A A A A Search :
Toledo Talk   (musing about Lake Erie West and beyond)
From nmorbushomg's workspace   

State of the Union

While gas prices climbed to 309.9 Monday, I saw the Democrats sit on their hands and not clap whenever Bush mentioned the economy, not raising taxes, all children left behind act etc... but any mention of the war and they're rising to the occasion and clapping with full force. Did you see Pelosi, who keeps a piece of paper between her hands in order to diffuse the full-force applause. How pathetic! Are the donkey lovers supposed to think the war is going good now, or were the jackasses just stuck between a rock and a hard place? By midnite Tuesday we will know who will be the Republican candidate, but one thing is for sure, George showed us why he has had a 29% approval rating.

"In the long run, Americans can be confident about our economic growth, but in the short run, we can all see that that growth is slowing."
"Seven years have passed since I first stood before you at his rostrum. In that time, our country has been tested in ways none of us could have imagined.

We've been tested because of his rage for war. But if he defines short-term as 30 years, then being right half the time aint all that bad

created by nmorbushomg on Jan 29, 2008 at 12:43:43 am     Comments: 17

print      source      versions

Comments ... #

I didn't quite get the point of your post, but none of this matters, since we're going socialist regardless of who gets to be the next president. If the Clintons weasel in again (giving us about, what? close to 30 years total of Bush/Clinton family rule?), it'll just come faster, but that's the only difference.

posted by Darkseid on Jan 29, 2008 at 01:03:08 am     #



Tag cloud word count of the speech (top 100 words).

Click to enlarge

posted by jr on Jan 29, 2008 at 01:29:18 am     #



>>I didn't quite get the point of your post>>

Neither did I.

>>but none of this matters, since we're going socialist regardless of who gets to be the next president.>>

Exactly. The Democrats will just take us there faster because they are explicitly about socialism - so they are the kind of the express route.

The Republicans will take a little longer because they will pretend to be against the Democrats but then ultimately compromise with them going halfway on issues to get the votes (see McCain especially - but really all of them).

Jr - that cloud is cool!

posted by babbleman on Jan 29, 2008 at 11:24:34 am     #



Don't kid yourself, the Republicans are all about socialism. They just have different clientele.

posted by Chris99 on Jan 29, 2008 at 11:47:02 am     #



very interesting word count, especially the words not used much, like the word "economy" ,, especially since most Americans have experienced a 14% cut in real wages since the oil companies took office.

I find it hilarious that you are worried about socialism. Its absurd. Here you are living in a perfect example of a fascist state, and you worry that we will have universal health care. What you should be worried about is how in the hell the oil industry installed their chumps in the white house, infiltrated and took control of intelligence to take us into an illegal war that they lied their faces off to get us into, and manage to still keep believing that socialism is a threat somewhere on this earth. The only threat is corporate greed and its control of our country. In government doesnt exist to benefit its people, but regularly gives taxpayer money by the billions to corporate benefit, is run by corporate stooges, takes us to war to enrich oil companies and arms dealers,,, tell me where the socialism is. It fascism, not socialism.
Read Ike's farewell address to the nation in 1961, he warned us of a fascist state. He didn't use the word "fascism", but he described it to a tee in his warning. His warning that the military industrial complex , which includes oil as the fuel of war, was in a position to make "war policy decisions" for the United States. Textbook fascism. To hell with socialism, but universal health insurance isn't socialism. Why do you figure bush won't send enough people to the border to stop illegal immigration? Because industry wants even cheaper labor. As we speak Ford is buying out all of its hourly employees to hire workers who will make half as much. Wake up.

posted by prime3end on Jan 29, 2008 at 11:50:07 am     #



At least they're being offered the chance of a buy-out before their fired. A $100,000 might last three-four years with proper care.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 29, 2008 at 01:10:49 pm     #



Prime3end said: I find it hilarious that you are worried about socialism. Its absurd. Here you are living in a perfect example of a fascist state

Sorry to but in here, but I've always thought of Socialism as Fascism if you really read the definition of fascism. After all, they want to control every aspect of your life.

fas·cism· (fas̸h′iz′əm)

noun

1. the doctrines, methods, or movement of the Fascisti
2. a system of government characterized by rigid one-party dictatorship, forcible suppression of opposition, private economic enterprise under centralized governmental control, belligerent nationalism, racism, and militarism, etc.
3.
1. a political movement based on such policies

The Dems have been just as guilty of all of the above.

