Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditOn Tuesday I spent the afternoon listening to Adrienne Davis of Washington University Law School engage in a smart and wide-ranging discussion of reparations. Professor Davis teaches contracts, legal theory, sex equality, law and literature, and slavery. Davis made a case for why truth and reconciliation commissions are sometimes insufficient for ensuring justice. There are times, Davis argued, when the state must make financial reparations for wrongs committed by the state. Although she does not favor direct cash payments to individuals, Davis did indicate that she believes there are ways that government can help support the work of anti-racist counterpublics.
It was an interesting seminar. Not all agreed with Davis, but all engaged the idea of reparations seriously and soberly. Then I got home and turned on the evening news. That was when I heard Rush Limbaugh invoking the term reparations with something much less serious or sober. It turns out Rush Limbaugh said of Obama's economic policy:
"This is the objective. The objective is unemployment. The objective is more food stamp benefits. The objective is more unemployment benefits. The objective is an expanding welfare state. And the objective is to take the nation's wealth and return to it to the nation's quote, "rightful owners." Think reparations. Think forced reparations here if you want to understand what actually is going on."
Clearly Limbaugh is attempting to use the politics of racial fear to appeal to the lowest common denominator of racial anxiety in this country. The terms "welfare" "food stamps" and "reparations" are all code words for "undeserving black people." Sadly Rush does not seem to understand that the politics of fear was soundly defeated in November. In the context of our deepening economic crisis Americans are embracing a politics of interconnection and shared struggle. We now understand, more than ever, that issues like reasonable nutrition for children, decent wages for workers, and affordable housing for families are not scary, racial bogeymen, they are the basis for a fair society. Everyone needs help these days. We will not be so easily and cynically divided.
I don't mean to suggest that there are no meaningful disagreements on policy, only that Americans with hard hit pocketbooks are seeking more solutions and less rhetoric. Rush and the shouting members of the GOP Right are ignoring this fact at their own peril.
Still, the term reparations here is interesting. Reparations are not solely, or even mostly, about race. Reparations are about giving back to those who have been wronged in order to make them whole again. American citizens as a whole have been wronged by the policies of the Bush Administration. Our sons and daughters were tricked into war. Our financial industry was deregulated. Our civil liberties were trampled. Enemies were tortured in our name. So yes, Americans, all Americans, are due reparations. We have been wronged by our government. When the government helps to right those wrongs by reinforcing the social safety net it is a kind of reparation, the best kind.
Finally, The idea that Barack Obama supports racial reparations is laughable! He was nailed on this question as far back as the 2004 Senate race when Alan Keyes supported slavery reparations and Obama didn't. I swear this happened: Alan Keyes pointed out that he supported reparations and that Obama would not be eligible for any because he had a white mama and African father. It was one of the funniest and most memorable moment of the Illinois senate race because Alan Keyes used reparations to claim he was more racially authentic than Obama. I'd love to see Rush call Alan on the carpet. That is a show I would tune it to hear! Indeed Obama has taken serious criticism from many African American progressives because he would not send a US official representative to the UN Conference on Racism in part because the conference included a plank supporting reparations.
So clearly Rush was not saying anything that is even vaguely, substantively true. He is simply screaming, "there is a black man in the White House! Be afraid!" But we are not afraid.
Besides, as Adrienne Davis said today, "I have no idea what to do with 40 acres and a mule." But I'm sure we all have ideas how to spend its 2009 cash equivalent to improve life in poor communities throughout the United States.
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
What is Rush's salary? I wonder how rich and out of touch you have to be not to know how many people are applying for food stamps and Medicaid and everthing else nowadays. There was a whole article on this in the NY Times Sunday, and all the red tape the People Formerly Known as Middle Class are encountering when they try to land in America's barely-there safety net. I'm not sure how much mileage the Repubs will get out of making fun of benefits, reparations, refunds or any other cash from the government.
