http://tinyurl.com/onmkjjz

On Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 8:57:50 PM UTC-7, Anonymous posting pussy "John Doe" failed:

jon_banquer wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/onmkjjz

Prior to translation, what they said is that they want to hear pravda.

But at least it's better than Hillary, who believes the same things but
is a congenital liar.

--

On Friday, August 14, 2015 at 12:49:44 PM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/onmkjjz

Prior to translation, what they said is that they want to hear pravda.

But at least it's better than Hillary, who believes the same things but
is a congenital liar.

--

Hillary Clinton isn't trustworthy. Poll after poll bears this out.

The millennials have had enough of being ****ed over. No one is coming close to drawing the kind of crowds Bernie Sanders is.

I see a lot if similarities between FDR and Sanders. Both understand the dangers of unfettered capitalism. Both make rebuilding our infrastructure high priority.

GOP has zero chance of winning the election until they start embracing repeal of Citizens United and breaking up big Wall St. banks.

jon_banquer wrote:
On Friday, August 14, 2015 at 12:49:44 PM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/onmkjjz

Prior to translation, what they said is that they want to hear
pravda.

But at least it's better than Hillary, who believes the same things
but is a congenital liar.

--

Hillary Clinton isn't trustworthy. Poll after poll bears this out.

The millennials have had enough of being ****ed over. No one is
coming close to drawing the kind of crowds Bernie Sanders is.

So he's popular. Islam is popular too.

The millennials are callow and ignorant fools.


I see a lot if similarities between FDR and Sanders. Both understand
the dangers of unfettered capitalism. Both make rebuilding our
infrastructure high priority.

GOP has zero chance of winning the election until they start
embracing repeal of Citizens United and breaking up big Wall St.
banks.

So the millennials are against unfettered free enterprise and unfettered
free speach, and are too callow and ignorant to see where that goes.

--

jon_banquer wrote:

I see a lot if similarities between FDR and Sanders. Both understand
the dangers of unfettered capitalism. Both make rebuilding our
infrastructure high priority.

FDR would not allow civil servants to unionize because he knew they
could ask for a practically unlimited salary. JFK made it happen, so
now when we engage in "rebuilding our infrastructure", we do it with
confiscatory local taxes so those overpaid workers can retire with full
pay when they're 40, and so states and cities can go bankrupt.

When people believe in Progressivism they believe in nothing in
particular. They support policies that they opposed yesterday. We've
seen it happen with gay marriage in only the past few years. It's a
naturally attractive philosophy for callow and ignorant millennials.

--

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:57:03 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
wrote:

jon_banquer wrote:
On Friday, August 14, 2015 at 12:49:44 PM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/onmkjjz

Prior to translation, what they said is that they want to hear
pravda.

But at least it's better than Hillary, who believes the same things
but is a congenital liar.

--

Hillary Clinton isn't trustworthy. Poll after poll bears this out.

The millennials have had enough of being ****ed over. No one is
coming close to drawing the kind of crowds Bernie Sanders is.

So he's popular. Islam is popular too.

The millennials are callow and ignorant fools.


I see a lot if similarities between FDR and Sanders. Both understand
the dangers of unfettered capitalism. Both make rebuilding our
infrastructure high priority.

GOP has zero chance of winning the election until they start
embracing repeal of Citizens United and breaking up big Wall St.
banks.

So the millennials are against unfettered free enterprise and unfettered
free speach, and are too callow and ignorant to see where that goes.

RCM word for the day: "Callow." Excessive use can cause impotence,
hair loss, blurred vision, and skin wrinkles. g

As for "where [unfettered] capitalism goes," we already know from our
own history. And those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it:

"The laissez-faire capitalism, which dominated the second half of the
19th century and fostered huge concentrations of wealth and power, was
backed by a judiciary which time and again ruled against those who
challenged the system. In this, they were merely following the
prevailing philosophy of the times. As John D. Rockefeller is reported
to have said: "the growth of a large business is merely a survival of
the fittest." This "Social Darwinism," as it was known, had many
proponents who argued that any attempt to regulate business was
tantamount to impeding the natural evolution of the species.

