[GMAN]

Originally Posted by robertt

It was meant to mean they have to pay people to go, coerce, bribe, that kind of thing. So actually, they don't have their act together if they have to do that.

The communists have been doing that for years in some of the old European eastern bloc countries as well as the Soviet Union, etc.,

[robertt]

Is their any doubt about their agenda??? Got an excuse for these folks hobo? This is TOTAL insanity!!! For those of you that don't know the layout of D.C. this is right across the street from the White House. This CRAP is going on in "OUR" CAPITAL'S BACK YARD!!!

WHAT ARE THESE PEOPLE DOING???

WHEN ARE THE ONES THAT ARE ASLEEP GOING TO WAKE UP???

KNOCK KNOCK GOLFHOBO!!!

http://www.youtube.com/v/Wkw7n9Qagu8...</param><param

[golfhobo]

Originally Posted by robertt

LOVELY PEOPLE! They are "supplying" buses for union members and whomever else want to go. Folks that went to 8/28 went on their own dime.

http://blip.tv/play/hJNRgoCscwI%2Em4v

No they didn't. I haven't even checked this out, but I'm quite SURE that buses were "supplied" to people who wanted to attend the Beck rally.

It was meant to mean they have to pay people to go, coerce, bribe, that kind of thing. So actually, they don't have their act together if they have to do that.

MORE total B.S.! No one was "bribed" let alone "coerced" to go. PROVE IT or .... well.... you know the drill. :lol:

I wonder how many of the membership would approve of their union wasting their union dues on something that is so anti American?

Wow! Having never been in a union, I guess you have NO IDEA what the purpose of union dues IS! And what is so "un-American?" This rally was about the people wanting JOBS! It was also about bringing MANY diverse organizations together in a COALITION to show that they have at least one thing in common... they want to WORK and pay their own way in life! Such a crime! :roll:

[golfhobo]

Originally Posted by GMAN

I wonder how many of the membership would approve of their union wasting their union dues on something that is so anti American?

What is so anti-American about wanting JOBS?? Your position here shows that you are firmly allied with the greedy corporations that will ship EVERY job out of this country that they possibly CAN! Why?? For more profits. More gold in their OWN coffers. The American worker / middle class be DAMNED!

THAT, sir... is what I call being anti-American. And you, sir... are a shining example of it. :roll:

I bet you do a real good immitation of Marie Antoinette saying, "Let them eat CAKE!" :hellno:

They have no idea what they will lose if this agenda continues.

I bet most of them already know what they've LOST! Homes, jobs, healthcare, retirement savings.....

[VitoCorleone99]

Originally Posted by golfhobo

No they didn't. I haven't even checked this out, but I'm quite SURE that buses were "supplied" to people who wanted to attend the Beck rally.

I have no doubt that plenty of buses were chartered for each event. I believe that the distinction would be that my sister-in-law, a teacher in Michigan who would best be described as a moderate Democrat, had her union dues taken and used for a purpose that she had no desire to support. She's of the old Democrat school ('friend of the working man' and so forth) as opposed to the party's current far-left incarnation. She wouldn't have volunteered any money to support this 10/2 gathering, but she's paying anyway. In the case of the earlier rallies (9/12, 8/28, etc.), the people riding in the buses tended also to be the people who paid for the buses.

MORE total B.S.! No one was "bribed" let alone "coerced" to go. PROVE IT or .... well.... you know the drill. :lol:

"Bribed" is a term that is a little charged, but many were paid. Byron York has a pretty good rundown on the "diversity" of the event. He's a conservative, but I have no doubt that he actually spoke with each person that he has quoted. His journalism has never been along the 'just asking questions' line that people like Beck and Schultz use as a cover. Paid buses, paid meals, paid lodging, etc.

Decide for yourself what constitutes a bribe, but my guess is that the RACIST INSURANCE INDUSTRY wasn't paying for anyone's expenses to attend 9/12 last year. (I never got my check, in any event.) I didn't agree with much of the message being communicated this past Saturday, but you may have been able to "coerce" me by offering a free trip to the nation's capital on a beautiful autumn weekend. I wouldn't have stuck around very long though. It looks like plenty of others took the same approach, which may explain why the crowd turned out to be so much smaller than advertised.