Posted by RLawrence at 05/12/2009 @ 10:31pm
That babbling baboon, a coward and a bigot. All he has is fear, (as does the rest of the R's), and he uses that to rile up his "dittoheads".
Few people realize the gasbag never goes on other shows, unless he has complete control, simply because he is wrong on virtually every issue. He makes a fine living by lying, derision and being in a world where the sky is a color unknown to most humans .
Posted by rasputin195 at 05/12/2009 @ 10:39pm
Posted by RLawrence at 05/12/2009 @ 10:31pm
He just signed a $400 million, 8 year contract. Nice, huh?
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200905050007
Posted by zmann at 05/12/2009 @ 10:57pm
Not so fast, Melissa. this is not his idea. This was posted on Blogger News Network in October, 2008, by Allen Taylor: "To Joe the Plumber, Obama's "spread the wealth" philosophy sounds like Marxist socialism. I understand that. Obama made the fatal mistake of explaining his tax plan in the most ineffectual of linguistic styles. What he should have said was, "I'm just taking back a little bit of what the Bush Administration and America's wealthy class have stolen from the poor and middle class and giving it back to its rightful owners."
The idea of the poor and middle class as the "rightful owners" of the nation's wealth has been circulating the blogosphere for quite a while. You can't say that Limbaugh cooked up this issue on his own.
So, the words "welfare", "food stamps", and "reparations" are "CODE WORDS" for "undeserving black people? Does Limbaugh know that? Are there other "code words" we should know about, so we don't get on your bad side?
After reading all of what Limbaugh said, and not just cherry-picking tidbits to take out of context, it seems to me his beef is with liberal Dems who want to soak the rich.
You trying to turn it into a racial smear is dishonest, whether you agree with him or not.
Posted by twillie at 05/12/2009 @ 11:14pm
"This is the objective. The objective is unemployment. The objective is more food stamp benefits. The objective is more unemployment benefits. The objective is an expanding welfare state. And the objective is to take the nation's wealth and return to it to the nation's quote, "rightful owners." Think reparations. Think forced reparations here if you want to understand what actually is going on."
So...just where are the 2.5 million NEW jobs? Where are the now over 6 million jobs already lost being RESTORED to the economy?
Now just where in the "porkulus spending bill" rewarding Demoncrat supporters, unions, and leftist extremist organizations did they REMOVE the increased broadening in eligibility and amount of food stamps?
Tell us where it states they did NOT approve increased unemployment benifits and the lengthening of the time for collection "with permanent strings attached after 2 yrs burdening the states?
Sounds to me like Rush must have at least read the spending bill and is synopizing it when the writer knows NOTHING about it!
How is this "racist"? Isn't that what reparations by way of the back door poliics might look like?
Since when is it politically incorrect to tell the truth; perhaps when you are a Demoncrat congressman or house speaker demonizing the previous administration???
Posted by comancheamerican at 05/12/2009 @ 11:24pm
You know, it's kind of funny when ComanchAmerica says 'Demoncrat' because it sounds kind of like 'Democrat' except with the 'mon' in there because it sounds Jamaican and reminds us that the democrats are all pot-smoking hippies. I lolled! For realz!
Posted by cyrano at 05/13/2009 @ 12:18am
the wheels on the bus.....
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 12:23am
Posted by cyrano at 05/13/2009 @ 12:18am | ignore this person | warn this person
Speaks to the maturity and general bankruptcy of ideas in the Republican party. Notice how just a little while back, every R spokesman and officeholder suddenly started calling us the "Democrat party" just to tick us off - in their usual lockstep? Or their recent effort to rename us the evil socialists or some such nonsense?
Whereas when I call them Rethugs, corporate tools and fascists, it's simply descriptive...lol.
The Rethugs, of course and unfortunately, don't have a monopoly on corporate tools - but it does seem to be a party requirement.
Posted by UnEasyOne at 05/13/2009 @ 04:27am
Cheney & Rush as the GOP voice/face ... excellent news for Dems. The GOP will be left with some, not even all, of the old slave states & that's it for the next decade or so. May their ilk control the '12 GOP primaries & offer We the People a pair of morons the Dems can run circles around.