"Yet the costs of this indifference to the victims of capital were
high. For millions, living and working conditions were poor, and the
hope of escaping from a lifetime of poverty slight. As late as the
year 1900, the United States had the highest job-related fatality rate
of any industrialized nation in the world. Most industrial workers
still worked a 10-hour day (12 hours in the steel industry), yet
earned from 20 to 40 percent less than the minimum deemed necessary
for a decent life. The situation was only worse for children, whose
numbers in the work force doubled between 1870 and 1900."

http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/outlines/h...e-of-labor.php

Ah, the good old days -- a Tea Bag Reactionary's wet dream.

--
Ed Huntress

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 7:57:02 AM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:

The millennials are callow and ignorant fools.

The world is passing you by.

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 8:14:16 AM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:

I see a lot if similarities between FDR and Sanders. Both understand
the dangers of unfettered capitalism. Both make rebuilding our
infrastructure high priority.

FDR would not allow civil servants to unionize because he knew they
could ask for a practically unlimited salary. JFK made it happen, so
now when we engage in "rebuilding our infrastructure", we do it with
confiscatory local taxes so those overpaid workers can retire with full
pay when they're 40, and so states and cities can go bankrupt.

When people believe in Progressivism they believe in nothing in
particular. They support policies that they opposed yesterday. We've
seen it happen with gay marriage in only the past few years. It's a
naturally attractive philosophy for callow and ignorant millennials.

--

More hate for a world passing you by please. It's clear you have plenty to spare.

Ed Huntress wrote:

Ah, the good old days -- a Tea Bag Reactionary's wet dream.

Your kind has a complete lack of respect for the founders, from the rank
and file who threw the tea into the harbor on up.

The period from the Civil War to the creation of the Fed was our
greatest period of growth. At the end of it, in spite of Marx's
prediction that people would demand Communism, they did not, even in
feudal Russia where Leninism replaced Marxism so that Communism could be
forced upon them.


--

Ed Huntress wrote:

"Yet the costs of this indifference to the victims of capital were
high. For millions, living and working conditions were poor, and the
hope of escaping from a lifetime of poverty slight. As late as the
year 1900, the United States had the highest job-related fatality rate
of any industrialized nation in the world. Most industrial workers
still worked a 10-hour day (12 hours in the steel industry), yet
earned from 20 to 40 percent less than the minimum deemed necessary
for a decent life. The situation was only worse for children, whose
numbers in the work force doubled between 1870 and 1900."

In case I was too ambiguous, civil problems should be fixed by civil
means. The Abolitionist movement at least tried to end slavery by civil
action before the government got involved and 600,000 died.


--

jon_banquer wrote:

Hillary Clinton isn't trustworthy. Poll after poll bears this out.

Polls bear nothing out, except what people think they know. They just
happen to be right about this one, and it took the idiots over 20 years
to figure it out. Conservatives obviously knew it all that time. It's
just another example of Progrssives changing their minds but never
admitting they were wrong.

--

jon_banquer wrote:
On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 7:57:02 AM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:

The millennials are callow and ignorant fools.

The world is passing you by.

He says, like a sage, as he walks past me off of a cliff.

--

jon_banquer wrote:
On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 8:14:16 AM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:

I see a lot if similarities between FDR and Sanders. Both understand
the dangers of unfettered capitalism. Both make rebuilding our
infrastructure high priority.

FDR would not allow civil servants to unionize because he knew they
could ask for a practically unlimited salary. JFK made it happen, so
now when we engage in "rebuilding our infrastructure", we do it with
confiscatory local taxes so those overpaid workers can retire with
full pay when they're 40, and so states and cities can go bankrupt.

When people believe in Progressivism they believe in nothing in
particular. They support policies that they opposed yesterday.
We've seen it happen with gay marriage in only the past few years.
It's a naturally attractive philosophy for callow and ignorant
millennials.


More hate for a world passing you by please. It's clear you have
plenty to spare.

It's clear you want to ignore facts.

--

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 12:21:48 PM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:

Hillary Clinton isn't trustworthy. Poll after poll bears this out.

Polls bear nothing out, except what people think they know. They just
happen to be right about this one, and it took the idiots over 20 years
to figure it out. Conservatives obviously knew it all that time. It's
just another example of Progrssives changing their minds but never
admitting they were wrong.

--

There are almost no real conservatives left in the GOP, just sleazeball RINO's like Boehner, McConnell, Ryan, etc.

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 14:30:37 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

Ah, the good old days -- a Tea Bag Reactionary's wet dream.

Your kind has a complete lack of respect for the founders, from the rank
and file who threw the tea into the harbor on up.

