. Just because Forbes doesn't agree with your made up math "facts", they are the poor source? Red herring indeed. :

OH! Look over there, Bill Gates!  Non sequitur, anyone?  :
Fuck Jesus jumping on a pogo stick! How deluded can you get?

By all means, please stop being fucking stupid. It's important for a writer to have good reading comprehension. Integrity, IQ, and math skills, apparently not so much.

Who's turn to hit the dubious? #puffpuffpass

[NowhereInTime]

"The feds just caught up to another guy last week." In other words, he's going to prison. What exactly do you have a problem with here? It looks like the laws are working and catching the crooks in the finance industry.

I just don't know what the fuck you want man. It seems to me that you're not thinking any of this through, you're just seeing people going to jail in the finance industry and reacting with "Those fucking riiiiiiiiiiiich" like some guy in a trailer in Arkansas beholden only to emotional outburst.

Well what the fuck does that solve? I'd like a real answer.

You are corporate America. You say you invest. You are a share holder out to make a buck off the market by benefiting from what those corporations are doing. I do not. I am not in the market, I'm simply collecting book royalties for spending 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 6-7 months each year writing then heading off to promoting, signing, dealing with my fucking agent and publishers every day, all the while taking blood pressure pills. Yet, you want my money and want to deprive me of my right to pass my money down to my heirs and probably the rights to my books as well since they are also passed down to inheritors for as long as the copyrights are valid. Well, I want a good god damned reason why, and you're not providing me with it. You're just giving my a list of people going to prison, already subject to asset forfeiture, and claiming that justifies this Occupy movement out calling for something more (whatever that is). Bull fuck it does.

I didn't ignore any point, other than the TR quote. You however keep ignoring my subsidized higher education point. Your side is directly responsible for that HUGE section of income inequality and you really need to own it and justify it. Otherwise, you'll never by truthful in your positions and will just run around rhetoricizing while the fucking country implodes.

For the third time, now.  It is endemic to the finance industry that rules are for suckers.  This is why people are continually being caught and convicted.  It is not, however, problem solved nor case over.  Stop pretending it is.  The idea that "the laws are working?" Is as naive a notion as I have seen posted here.  Even a cursory review of the SEC's difficulty prosecuting these cases would leave any reader with the opinion that the laws aren't working.  This is why they have to settle for civil actions more often than not.

And really, are you still trying to minimze and compartmentalize the finance industry as some outlier in our economy?  Not one person on these threads could honestly support that notion.

Occupy is dead.  It only lives on in the hearts and minds of fearful conservatives like yourself.  For the record, I never participated in the rallies because, frankly , I never thought they'd have real effect.  Conservatives are too inured against reality with their loathsome principles to ever pay heed to the suffering of others.

I do invest.  I enjoy seeing companies grow and new and exciting products brought to market.  I am not perfect; I try to invest in companies that play with others but I fail.  I am in Ford, Microsoft, Empire State Realty Trust, Alexander's, Fuel Cell, Bank of America, and Tesla (3 lousy shares -  I missed it last April when I was paying Uncle Sam and Uncle Dannel).  I wish I could be in some other companies, and may yet, but I work retail and don't make jack making other people rich.

I don't envy your career.  Sure, you may write that breakthrough novel and be spectacularly wealthy, but the dreariness of publicity tours and the uncertainty of publishing are gambles.  I do hope you are wealthy from your endeavors.  Here's the catch; as I have said before and will say again: I do not want to "take your money".  I want you to be wealthy and secure.  Want I do not want, along with people smarter than me, like TR, is to create perpetual wealth.  I believe that we are better as a nation when we are all involved in the furtherance of national interest.  When we all have to pick up a shovel (or brainstorm in front of a blank screen). When we all have opportunity to start and all the wealth isn't being pooled and dammed by an incredibly tiny amount of people.

You call that demoninzing; I call it fair play.  And yes, I feel the estate tax (for estates over $10 million) is a fair way to do that.  Pay down the debt instead of paying the wealthy to finance it through treasuries. 