Posted by sloper at 05/13/2009 @ 05:00am
Mark my words, sloper, the Republican party as such, is no more. It is about to split in two. If one side or the other manages to push the other to the back of the bus, the other side will sit out, then desert or revolt. Right now, they are mixing like oil and water.
The religious extremists have realized that the corporatists only pay lip service to their agenda and they will insist on dominance now. The corporatists and the rich will always shell out enough cash to get their voice heard, so a party of wealth is inevitable by one name or another, but that "grand alliance" is over.
Posted by UnEasyOne at 05/13/2009 @ 06:10am
When I read "Alan Keyes supports reparations," the first thing I had to ask was: How does a radical conservative propose to pay for something like that?
The answer was easy to find, and made perfect sense, from a plutocratic point of view: Keyes would exempt Blacks from income tax.
This would change absolutely nothing for poor African-Americans, of course, who would still have to bear all the regressive taxes: sales taxes, payroll taxes, property taxes, et cetera. It's the rich African-Americans, including Keyes himself, who would benefit the most.
So I have actually found two points of agreement between myself and Keyes. I support reparations for slavery, and I believe they should come from income taxes paid by Whites. However, after this, our views diverge rather sharply. My reparations would be used to fight poverty (by supporting education, healthcare, et cetera), not to give tax breaks disproportionately to rich Blacks.
I am sorry that the noble cause of reparations has to endure being associated with Keyes.
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 06:57am
'So, the words "welfare", "food stamps", and "reparations" are "CODE WORDS" for "undeserving black people"?'
Yes.
'Does Limbaugh know that?'
Yes.
'Are there other "code words" we should know about, so we don't get on your bad side?'
Don't pretend to be so ignorant, "twillie." You're not fooling me.
From the general context of Rush Limbaugh's often overt racism, it is not a stretch to infer that his racism is often covert, or that many of his listeners are covert racists as well. White indifference toward the economic injustice that continues to plague Blacks is well documented, with Hurricane Katrina providing lots of new evidence. (Whites are "scavengers"; Blacks are "looters.")
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 07:21am
I support reparations for slavery, and I believe they should come from income taxes paid by Whites.
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 06:57am | ignore this person | warn this person
really? REALLY?
has not taxpayer money (for many years mainly coming out of white folks' pockets because obviously all white people are born rich and privileged) been used for years to support programs aimed at advancing the cause of african americans?
i tell you the truth. start pushing this idea and watch white america (perhaps even "non-black" america)flood the gates of whichever political party opposes it.
if i were to be asked to pay an extra tax because of my "race", because of the actions of my ancestors, watch me join a militia and refuse to pay ANY taxes. or follow any other law. watch me shoot at those who come to force me to endure such bullshit and yes, most likely watch me die with dignity, smeared as a racist for refusing to be singled out and punished for crimes did not commit, unless being white is a crime...
what obama seems to be trying to do is move beyond race. if a particular ethnicity, for whatever reason, is at an economic disadvantage, would not a solid social safety net, applied regardless of ethnicity, help out any particular ethnicity which suffers from whatever result of historical injustice?
your solution would, i believe, result in chaos, civil war, and ultimately the dissolution of the nation.
beware too much compassion and empathy. not everyone deserves it and the results are all too often unforseen and ugly. as much as i disagree with the american conservative movement, sometimes the american left does indeed come up with some abominably well intentioned, horrific ideas.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 07:42am
I actually noted this yesterday on another thread (not to toot my own horn), but for a different reason.
The racial aspects are nothing new to Limbaugh. Remember this is the guy who as "Jeff Christie" in the 70s once told a black caller to "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back". (A comment most ditto-heads get stymied trying to defend, given their constant talk of Robert Byrd's past!)
But the general economic/political idea put forth by Limbaugh is more LAUGHABLE than racist.