Wow! Having never been in a union, I guess you have NO IDEA what the purpose of union dues IS! And what is so "un-American?" This rally was about the people wanting JOBS! It was also about bringing MANY diverse organizations together in a COALITION to show that they have at least one thing in common... they want to WORK and pay their own way in life! Such a crime! :roll:

You really should watch some of the video. It was a collection of kooks for the most part. Generic slogans like "jobs" and "justice" were thrown around here and there, but the only real message conveyed was "DOWN WITH RACIST TEABAGGERS AND THEIR RACIST RACISM FUNDED BY RACIST REPUBLICANS AND THEIR RACIST ALLIES IN SUPPORT OF RACISM. AND... AND... GEORGE BUSH!"

I'm not sure that I'd be getting a whole lot out of my union dues if they shipped some of my coworkers to D.C. in order to listen to Ed Schultz and his ilk for a couple of hours. It's not like the present administration is hostile to the views that Mr. Schultz tends to express in the first place, so what really was the point?

My dues will be always be used to help elect Democrats. I know the drill. I'm free to work elsewhere or leave my bankrupt state (run completely by the unions and the D's, of course) if I see fit. I don't lose any sleep over it, but it's a little silly to suggest that this rally was somehow going to help anyone get a job.

(I'm gonna leave the "pay their own way" part alone. I just highlighted it so that you would know it gave me a hearty chuckle. Thanks for that.)

[robertt]

Originally Posted by golfhobo

No they didn't. I haven't even checked this out, but I'm quite SURE that buses were "supplied" to people who wanted to attend the Beck rally.

Guess you haven't seen the video of the woman talking about how they paid for her bus ride and hotel. She said it has been really great because she wasn't working anyway.

Originally Posted by golfhobo

MORE total B.S.! No one was "bribed" let alone "coerced" to go. PROVE IT or .... well.... you know the drill. :lol:

OK.....here's the "drill". http://blip.tv/play/hJNRgoDSCgI%2Em4v

Originally Posted by golfhobo

Wow! Having never been in a union, I guess you have NO IDEA what the purpose of union dues IS! And what is so "un-American?" This rally was about the people wanting JOBS! It was also about bringing MANY diverse organizations together in a COALITION to show that they have at least one thing in common... they want to WORK and pay their own way in life! Such a crime! :roll:

I've got news for you. I "WORK" with union members of the AFGE, and "WORK" isn't in their vocabulary or ethics or anything else that involves said word!

[golfhobo]

VitoCorleone said:

I have no doubt that plenty of buses were chartered for each event. I believe that the distinction would be that my sister-in-law, a teacher in Michigan who would best be described as a moderate Democrat, had her union dues taken and used for a purpose that she had no desire to support. She's of the old Democrat school ('friend of the working man' and so forth) as opposed to the party's current far-left incarnation. She wouldn't have volunteered any money to support this 10/2 gathering, but she's paying anyway. In the case of the earlier rallies (9/12, 8/28, etc.), the people riding in the buses tended also to be the people who paid for the buses.

I haven't had alot of experience with unions, Vito, but I'm pretty sure that the workers don't have alot of say in how the money is spent. Some goes to retirement accounts (the interest from which is often spent politically.) So, it really doesn't matter if she would "support" the activity or not. I bet she "supports" the higher wages and benefits she gets. The last (perhaps only) time I was in a union, I was getting paid about $13/hr to start and $22/hr after making top pay for service years. That was close to twice the going rate in my region of the country.

Whether I agree with the idea of unions or not... they had negotiated a pretty sweet deal for me. So.... what THEY chose to do with my dues, in an effort to lobby congress for my stability and benefits, etc., is way above my paygrade. In a NON-union shop, this would be paid by the corporation out of their profits gained by paying me the lowest wage possible! So, either way, THEY do what they want, but I make more money by paying some dues.

Please fill me in on this current "far left incarnation."

The 8/28 rally was supported mostly by the Koch Brothers (and a few other conservative PACS.) I doubt seriously if the attendees paid for their own buses. However... IF they did? Well, just shows how greedy those b@stards are! :lol:

I really don't care enough to do the research. But, I maintain that no one was bribed or coerced to attend this rally. A "free lunch?" Give me a break! My dad's CHURCH has done that for people they wanted to attend a rally or a CRUSADE! :roll:

"Bribed" is a term that is a little charged, but many were paid. Byron York has a pretty good rundown on the "diversity" of the event. He's a conservative, but I have no doubt that he actually spoke with each person that he has quoted. His journalism has never been along the 'just asking questions' line that people like Beck and Schultz use as a cover. Paid buses, paid meals, paid lodging, etc.