Finally, I ignore your point about subsidized education  not out of malice but for two reasons: 1) in my values system, helping people become even more knowledgable and gain skills is a good thing and 2) the people who rule this economy aren't subsidized; they are legacy heirs who attend schools like Yale, just 8 miles away from here.  They are fraternity brothers from Duke or Notre Dame or people like the Winklevoss twins who come from wealth and are ginning up this Bitcoin nonsense. These are would-be masters of the universe who don't know an honest day's work yet will make life and death decisions about families' lives.  Too often they lack a moral compass, caring only for their own and their lucre.

Why should I ever accept that as an American value?

[NowhereInTime]

As a follow up to my last post, this is another problem with the wealthy; always rigging the game .  Tell me how William O'Brien and BATS trading do a damn thing to help the economy?
What they are really doing is front running trades made by investors in good faith and should be indicted for racketeering.  This is only innovation if you support organized crime.
Kudos to Brad Katsuyama and Michael Lewis for blowing the cover off this:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101544772

[qaddisin]

It doesn't really matter anyway. With today's SCotUS ruling, it's that much easier for corporations to 'exercise their right of free speech' and make sure they can put into office the people that will continue to make sure their tax loopholes and subsidies stay in place.

After all, it's better for that to continue, and we can cut SNAP and EBT benefits to families that may actually need assistance because there are PEOPLE GAMING THE SYSTEM! I got an idea, to make sure that the government doesn't steal any more of our hard earned money, let's just go ahead and cut every other social welfare program as well. Get rid of police departments, and let those that can afford it hire their own private security. Maintain the fire department, but they have to run a credit card before they send the engines out. If you want quality roads, you and your neighbors go out there and pour asphalt, or hire a construction company to do it. Get rid of environmental regulations, because they stand in the way of progress and if you're a worthwhile human being, you can afford to import your own clean water anyway. All of it is just the government teat being shoved into your mouth. I'd say get rid of the military as well, but that would be unpatriotic, and I'd be tagged as a "marxist libtard."

Or, tell you what: let's just go ahead and cut out the middleman and let the corporations send their own people to Capitol Hill, and take over all aspects of running the goverment. It is obvious they know our best interests, and that way we don't have to be bothered by such pesky things as elections or politics, and we can just freely accept that this country wouldn't be what it is without rich people making sure everyone else knows their role.

I wish they'd hurry up and get the dystopian, corporate-controlled, drone-monitored, liquid soy-meal future here. I'm getting bored with the lead-in.

[ItsOver]

Meh, why not.  Corporate fat cats vs. politicians.  What's the difference.

[wr250]

I wish they'd hurry up and get the dystopian, corporate-controlled, drone-monitored, liquid soy-meal future here. I'm getting bored with the lead-in.

how about some soylent green instead ?

[qaddisin]

how about some soylent green instead ?

The moment MegaFood Conglomerate is sure it would be better for their bottom line, you can be damn sure they'll have people in Washington lined up to make it so they won't get fined by the USDA for doing it.

And you can be sure that truly hungry people would eat it if they felt there were no other alternative. If people were going to rise up in open rebellion due to dead people or worse being in their food, it would have happened in 1906.

[VtaGeezer]

Justice Roberts' message to Putin:  You think you have an oligarchy?  Hah; we'll show you how to do oligarchy.

[albrecht]

Justice Roberts' message to Putin:  You think you have an oligarchy?  Hah; we'll show you how to do oligarchy.

Ours is more properly called a plutocracy.

ps: Putin finally made all rumors true and got divorced (and apparently in good ol' Soviet fashion purged the documents and websites of his former wife.) Wonder if our dear leader will also come clean considering all the rumors.

[NowhereInTime]

Continuing our lengthy homage to the "wealth creators" and the corporations who really are "people":
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/02/ups-queens-firing_n_5078776.html

UPS gets pissed at a 90 minute job action that "interrupts the quality their delivery service".  Their response?  Fire everyone who dared walk for 90 minutes.  Gee, no interruptions there.

And this after they really sucked delivering Christmas on time.