I don't trust any of our politicians. I wish "we the people" would take back control and cut the size of our government back down to bare bones.

posted by FatBabe44 on Jan 29, 2008 at 01:35:45 pm     #



Commonalities for sure, but most American politicians use the term as a scary scenario that covers everything except, corporate control of government. Maybe militaristic expansionist theorcratic oligarchy is more fitting... seems long
note below, socialism is government ownership of the corporations, what we have is government (in fact) being owned by the corporations.

from websters:
Main Entry: so·cial·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1837
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

I agree that govt needs an overhaul, but the first and most difficult change will be to take the corporations out of the drivers seat. They took control with authority when the supreme court gave them the legal right to free speech and personhood, over a hundred years ago as I recall. On the rebuild, we should make people come first and controlling our borders a massively important priority. Something would have to be done to make corruption by corporations impossible. I'm at the point where I think a lottery is the best way to select our leaders. We couldn't possibly do any worse than we are doing now. There would be no need for campaign money, and nobody would get re-elected. It was good enough to select soldiers in wartime, so should be good enough to award a job in any public office.

Benitto called fascism the perfect marriage between church state and religion. If its a marriage, the corporations wear the pants.

posted by prime3end on Jan 29, 2008 at 02:14:53 pm     #



"A $100,000 might last three-four years with proper care"
And with the tax break 100,800 dollars will last even longer.:)

The post was meant to form its own life. If I had gone into much deeper detail, I would of steered the discussion into our economic future. "Who is president" does not have much impact on the economy. Presidents and our representatives alike are overrated in their power to sway the economy.
I would rather we look in the mirror and blame Johnny and Susie Consumer for our trade deficits. Our demise is our own doing.
Don't blame Walmart. People kill the economy, not politicians.
But if you still want to blame the politicians, think back to the 1973 Oil Embargo. Hasn't the US had ample time to reroute its fuel dependency on the Middle East?
Mileage standards? Ha!
Blame the SUV? We bought them.
Blame homeowners who always have to trade up to bigger and bigger houses. An economy based on selfish pleasures is doomed. But I certainly don't want the Government dictating to me what I can buy. Socialism, eiuhh.

Anyhow what candidate is going to keep the economic mountain from falling over faster than it will otherwise? Is their a financially prudent one out there? Ixnay on universal healthcare. We'll all die one day. Now remember to buy American (as long as you trust a car made by a union worker on a Friday after his boozing lunch)

Now if I could just could of gotten my $800 tax refund back when the Giants were getting 14...or at least gotten another widescreen Sony..."

posted by nmorbushomg on Jan 29, 2008 at 02:35:14 pm     #



Woops, I meant to say Benitto called fascism, the perfect marriage between church, state, and INDUSTRY.

With regard to the presidency being irrelevant to the sway of the economy,, I disagree. Cheney's function under Nixon was to form the imperial presidency, and he has sharpened his crayons since then. Everything he and the neo's do seems to circumvent the will of the people, and now , even the will of congress. Congress is afraid to act lest they be seen as disloyal by a really gullible and very very easily swayed public.

The government is already dictating what you can buy, you can only buy foreign made goods per their and the corporations laws and policies economique.

That seems like a huge sway to me. We are getting poison food, poisoned toys, 14% reduction in wages since this madness started, massive debt that our grandkids will still be trying to pay down,,, to the chinese.

How could a candidate survive to make it past that need for corporate money. We only see the candidates that the corporations really support well. The others are invisible or intentionally campaigned against with mostly corporate money.

posted by prime3end on Jan 29, 2008 at 03:14:05 pm     #



good points, but,
Imperial Presidency: if you are speaking of foreign policy, spying on Americans, or creating wars to wad their pockets with cash, then yes I agree

But as for the economy, supply and demand.

Unheralded Candidates: don't forget Kucinich (spelling permission please), He saw UFO's.