Okay, I just read your link. I'm sure you noticed the bias as well as I did. Where was the mention of the CHURCHES? You know... CHRISTIANS who stood side by side for human rights and those of the middle class? I would say, from what I've read elsewhere, that there was indeed more diversity in the crowd than there was in that article!

And even Byron's OWN quotes showed that the people were there for JOBS! NO ONE mentioned being coerced or bribed. They didn't even mention Dubya! They were there for JOBS!

I really haven't paid much attention to THIS rally OR Beck's! And I try to stay away from this "gotcha" game of who's got the biggest DORK! :roll: I listen to Ed Schultz fairly often, but I disagree with much of what he says. Not necessarily his VIEWS.... but, the way he presents them. I'm looking forward to the Comedy Central duo's rally at the end of the month. I think that will show how many of "us" are still SANE!

Decide for yourself what constitutes a bribe, but my guess is that the RACIST INSURANCE INDUSTRY wasn't paying for anyone's expenses to attend 9/12 last year. (I never got my check, in any event.) I didn't agree with much of the message being communicated this past Saturday, but you may have been able to "coerce" me by offering a free trip to the nation's capital on a beautiful autumn weekend. I wouldn't have stuck around very long though. It looks like plenty of others took the same approach, which may explain why the crowd turned out to be so much smaller than advertised.

It was ONLY meant to be a 4 hour rally. I don't know... did Beck have the same time limit? I don't know anything about the 9/12 rally last year. But, I'm interested in your characterization of the Insurance Industry as "racist." Was that a joke? I guess I'm due for some MORE research! :lol2:

You really should watch some of the video. It was a collection of kooks for the most part. Generic slogans like "jobs" and "justice" were thrown around here and there, but the only real message conveyed was "DOWN WITH RACIST TEABAGGERS AND THEIR RACIST RACISM FUNDED BY RACIST REPUBLICANS AND THEIR RACIST ALLIES IN SUPPORT OF RACISM. AND... AND... GEORGE BUSH!"

Okay... I get your point! I really didn't get to see any of it on T.V. I was driving that day and listening to college football! I realize that some of you don't "get me," but I am NOT a far left socialist union type!

I think SOME of the leftist rhetoric is just as bad as the rightwing B.S.! Middle to lower class people are PRONE to repeat the B.S. they are FED! This goes for BOTH parties. Exhibit A: The lady that McCain had to INFORM that Obama was not a...a... a.... ARAB! :roll:

I don't deny these people their constitutional right to assemble and to petition the government for redress of their grievances! But, that doesn't mean I have to give a DAMN about what their signs say.... or consider them as representative of the PEOPLE! :hellno:

I'm not sure that I'd be getting a whole lot out of my union dues if they shipped some of my coworkers to D.C. in order to listen to Ed Schultz and his ilk for a couple of hours. It's not like the present administration is hostile to the views that Mr. Schultz tends to express in the first place, so what really was the point?

I WOULD say, "you tell me and we'll BOTH know," but the point is simple political enthusiasm! We need to get out the vote or we will lose.... simple as that.

My dues will be always be used to help elect Democrats. I know the drill. I'm free to work elsewhere or leave my bankrupt state (run completely by the unions and the D's, of course) if I see fit. I don't lose any sleep over it, but it's a little silly to suggest that this rally was somehow going to help anyone get a job.

I agree!

(I'm gonna leave the "pay their own way" part alone. I just highlighted it so that you would know it gave me a hearty chuckle. Thanks for that.)

Maybe, you misunderstood me. (maybe not.) I simply meant that the average American wants a JOB so they can PAY their mortgage, and their taxes, AND buy some products from the corporations, and maybe take their family to the zoo now and then!

The big corporations seem to want to increase their profits for themselves AND their stockholders by shipping the jobs overseas for lower manufacturing costs. But, by DOING so... they obliterate the MARKET for their own products by increasing the unemployment levels here in America. When people don't have jobs, they can't buy the products. Why is that so hard to understand? How does it serve them to earn one more dollar on the price of a "widget" when the sales of those widgets bottom out because the market can't afford to buy them... especially if they are not a necessity?