Great job on your continuing "streamlining".  Assholes, no let's "see what Brown can do for you".

[SciFiAuthor]

Sorting through your bifurcated, sycophantic, factless, diatribes, masquerading as intellect, must be how girls feel when you are going for second base. Fingers frantically, fumbling, futilely, with her bra. How beta, ew.

Social intercourse with you is tedious, and unproductive at best.
I have not the will, or desire to back track if the bread crumbs are to far apart for you to follow. Giving rise for you to imply false ideas on my part.

It seems, you can't read, do math, and you have no integrity. The article speaks for itself, and at this point Forbes has more credibility than you ever will. Remember math is math, quit whining and face facts.  Math is not a red herring.

You are correct the top 500 are not worth $110 trillon, nor did the Forbes article I posted imply such. That was some flawed math you pulled out of thin air, of your own accord. Just because Forbes doesn't agree with your made up math "facts", they are the poor source? Red herring indeed. :

OH! Look over there, Bill Gates!  Non sequitur, anyone?  :
Fuck Jesus jumping on a pogo stick! How deluded can you get?

By all means, please stop being fucking stupid. It's important for a writer to have good reading comprehension. Integrity, IQ, and math skills, apparently not so much.

Who's turn to hit the dubious? #puffpuffpass

Since you were too fucking lazy to bother, I calculated the sum of the fortunes on the 500 list. It didn't break 5 trillion. That's a far cry from 110 trillion. You been had.

As to the rest of what you said, that's just substanceless bullshit. Now run along to the Noory hating threat, you don't need much horsepower in the head to partake in that one.

[SciFiAuthor]

For the third time, now.  It is endemic to the finance industry that rules are for suckers.  This is why people are continually being caught and convicted.  It is not, however, problem solved nor case over.  Stop pretending it is.  The idea that "the laws are working?" Is as naive a notion as I have seen posted here.  Even a cursory review of the SEC's difficulty prosecuting these cases would leave any reader with the opinion that the laws aren't working.  This is why they have to settle for civil actions more often than not.

Yeah, but you're projecting what's going on the in the finance industry on the rest of the rich people, which as the Forbes list shows did not make their fortunes in finance. Very few of the biggest did.

Your side also held the legislative and the executive for two years. It still holds the senate and the presidency. They've done nothing to alleviate the problem you're articulating, but you're still more interested in fighting with the conservatives who haven't been in a position to do jack shit about anything in 6 years. You know your president has more ties to Goldman Sachs than either Goldman or Sachs, yet you still run around blindly supporting the guy. I just don't get it.

And really, are you still trying to minimze and compartmentalize the finance industry as some outlier in our economy?  Not one person on these threads could honestly support that notion.

Quite the opposite, I'm pointing out that it's not the be all and end all of the American economy and you can't use it to judge American business. Technology, Pharmaceuticals, energy...

Occupy is dead.  It only lives on in the hearts and minds of fearful conservatives like yourself.  For the record, I never participated in the rallies because, frankly , I never thought they'd have real effect.  Conservatives are too inured against reality with their loathsome principles to ever pay heed to the suffering of others.

I wouldn't say dead, more that it could never come up with a cohesive platform. There was a reason for that, it would have been a platform almost wholly against the Democratic Party. The organizers of it realized that, and it fell apart soon after, apparently.

I do invest.  I enjoy seeing companies grow and new and exciting products brought to market.  I am not perfect; I try to invest in companies that play with others but I fail.  I am in Ford, Microsoft, Empire State Realty Trust, Alexander's, Fuel Cell, Bank of America, and Tesla (3 lousy shares -  I missed it last April when I was paying Uncle Sam and Uncle Dannel).  I wish I could be in some other companies, and may yet, but I work retail and don't make jack making other people rich.

Well, that simply makes you into part of they very problem you're complaining about. You're out profiteering from it, and unless you want your stocks to drop, you'll eventually have to disavow your own viewpoints or take the hit. Not that I'd say any of those companies are particularly offensive, other than BofA, but ya know, you're the fat cat.

