It's hilarious to read on this board how the "progressives" want to defend the poor from the greedy capitalist CEOs, and their impersonal corporations...only to find that the progressive agenda furthers such tyranny!

If your proud "liberals" actually paid attention to what you support, you'd realize that you should condemn yourselves first.

http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/20...trade.html

(07-07-2009 10:39 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  It's hilarious to read on this board how the "progressives" want to defend the poor from the greedy capitalist CEOs, and their impersonal corporations...only to find that the progressive agenda furthers such tyranny!

If your proud "liberals" actually paid attention to what you support, you'd realize that you should condemn yourselves first.

http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/20...trade.html

Torch, it is not about the actual Legislation being put forth - -

It is about "Who is Leading the Charge and the Blind Babbling Slobbering Worshipers that Follow Aimlessly into Oblivion with him" ...

Common Sense no longer is the Mean Temper of the Day, because if Obama says it is Good and True, then by all the GODS in the Heavens, It is Good and True.

I have never witnessed anything like it and I have seen a lot in this old life.

.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/06/d...alism.html

Quote:Where to draw the line


Part of the problem here is definitional. No mainstream liberal actually wants government to completely seize the means of production, and no mainstream conservative believes that there's no room for any government regulation or social insurance. Both sides believe in a "mixed economy" but disagree profoundly about where to draw the line. One definition of social democracy is the peaceful, democratic transition to socialism. A second is simply a large European welfare state where the state owns some, and guides the rest, of the economy. Many liberals yearn for the latter and say so often — but fume when conservatives take them at their word.

Personally, I think socialism is the wrong word for all of this. "Corporatism" — the economic doctrine of fascism — fits better. Under corporatism, all the big players in the economy — big business, unions, interest groups — sit around the table with government at the head, hashing out what they think is best for everyone to the detriment of consumers, markets and entrepreneurs. But, take it from me, liberals are far more open to the argument that they're "crypto-socialists."

meanwhile, the Democrats admit their Cap and Trade policy is a Job Killer

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/peter-roff/2...iller.html

they are insane

(07-07-2009 10:39 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  It's hilarious to read on this board how the "progressives" want to defend the poor from the greedy capitalist CEOs, and their impersonal corporations...only to find that the progressive agenda furthers such tyranny!

If your proud "liberals" actually paid attention to what you support, you'd realize that you should condemn yourselves first.

http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/20...trade.html

I have heard from the liberal talk show station that the cap and trade is not going to do much for the environment and enrich a few and that it is not a very good plan. What I am trying to say is that there are many Demmocrats are not to fond of this plan despite your saying they are.

The general consensus is that Cap and Trade is a Job killer. So why is it Obama continue to push it as a Jobs Program. He is like the pied piper.

(07-07-2009 12:25 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-07-2009 10:39 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  It's hilarious to read on this board how the "progressives" want to defend the poor from the greedy capitalist CEOs, and their impersonal corporations...only to find that the progressive agenda furthers such tyranny!

If your proud "liberals" actually paid attention to what you support, you'd realize that you should condemn yourselves first.

http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/20...trade.html

I have heard from the liberal talk show station that the cap and trade is not going to do much for the environment and enrich a few and that it is not a very good plan. What I am trying to say is that there are many Demmocrats are not to fond of this plan despite your saying they are.

It's still passing in the legislature. I think your (note the spelling) protests are too little, too late. The Dems could do no wrong according to you, as long as they opposed the GOP. "Oops," doesn't really cut it.