Oh wait... I know! Because they are STILL making the profits on those widgets that are made in 3rd world countries and imported at lower prices, so the poor in America buy THEM instead of American made products! And they don't have to pay any TAXES to the government that then GIVES money to the poor so they can buy these products!

So, the corporations are screwing BOTH the government and the working class!

Someone (robertt) recently questioned the amount of money we give to foreign countries to "bring them up to our level." Firstly, the TOTAL combined amount of our foreign aid makes up only ONE percent of our national budget! THIS isn't what is hurting US... and it's not what brings them up to our level. It is the JOBS that we send overseas that is increasing their "level" of income and existence. Fruck the 1% of our budget that we send them! It is the 40% of our GDP that the corporations are sending them that raises THEM up while destroying the middle class of America! :eek2:issedoff:

And THIS.... Vito.... was the point of the 10/2 rally!

[robertt]

Originally Posted by golfhobo

Someone (robertt) recently questioned the amount of money we give to foreign countries to "bring them up to our level." Firstly, the TOTAL combined amount of our foreign aid makes up only ONE percent of our national budget! THIS isn't what is hurting US... and it's not what brings them up to our level. It is the JOBS that we send overseas that is increasing their "level" of income and existence. Fruck the 1% of our budget that we send them! It is the 40% of our GDP that the corporations are sending them that raises THEM up while destroying the middle class of America! :eek2:issedoff:

I wasn't questioning, I was trying to get the point across that the progressive loons and far left loons want to give "our" money, from the "greedy" people here in the U.S. and our tax money to the third world countries. The "poor" people who don't have a chance :tears:.(The tears are for the kooks trying to make us feel bad,[sarcasm]). Again, if I want to give to a charity, I'll do it on my own. Not the Gov't doing it for me. WE HAVE TOO MUCH WEALTH, according to obama. "We need to spread it around", in his words, not mine.

[golfhobo]

Originally Posted by robertt

I wasn't questioning, I was trying to get the point across that the progressive loons and far left loons want to give "our" money, from the "greedy" people here in the U.S. and our tax money to the third world countries. The "poor" people who don't have a chance :tears:.(The tears are for the kooks trying to make us feel bad,[sarcasm]). Again, if I want to give to a charity, I'll do it on my own. Not the Gov't doing it for me. WE HAVE TOO MUCH WEALTH, according to obama. "We need to spread it around", in his words, not mine.

Well, let's see.... robertt. I'm pretty sure we've been giving approximately 1% of our budget to foreign countries for YEARS now! That would include those "far right loons" in the Dubya administration, the Reagan administration and on and on! My point is that THAT is not the problem! Oh... but because it is happening NOW under the Obama administration... and YOU just learned of it.... it must be some kind of communist agenda! [shock!]

To a certain extent, our taxes are to be used as the government sees FIT! Just like the union dues I talked about. YOU don't get to decide if they should send a few bucks to other countries.... your REPRESENTATIVES do!

And then there is this: YOU are worried about how we look to other countries if Obama happens to bow a bit in respect to a King, (though you cry LOUDLY when Michelle touches a Queen) but the fact is.... the whole WORLD knows that we possess more wealth than most countries combined. IF we didn't give some amount in foreign aid.... what would they think? Do you think they would believe we are a good Christian nation when we asked them to sacrifice their OWN kids in a war that WE wanted?

You MADE your point. Everyone understood it. I SOUNDLY dismissed it. And apparently, you MISSED MY point about the GDP... and continued with your vitriol about a pittance of foreign aid.

You keep asking how "I" can defend the policies of Obama, yet YOU staunchly defend the position of the greediest of corporations... WHILE telling us all how you are struggling to make ends meet. Do you think they give a rat's AZZ about YOU?

[VitoCorleone99]

Originally Posted by golfhobo

I haven't had alot of experience with unions, Vito, but I'm pretty sure that the workers don't have alot of say in how the money is spent. Some goes to retirement accounts (the interest from which is often spent politically.) So, it really doesn't matter if she would "support" the activity or not. I bet she "supports" the higher wages and benefits she gets. The last (perhaps only) time I was in a union, I was getting paid about $13/hr to start and $22/hr after making top pay for service years. That was close to twice the going rate in my region of the country.