That's what I never understood. Everyone was bitching about their 401k plans going into the toilet in 2008, but then they turned around and bitched about Wall Street when in fact they were Wall Street.

But I will give you a free stock tip. AMGEN, Nasdaq: AMGN. Their drug T-Vec was just FDA approved for Melanoma after a Phase III clinical trial. Do a bit of Wikipedia reading and google research and it will become clear very quickly why I'm suggesting it. Pay particular attention to the head and neck cancer trials and the drug's efficacy. Shhhh, don't tell, but there's big news on the horizon.

I don't envy your career.  Sure, you may write that breakthrough novel and be spectacularly wealthy, but the dreariness of publicity tours and the uncertainty of publishing are gambles.  I do hope you are wealthy from your endeavors.  Here's the catch; as I have said before and will say again: I do not want to "take your money".  I want you to be wealthy and secure.  Want I do not want, along with people smarter than me, like TR, is to create perpetual wealth.  I believe that we are better as a nation when we are all involved in the furtherance of national interest.  When we all have to pick up a shovel (or brainstorm in front of a blank screen). When we all have opportunity to start and all the wealth isn't being pooled and dammed by an incredibly tiny amount of people.

Regarding TR, not my kind of guy. The Spanish American war pisses me off, and I'm not sure century old thinking is really relevant now as far as finance. He lived before labor laws, unions, inflation and fiat currency. The fact is inflation alone kills off the trust funders eventually.

But see, wealth is not finite. Every time I write a book, I create wealth for myself. It simply takes a lot of work, trial and error, and persistence. It's really not that hard to make cash on the side, most people do it actually, and yet for some reason we think that some people holding a certain amount of money somehow threatens something. It doesn't, go out and make new wealth. That's what Zuckerberg did, Elon Musk is doing it in a bunch of different sectors, Bill Gates, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, all of them new money. Sure, most people won't become billionaries, but if you put yourself out there, especially in the internet age, and you are persistent and certain your idea is good, you'll create wealth. Most people prefer the TV and Xbox 360.

Though I don't know for how much longer. Your side really seems intent on making it so difficult to be self-employed that people will simply not do it. Looking at the premiums hikes I've been going through since Obamacare dawned, I'm not too far off from saying fuck it and going back to Boeing.

You call that demoninzing; I call it fair play.  And yes, I feel the estate tax (for estates over $10 million) is a fair way to do that.  Pay down the debt instead of paying the wealthy to finance it through treasuries.

It's simple demonizing. The only people that can able the debt to be paid down is Congress. If you were to confiscate the wealth of the 1 percent in the US, it's really not that much money. Far less than a trillion, and confiscation is a one-shot deal. Once you've got the money, then the sources have no more money. Well, what does that do? Nothing as far as I can see, it's just a red herring to distract away from the real villains, the politicians that bribe votes with your nation's credit whether you agree with them or not.

Finally, I ignore your point about subsidized education  not out of malice but for two reasons: 1) in my values system, helping people become even more knowledgable and gain skills is a good thing and 2) the people who rule this economy aren't subsidized; they are legacy heirs who attend schools like Yale, just 8 miles away from here.  They are fraternity brothers from Duke or Notre Dame or people like the Winklevoss twins who come from wealth and are ginning up this Bitcoin nonsense. These are would-be masters of the universe who don't know an honest day's work yet will make life and death decisions about families' lives.  Too often they lack a moral compass, caring only for their own and their lucre.

1. Yes, but that's not how it's sold. Your politicians go out and tell kids that they'll help them pay for college, and when they get out of college they can expect a decent enough paying job to have made the time spent worth it. It's a dirty fucking lie in today's world. Most people do not want to spend four years or more in a school just for their own self-improvement. They want a job from it, and by creating more and more and more degrees you create more and more and more job competition which lowers and lowers and lowers wages. You simply can't have it both ways, you either can have income equality or you can have frivolous education. It's a choice the liberals have to make, but instead I'm sure you'll sit around blaming conservatives or Bush and hope the problem goes away like you've done for the last six years.