What you can buy: If the "fix the hole in the sky", "stop global warming" people get their way, then 100% more of the items you buy now will be on the no-can-buy list. They could restrict pleasure driving, vacations. They could force you into mass transit. These are all good for a greener earth, but at what cost to your freedom. The Global Warmers say that if nothing is done in the next 10-15 years to stop global warming, that there will be no turning back. This is the real challenge to our future, not whether or not we can pick the right candidate or not. Look beyond the corporations and politicans for the answers to our future.

posted by nmorbushomg on Jan 29, 2008 at 03:46:56 pm     #



Re: Global Warming, pollution controls and all that go with it.

Y'all need to visit somewhere where that are no effective enforced pollution controls and see for yourself what that really means. I have: Mexico (some parts) China and Turkey. You'd all come home singing a new tune - if you could still get a full breath of air and weren't dying from some heavy metal or pesticide contaminated water. You just have no damn idea what you are really talking about.

posted by holland on Jan 29, 2008 at 04:11:43 pm     #



Well nmorbush,, I don't think we have a choice anymore about controlling global warming gases, unless we all decide that its time to leave the earth to the insects and rats. So we have to control the gases. We won't have to give up anything really, excpept lung poisoning, heart poisoning air, poison water, and a massive health care bill from that dirty air. What we save in healthcare costs will easily offset the cost of fixing the problem. We have had alternative tech for cars and batteries that could put us in electric cars, literally all our nations electricity could be provided, times 4, using just N and S Dakota's wind potential. Not to mention solar which can be used anywhere. Both methods provide power during peak, and there are ways to store it overnight. The corporations , the ones that run our leaders in the white house, they don't want anything done about greenhouse gases, nor dose F.E. or other big bush contributors. So he reversed the clean air act, and instructed the USEPA head puppet to insist that greenhouse gases couldn't be regulated by USEPA. The supreme court finally kicked them in the ass late last year and instructed them to regulate the gases. Guess what, still not done. My point is that the leader we pick is important in an imperial presidency of the type we have now, which was cheney's vision even during Nixon.
Yes we can look beyond politicians for answers, on that we agree for certain.

Holland, just because they are suicidal and homicidal on the planets future, doesn't mean we should be. We use to lead the world in progress. Remember those days?

posted by prime3end on Jan 29, 2008 at 04:38:15 pm     #



Yeah. I had to go to China and breath yellow air to really get it though. Or see a small stream in Turkey so polluted with acid from a small metal works that the water ate metal while kids played nearby. We can't get out of this alone. It's very, very global. It starts from what American consumers are willing to pay for a product produced in an environmentally responsible manner. Right now it's just save pennies by shopping at Wal*Mart which arm twists such lower costs out of it's suppliers that they out-source to China and other countries. It's there that lower wages coupled with little pollution controls produce the products we want here so cheaply. We don't see the real cost. We just want to consume, consume, consume at the lowest possible price. The real price tag will come later and it will be huge.

posted by holland on Jan 29, 2008 at 06:33:06 pm     #



I certainly hope the industrialized world can be set on a path toward a pollution less society. On the Republican side McCain is the greenest candidate. He's wishy washy on the immigration issue, trying to sound moderate, but he sounds pro-corporate instead. Yippie yi yay yippie ki yi yi yeh, er no that's John McClain of Die Hard fame.

Global Warming is not a myth, so practice being green.
Yes I certainly agree with you guys that Global warming is a policy issue, and must be taken on by the politicos, not just the 10% green citizens out there.

posted by nmorbushomg on Jan 30, 2008 at 01:09:29 am     #



prime, you know, really - it doesn't matter whether government is collecting our individual capital for fascism or socialism. Whenever capital is concentrated in the government, people are going to try to raid it - whether it is politicians seeking power or businesses seeking to get it back.

People spending their lives trying to get their piece of a pile of concentrated capital is unavoidable. There is no set of policies or government structure that can keep people from seeking a pile of treasure - mostly because it is people who make policies and government structure :)

Therefore, the only solution, regardless of whether the problem with government is fascism or socialism, is to not concentrate treasure within it.

posted by babbleman on Jan 30, 2008 at 01:18:52 am     #



I didn't watch it but the Calgary Sun summed it up quite nicely for me.

posted by charlatan on Jan 30, 2008 at 06:37:16 pm     #