Whether I agree with the idea of unions or not... they had negotiated a pretty sweet deal for me. So.... what THEY chose to do with my dues, in an effort to lobby congress for my stability and benefits, etc., is way above my paygrade. In a NON-union shop, this would be paid by the corporation out of their profits gained by paying me the lowest wage possible! So, either way, THEY do what they want, but I make more money by paying some dues.

You're arguing a point that I never made. I pay my dues every month. I roll my eyes at the handful of my lazy coworkers who abuse the situation but, on balance, my wages and benefits are favorable to me. My point was that there is not a parallel between forty people on one bus and forty people on another. When the travel, food, and lodging are paid by someone else (willing or otherwise), it's a different situation from one where people choose to pitch in for their own travel costs.

Please fill me in on this current "far left incarnation."

The deficit has exploded beyond belief since the Pelosi/Reid crowd assumed control. In days of yore, Tip O'Neill would have tried to pretend to give a damn.

The president (according to Bob Woodward) is far more concerned about losing his far left support that he is in winning the war to which he committed 30,000 additional troops. In days of yore, Democratic voters would have stood behind their commander-in-chief during a time of war, especially given that he was an outspoken pacifist before taking office. The guy had to be dragged kicking and screaming into sending the additional troops, then sent less than the generals wanted, then telegraphed the exit date. Whom was this meant to appease?

As they bemoan the prospect of missing out on what they claim will be $700 billion in revenue over the next decade, should the present tax rates be left in place, the Pelosi/Reid crowd have spent trillions of dollars on special interest handouts. Stimulus, cash for clunkers, green technology subsidies, bailouts to state governments, bailouts for troubled homeowners (at the expense of their solvent neighbors), a massive new health care entitlement, an omnibus spending bill with 9,000 earmarks in it... these people spend $70 billion a week, but we're supposed to believe that the world will end if they don't get their $70 billion a year. According to The One™, his bold decision to stick with his predecessor's Iraq timeline is going to save a gajillion dollars or whatever. In days of yore, there were honest economists in the Democrat party who would admit that you don't raise taxes until the economy is on solid ground.

"Under my energy plan, electricity costs would necessarily skyrocket." - Senator Barack Obama, while running for president. When the happy days are here again and the rivers flow with hundred dollar bills, go ahead and try to ram this cap and trade crap down our throats. I won't support it, but maybe 50%+1 of my fellow Americans will. Not now though. The people are pretty much broke, the government is beyond broke, and we can't afford to lose our productivity to Third World countries that have no compunction about burning coal for energy. In days of yore, President Clinton's party knew when to back off and listen to the voters.

The knee-jerk reaction of today's left is to label every opponent of their agenda as a racist. They're simply hearing each other in an echo chamber, because the vast majority of the country stopped giving a damn about skin color a long time ago. When Scott Brown drives a pickup truck around Massachusetts and this is a coded racist signal according to MSNBC's loudest anchor, something has gone terribly awry. In days of yore, folks like President Johnson and Martin Luther King would have been insulted to see the word 'racism' lobbed around so casually and frequently, in light of the real racism that still exists in some corners of the world.

I'm getting bored, so I'll assume that I've made my point here. This part could go on for a while.

The 8/28 rally was supported mostly by the Koch Brothers (and a few other conservative PACS.) I doubt seriously if the attendees paid for their own buses. However... IF they did? Well, just shows how greedy those b@stards are! :lol:

Greed as a motivator to drive yourself to D.C. and listen to people talking about faith and charity? Okay, I suppose.

If you have a stage and a microphone and so forth, someone is always sponsoring the event. Paying the expenses of putting on the shindig are not the same as paying to get yourself to the shindig. For whatever that's worth. The knock on the leftapalooza deal was that many of the attendees were there at no expense to themselves. Conservatives like to use this as some measure of enthusiasm. Personally, I'm a little skeptical of its accuracy as a measure, but the difference still exists. Whether it matters or not (to me it does not), some people made their way to D.C. of their own accord and others were bussed in by their union bosses, with their traveling expenses defrayed by their fellow union members.