2. I don't really see that. I mean, I'm well aware of scary Yale, but I look at the top billionaires and they're not Yale graduates. Gates dropped out of Harvard, the Koch's are MIT, Larry Ellison is University of Chicago (and so am I), Warren Buffet is Wharton, Sheldon Adelson is a dropout from the City College of New York, I'm not sure any of the Waltons even attended college (Git aunt Bertha Mae her teeth, would ya? They're inside the Faberge Egg over by my Elvis paintings), Bloomberg went to Johns Hopkins and Harvard, Larry Page is Stanford, Bezos went to Princeton, Brin went to Stanford, Zuckerberg dropped out of Harvard. I mean, you've got to go pretty far down that list to find any Yalies.

However I will tell you that Yale rules intelligence. Very much so. The CIA to this day is full of Yalies and always has been. Even William F. Buckley was recruited on campus and served as a spy in Mexico.

Why should I ever accept that as an American value?

Far be it from me to complain about moral compasses, but I just don't see it. The richest people in the country are philanthropic as all get out. Some of the people in the finance industry might have no moral compass, but as I've been pointing out it's really not that big of a section of the economy as opposed to technology. And not everyone in it is crooked. And you've had the presidency for 6 years and they seem to be more bought and paid for by the financial industries than Bush was (he was owned by the oil industry, of course.)

[Catsmile]

Since you were too fucking lazy to bother, I calculated the sum of the fortunes on the 500 list. It didn't break 5 trillion. That's a far cry from 110 trillion. You been had.

As to the rest of what you said, that's just substanceless bullshit. Now run along to the Noory hating threat, you don't need much horsepower in the head to partake in that one.

Well, thanks for telling me something that has NOTHING to do with the article that I posted. Next you will tell me that 1+1= POTATO and call me weak minded. What next? Will you will sum up your income, and tell me that that it doesn't sum to $110 trillion? Trying invalidate a real study, to fit YOUR deluded narrative. What color is the sky in your flat world?

You are the only one proposing that the top 500 richest peoples wealth must equal $110 trillion. Non sequitur. Something you pulled out of your ass, period.  The article you cited doesn't say, or imply the top 500 are worth $110 trillion. Nor did the article I cited say or imply the top 500 are worth $110 trillion, period. You have been had by your own flawed logic, weak reading comprehension, and math skills, period. Stop being so obtuse trying to save face.

Rough worlds population now = 7,150,000,000  ... or 7.15 BILLION people.
1% of the worlds population = 71,500,000 ... or 71.5 MILLION people, NOT 500 people.
So...71,500,000 people wealth = $110 TRILLION.

Yet again, below is what the article I posted said. You are being obtuse, or just stupid at this point.

   The wealth of the one percent richest people in the world amounts to $110 trillion. That’s 65 times the total wealth of the bottom half of the world’s population.

[Jackstar]

Every time I see "SciFiAuthor" I think "Terry Brooks." Those books sucked.

[SciFiAuthor]

Well, thanks for telling me something that has NOTHING to do with the article that I posted. Next you will tell me that 1+1= POTATO and call me weak minded. What next? Will you will sum up your income, and tell me that that it doesn't sum to $110 trillion? Trying invalidate a real study, to fit YOUR deluded narrative. What color is the sky in your flat world?

You are the only one proposing that the top 500 richest peoples wealth must equal $110 trillion. Non sequitur. Something you pulled out of your ass, period.  The article you cited doesn't say, or imply the top 500 are worth $110 trillion. Nor did the article I cited say or imply the top 500 are worth $110 trillion, period. You have been had by your own flawed logic, weak reading comprehension, and math skills, period. Stop being so obtuse trying to save face.

Rough worlds population now = 7,150,000,000  ... or 7.15 BILLION people.
1% of the worlds population = 71,500,000 ... or 71.5 MILLION people, NOT 500 people.
So...71,500,000 people wealth = $110 TRILLION.

Yet again, below is what the article I posted said. You are being obtuse, or just stupid at this point.

   The wealth of the one percent richest people in the world amounts to $110 trillion. That’s 65 times the total wealth of the bottom half of the world’s population.