My kind knows American history and the Constitution. Your kind has a
head full of myths.

James Madison, often called "the father of the Constitution," said
that the large federal government and the smaller state governments
differed in their natural tendency to be incompetent and corrupt.
Which one? Where did he say it?

Tea baggers and other rightards often quote the statement, "That
government is best that governs least." They often attribute it to
Jefferson. Is that right? If not, then who said it? In what decade?
Was it a founder, or a proto-anarchist? Or was it a communist?

You remind me of this guy:

http://www.theonion.com/article/area...magines-c-2849

You righties make up an imaginary "Constitution" in your heads, but
you know little or nothing about the real one.


The period from the Civil War to the creation of the Fed was our
greatest period of growth.

Nonsense. The per-capita GDP indices for 1866 and 1913, respectively,
are 170 and 350:

http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/24/...nder-hamilton/

That's just over 100% growth in 47 years.

In comparison, for the last 47 years, per-capita GDP values are 20,114
(1967) and 46,405 (2014). That's 131% growth in 47 years. And that's
ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION, so the real comparison is somewhat higher for
the past 47 years.

https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred...raph_id=250459

(Do you bother to check your facts before spouting off?)

So this era of "fettered capitalism" is a lot more productive than the
"unfettered capitalism" of the late 1800s. Maybe that's because a
higher percentage of earnings wind up in the hands of the people who
spend more of their money -- the workers.

At the end of it, in spite of Marx's
prediction that people would demand Communism, they did not, even in
feudal Russia where Leninism replaced Marxism so that Communism could be
forced upon them.

And why do you think that is? Maybe because a representative democracy
contains its own seed of self-protection -- people vote to keep
"unfettered capitalism" from destroying their society. They called it
"Progressivism." Marx never anticipated it, or never believed it would
work.

I'll look forward to hearing your answers to the two questions posed
at the top. They're good indicators of whether you know what you're
talking about regarding the founders and the ideas that informed the
writing of our Constitution.

--
Ed Huntress

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 2:39:59 PM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:
On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 8:14:16 AM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:

I see a lot if similarities between FDR and Sanders. Both understand
the dangers of unfettered capitalism. Both make rebuilding our
infrastructure high priority.

FDR would not allow civil servants to unionize because he knew they
could ask for a practically unlimited salary. JFK made it happen, so
now when we engage in "rebuilding our infrastructure", we do it with
confiscatory local taxes so those overpaid workers can retire with
full pay when they're 40, and so states and cities can go bankrupt.

When people believe in Progressivism they believe in nothing in
particular. They support policies that they opposed yesterday.
We've seen it happen with gay marriage in only the past few years.
It's a naturally attractive philosophy for callow and ignorant
millennials.


More hate for a world passing you by please. It's clear you have
plenty to spare.

It's clear you want to ignore facts.

--

That the best you can do? Pathetic.

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 2:39:46 PM UTC-7, Tom Del Rosso wrote:

He says, like a sage, as he walks past me off of a cliff.

It's more like I tossed you over the cliff. When you post lame bull**** it's not really that hard for me to do.

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 14:36:00 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
wrote:

Ed Huntress wrote:

"Yet the costs of this indifference to the victims of capital were
high. For millions, living and working conditions were poor, and the
hope of escaping from a lifetime of poverty slight. As late as the
year 1900, the United States had the highest job-related fatality rate
of any industrialized nation in the world. Most industrial workers
still worked a 10-hour day (12 hours in the steel industry), yet
earned from 20 to 40 percent less than the minimum deemed necessary
for a decent life. The situation was only worse for children, whose
numbers in the work force doubled between 1870 and 1900."

In case I was too ambiguous, civil problems should be fixed by civil
means.

What's the "civil problem" we're talking about here? It was an
economic problem. Families had to put their kids to work just to
survive.

The Abolitionist movement at least tried to end slavery by civil
action before the government got involved and 600,000 died.

Which government? The Confederates shot first.

--
Ed Huntress

On 08/15/2015 04:25 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
jon_banquer wrote:

More hate for a world passing you by please. It's clear you have
plenty to spare.

It's clear you want to ignore facts.



Tom, you are exercising your Don Quixote personality.
Tilting at the windmill named Banqueer is a waste of
good electrons, he doesn't have a clue about the real
world.

Please join the rest of us that have filtered little
Jonny boy's tantrums and ignorance.



technomaNge
--
Makes this NG much more readable.