I really don't care enough to do the research. But, I maintain that no one was bribed or coerced to attend this rally. A "free lunch?" Give me a break! My dad's CHURCH has done that for people they wanted to attend a rally or a CRUSADE! :roll:

Semantics. If the lunch was any good, I may be coerced to hang out at your dad's church for a while.

Okay, I just read your link. I'm sure you noticed the bias as well as I did. Where was the mention of the CHURCHES? You know... CHRISTIANS who stood side by side for human rights and those of the middle class? I would say, from what I've read elsewhere, that there was indeed more diversity in the crowd than there was in that article!

I noted that York is a conservative. I never held him out as a paragon of objectivity. The reason I linked the article was that he listed quite a few of the ways that quite a few unions were drumming up quite a bit of phony "turnout." Good for them, as far as I'm concerned. As I said, I'd have taken the weekend in D.C. if someone wanted to pay my way. The church angle, as I'm sure we're both aware, was far more about politics than it was about Jesus. If you go to a Republican campaign stop and see a bunch of rednecks condemning homosexuals, I doubt that you'll feel so charitable toward Christian diversity, so I'm not going to be overwhelmed by a bunch of urban ministers condemning capitalism.

And even Byron's OWN quotes showed that the people were there for JOBS! NO ONE mentioned being coerced or bribed. They didn't even mention Dubya! They were there for JOBS!

And what did their speakers tell them about jobs? RACIST TEABAGGING REPUBLICAN RACISTS ARE THE REASON YOU CAN'T GET JOBS! Quite frankly, 'hopenchange' was a better slogan. It was meaningless, hollow, and ultimately ineffective, but at least it sounded fun. Demonizing the 50% of the country who disagree with you and remembering to howl the word "jobs" every now and then is just lame. Schultzie is probably archived on C-SPAN somewhere. Tell me he didn't mention Dubya. Reason TV (the hardcore libertarians) walked around and talked to the event's organizers, rather than taking the easy layup and finding random nutjobs to interview. (It's hilarious if you haven't seen it. My favorite was the AFL-CIO guy. TARP - necessary. Auto bailouts - great idea. AIG - Crap, gotta run!) You'll hear a bunch of boilerplate far left rambling, but you won't hear anything about creating jobs. Soaking the rich is about all they have to offer. That's fine if you have some sort of jealousy complex, but it really does nothing to create jobs. (Note the reaction when he asks the one guy how the government can create jobs - "Uhh.........")

I really haven't paid much attention to THIS rally OR Beck's! And I try to stay away from this "gotcha" game of who's got the biggest DORK! :roll: I listen to Ed Schultz fairly often, but I disagree with much of what he says. Not necessarily his VIEWS.... but, the way he presents them. I'm looking forward to the Comedy Central duo's rally at the end of the month. I think that will show how many of "us" are still SANE!

I went to one in Lansing on April 15th last year. Just a bunch of polite old people who don't think the country should be going bankrupt when 20% of the economy goes to taxes. Snoozefest. I went to D.C. on September 12th last year. By this point, the trendy thing was to make placards with witty insults toward the Democrats on them. I found plenty of them amusing, but still - snoozefest. (I did find a bar near the White House with all the beer you could drink during the Notre Dame game for $15. Holy smokes!)

I'll make a prediction. The clowns will have their rally and the Crooks And Liars crowd will say it was amazingly overwhelmingly earth-shatteringly huge. The Townhall.com crowd will say it was nothing compared to {insert conservative cause here}. On this, I think we agree. Dorks, all of them.

It was ONLY meant to be a 4 hour rally. I don't know... did Beck have the same time limit? I don't know anything about the 9/12 rally last year. But, I'm interested in your characterization of the Insurance Industry as "racist." Was that a joke? I guess I'm due for some MORE research! :lol2:

The aerial photo has the shadows facing due north. That's pretty close to the noon start of the rally, according to my second grade sundial experiment. I'm not sure how the seasonal shifts would affect things, but there's clearly a significant difference in attendance. (The videos of the last guy basically talking to himself just after 4pm are downright hilarious.)

Okay... I get your point! I really didn't get to see any of it on T.V. I was driving that day and listening to college football! I realize that some of you don't "get me," but I am NOT a far left socialist union type!