I still doubt the math would come out, but we don't have a list of the world's millionaires to calculate from. 110 trillion dollars is a massive amount of money for a bunch of millionaires to come up with. But even if it did, why would it be disconcerting that 71,500,000 people control 65 times the bottom half of the world's wealth? What exactly would an ideal number be?

[SciFiAuthor]

Every time I see "SciFiAuthor" I think "Terry Brooks." Those books sucked.

Wrong genre. Brooks is an epic and urban fantasy writer. I don't care for his books either.

[West of the Rockies]

I don't know what the ideal number would be...  I hear a lot of business owners complain about their threadbare profit margins.  But we also know that other businesses are raking it in:  how much does it cost to produce a Starbucks mocha?  I am guessing not $3.75 in raw materials.

Funny thing about wealth--there's never enough!  I heard a story a few years ago on NPR in which it revealed that people who had a million dollars in the bank really wanted two mil.  When they reached two, they wanted ten.  The super-wealthy apparently show their ascendency by having yachts; the same dollar dynamic applied.  A 100-footer was nice, but they really wanted the two.  Humans are interesting creatures.  Fear of diminishing resources is hard wired into our brains.

[SciFiAuthor]

I don't know what the ideal number would be...  I hear a lot of business owners complain about their threadbare profit margins.  But we also know that other businesses are raking it in:  how much does it cost to produce a Starbucks mocha?  I am guessing not $3.75 in raw materials.

Funny thing about wealth--there's never enough!  I heard a story a few years ago on NPR in which it revealed that people who had a million dollars in the bank really wanted two mil.  When they reached two, they wanted ten.  The super-wealthy apparently show their ascendency by having yachts; the same dollar dynamic applied.  A 100-footer was nice, but they really wanted the two.  Humans are interesting creatures.  Fear of diminishing resources is hard wired into our brains.

I think part of the problem is the cheap culture. We seem to grow increasingly obsessed with getting the best possible deal, i.e. the success of Pawnstars, Pickers, Black Friday sales, ebay sniping and god knows what else. Nobody wants anyone else to make a living anymore. They might say "I want a raise in the minimum wage!" but in turn don't want to pay an extra dollar for a burger. That outlook has gotten way worse over my lifetime, we basically don't have much of a retail model anymore, we have wholesale to the public mindset.

But yes, those in search of wealth do seem to want more wealth after they get the first million. I think it's just human nature. You're right, everyone fears they'll run out.

[albrecht]

Continuing our lengthy homage to the "wealth creators" and the corporations who really are "people":
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/02/ups-queens-firing_n_5078776.html

UPS gets pissed at a 90 minute job action that "interrupts the quality their delivery service".  Their response?  Fire everyone who dared walk for 90 minutes.  Gee, no interruptions there.

And this after they really sucked delivering Christmas on time.

Great job on your continuing "streamlining".  Assholes, no let's "see what Brown can do for you".

What gets me is that the city gives UPS a break on parking tickets. Why should some company get to block traffic, park illegally, etc but if a person does it they get hit with a big fine or even get their car towed.

[Unquenchable Angst]

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2014/04/03/beyond-left-right-escaping-matrix/

[NowhereInTime]

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2014/04/03/beyond-left-right-escaping-matrix/

Wow!  Long read but very interesting.  I would love to escape party rule but I fear its inevitability.

[Little Hater]

A story conspicuously absent from theblaze.com. Beck has been pimping for this guy for months.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/04/ky-gop-senate-candidate-draws-ire-after-speaking-at-pro-cockfighting-rally/?intcmp=latestnews

[FightTheFuture]

A story conspicuously absent from theblaze.com. Beck has been pimping for this guy for months.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/04/ky-gop-senate-candidate-draws-ire-after-speaking-at-pro-cockfighting-rally/?intcmp=latestnews

What a freaking inbred scumbag.

Beck isn`t much better.

[albrecht]

What a freaking inbred scumbag.

Beck isn`t much better.