I think SOME of the leftist rhetoric is just as bad as the rightwing B.S.! Middle to lower class people are PRONE to repeat the B.S. they are FED! This goes for BOTH parties. Exhibit A: The lady that McCain had to INFORM that Obama was not a...a... a.... ARAB! :roll:

I don't deny these people their constitutional right to assemble and to petition the government for redress of their grievances! But, that doesn't mean I have to give a DAMN about what their signs say.... or consider them as representative of the PEOPLE! :hellno:

I hope they assemble there every weekend. The more opportunities they have, the more they'll slip up and let their real hatred of their political foes show. The American public deserves to know that it isn't a big group hug that these people want.

Maybe, you misunderstood me. (maybe not.) I simply meant that the average American wants a JOB so they can PAY their mortgage, and their taxes, AND buy some products from the corporations, and maybe take their family to the zoo now and then!

I understood you just fine. The people at that rally want as much as they can possibly get, preferably paid for by someone else. Housing is a right. Health care is a right. Education is a right. Everything is a right to these people, meaning that they're... wait for it... entitled by virtue of living in America. Not even by being citizens, but merely by being here. So what if you can't afford one of those things? Of course, someone else should pay for it. Per usual, I simply disagree. I don't wade into these debates hoping to change someone's philosophical outlook. I just find it amusing that the 'soak the rich' battle cry is somehow supposed to represent a desire to pay one's own way. You know the stats - 40% pay no income tax, yada yada yada. It was funny to me. That's all.

The big corporations seem to want to increase their profits for themselves AND their stockholders by shipping the jobs overseas for lower manufacturing costs. But, by DOING so... they obliterate the MARKET for their own products by increasing the unemployment levels here in America. When people don't have jobs, they can't buy the products. Why is that so hard to understand? How does it serve them to earn one more dollar on the price of a "widget" when the sales of those widgets bottom out because the market can't afford to buy them... especially if they are not a necessity?

Oh wait... I know! Because they are STILL making the profits on those widgets that are made in 3rd world countries and imported at lower prices, so the poor in America buy THEM instead of American made products! And they don't have to pay any TAXES to the government that then GIVES money to the poor so they can buy these products!

So, the corporations are screwing BOTH the government and the working class!

Someone (robertt) recently questioned the amount of money we give to foreign countries to "bring them up to our level." Firstly, the TOTAL combined amount of our foreign aid makes up only ONE percent of our national budget! THIS isn't what is hurting US... and it's not what brings them up to our level. It is the JOBS that we send overseas that is increasing their "level" of income and existence. Fruck the 1% of our budget that we send them! It is the 40% of our GDP that the corporations are sending them that raises THEM up while destroying the middle class of America! :eek2:issedoff:

And THIS.... Vito.... was the point of the 10/2 rally!

If this was the point, then those unions shouldn't have been there. Exports are the only area that holds significant growth potential for the blue collar sector in this country. Democrats can dole out special interest money for this project and that, but the real working economy has advanced a long way since the industrial revolution. Our roads will need maintenance, but they won't need to be built again. Our cities will get new buildings, but they won't start from the ground up again. We'll buy cars when we need them, but the baby boomers and their Cadillacs won't come around as a boom market again. This is the point that my Big Labor brethren can't get through their thick skulls. Wall off our economy if you want to. (Herbert Hoover, Pat Buchanan, and Big Labor - talk about strange bedfellows.) That's all fine. Tell companies that they have to make all of their stuff here, then watch them lose their business to some fly-by-night Chinese outfit, subsidized by their government with the interest payments on our bonds. Meanwhile you and I can see how many times we can pass the same dollar bill around, calling it GDP, before the government's cut finishes it off. [$1 -> $.75 -> $.56 -> $.42 -> $.32...] It's a decaying orbit, which is why the Keynesian economic model never works. If those union members really want jobs, then they should want oil drilling, coal mining, a sealed border, a robust agricultural sector, and a tax code that encourages businesses to grow and innovate rather than to punish them. Those resources in the ground represent actual wealth that could flow into our economy, as opposed to recirculated wealth that gets taxed as we pass it around until it runs out. Inventions represent added productivity that makes each hour of our work worth more to the overall economy. Taking money from the productive sector in order to subsidize things that can't stand on their own (windmills, ethanol) is merely one more drag on an economy that is struggling to get going. Get your leftist buddies to understand this and I'll pay my own way to their next rally.