Try to outreach to the Hispanic community and still coalesce the base and get still get criticized. Why do Republicans even try? Ever been to old Mexico (or go to where all the illegals congregate like a flea market?) If you can't find actual bull fights, dog fights, or cock fights going on you can buy videos of them (usually on VHS as the DVD market has yet to catch up to that segment, I guess.) Now this guy tries some cultural outreach and is mocked.

[Little Hater]

Try to outreach to the Hispanic community and still coalesce the base and get still get criticized. Why do Republicans even try? Ever been to old Mexico (or go to where all the illegals congregate like a flea market?) If you can't find actual bull fights, dog fights, or cock fights going on you can buy videos of them (usually on VHS as the DVD market has yet to catch up to that segment, I guess.) Now this guy tries some cultural outreach and is mocked.

I hope you're being sarcastic.

[West of the Rockies]

Hijacking the thread a bit with an observation... I have been poking around a liberal blog or two and am seeing a clear strain of folks who are not fond of Hillary.  We keep hearing how she is the Democratic front runner and the election is hers to lose, but I am not convinced she is thrilling the left.  Oh, it's not as chaotic as it is on the Republican side, but it makes for a very strange 2016.

[NowhereInTime]

Hijacking the thread a bit with an observation... I have been poking around a liberal blog or two and am seeing a clear strain of folks who are not fond of Hillary.  We keep hearing how she is the Democratic front runner and the election is hers to lose, but I am not convinced she is thrilling the left.  Oh, it's not as chaotic as it is on the Republican side, but it makes for a very strange 2016.

I'm a leftie and I don't want her.  Now she's involved in this USAID "secret Twitter" scandal in Cuba?  I worked my ass off in 2007 and 2008 to help 'Bam win the CT primary and general because Hillary is a carpetbagging cynic who voted for the Iraq War (showing her tough guy creds) but, come primary time, suddenly opposed it.  She's an opportunist with no clear agenda, like her husband, who will flow any way the wind blows.  Thanks but no thanks.
I'm hoping Elizabeth Warren will make a go of it.  I would love a Warren/Franken ticket - it would be the most progressive and intelligent ticket in a very long time.

[albrecht]

I'm a leftie and I don't want her.  Now she's involved in this USAID "secret Twitter" scandal in Cuba?  I worked my ass off in 2007 and 2008 to help 'Bam win the CT primary and general because Hillary is a carpetbagging cynic who voted for the Iraq War (showing her tough guy creds) but, come primary time, suddenly opposed it.  She's an opportunist with no clear agenda, like her husband, who will flow any way the wind blows.  Thanks but no thanks.
I'm hoping Elizabeth Warren will make a go of it.  I would love a Warren/Franken ticket - it would be the most progressive and intelligent ticket in a very long time.

I wonder if she will really go for it. Forming a committee and even raising money really doesn't mean anything these days. She has A LOT of baggage and not just from the good ol' days in Arkansas or when Bill was Pres. Now we have the missing billions from the State Dept and the fact that she can't point to any single accomplishment during her tenure there. And the health problems. And, as you mentioned, she is not popular with many base elements in the Democrat party, though there are clearly die-hard supporters who also begrudge the tactics used by Obama during the initial nomination process (PUMA etc). Who knows but I could see her not running. She has plenty of money and can still get limelight where-ever she goes so?

[PB the Deplorable]

...  I would love a Warren/Franken ticket - it would be the most progressive and intelligent ticket in a very long time.

A fake Indian and a guy who stole an election to get his Senate seat. 

I'm not so sure about intelligent but they sure seem typical of that party. 

[albrecht]

A fake Indian and a guy who stole an election to get his Senate seat. 

I'm not so sure about intelligent but they sure seem typical of that party.

But at least Franken was marginally funny in that movie "Stewart Saves His Family", not so funny on SNL or on Comedy Central though.  An awful movie but worth a watch because the other actors in it were pretty good and some nice slapstick, drunken humor. As for the fake-Indian: me thinks white man speak with forked tongue and she took some wampum and fire-water from national party coffers to get elected and soon as stopped her rhetoric for change or reform.