Obama wants MORE unemployment?!?!?!???
How exactly does he win re-election on that in 2012? Is Rush's idea that there will be so many black people on welfare "reparations" that they'll somehow over-ride the millions of voters who are ROYALLY PISSED at losing their jobs that a 12-15% unemployment rate won't be a hindrance to Obama's victory????
Sure it's racist...but it's also NUTS. And the odd thing is, Rush should be at the top of his game. He got what he wanted...Obama as President. You REALLY think he wanted to spend 4-8 years defending MCCAIN????
But this makes him sound like he's losing his mind...or he's back on the Oxy! heheh
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 07:47am
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 06:57am
By it's very definition "slavery reparations" could only be paid to living ex-slaves. The much-vaunted "We paid reparations to interned Japanese" argument falls apart...given those Japanese were still ALIVE when such reparations were made.
Even if you tried to make it a "Jim Crow reparations", your argument would fall apart, since many African-Americans did not live in Jim Crow South, but in the North and West Coast.
And all of that legalistic problems doesn't address points made by IBBLE and the fact that POLITICALLY it would be a disaster.
In fact, I'd say Keyes sponsorship of reparations was a calculated move (by advisors to the Republican Party) to keep it on the table...as it plays PERFECTLY to the GOP use of it as a means to frighten and anger white voters and keep them in line.
Unfortunately, Jakob, we have some on the Left who want to HELP them do that.
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 07:55am
It would be pointless to review with Melissa all the reasons, legal or philosophical, for not paying reparations. I'm sure she's heard them all. Suffice it to say, My stand on this is simple:
I will never pay reparations, to anyone, at any time, in any form.
Chip
Posted by PRESTERJOHNofASIA at 05/13/2009 @ 07:58am
And if I had thought for a moment that President Obama was paying reparations, secretly or otherwise, I never would have voted for him. I think he's smarter than forcing people today who owe nothing to pay people today who deserve nothing.
Limbaugh demonstrates once again what an idiot he is.
Posted by PRESTERJOHNofASIA at 05/13/2009 @ 08:01am
I wrote: 'My reparations would be used to fight poverty (by supporting education, healthcare, et cetera).'
Then "ibbleblibble" wrote: 'your solution would, i believe, result in chaos, civil war, and ultimately the dissolution of the nation.'
Really?
One of the many problems with a race-divided society is that we use two different languages. Whites generally see economic injustice as "classism" or "capitalism." Blacks call it "racism." But it's the same "historical injustice" in either case.
You will note that I nowhere require reparations to benefit exclusively Blacks. However, I believe we can sell antipoverty programs -- good ones run by nonprofits, not make-work programs for bureaucrats -- more easily to Blacks by calling them "reparations." This puts the program in a historical context that for them is meaningful.
Of course, we need to use different words with touchy White folks like "ibbleblibble."
It is undoubtedly true of all antipoverty programs, most particularly of the ones that work the best, that they do not benefit everybody equally. This is not an argument against antipoverty programs. For example, many privately-funded scholarships, such as those that encourage young people to study abroad in Europe, disproportionately benefit Whites. Does this mean that they are wrong?
In a world in which so many charitable schemes benefit primarily Whites, what is so civil-war-inducingly wrong with just one that would be targeted to benefit primarily Blacks?
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 08:03am
lolling!
Worst Slide Story:
http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/opinion/walthand
elsman/blog/2009/04/animation_recession_singalon
g_1.html
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 08:20am
"the politics of fear was soundly defeated in November"
You have got to be kidding me. The politics of fear is stronger than ever whether it comes from the Republicans or Democrats. Obama used the fear of "another depression" to push his takeover of the banking and auto industries. The "greens" use the idea of manmade global warming and the rising sea waters to push their agenda even though Nasa's data has shown that the earth is actually entering a cooling phase. Our government rules through fear.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 08:20am
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 08:03am
Because those other benefits are not LIMITED to whites (despite what you claim)...blacks can gain access to them too.
A reparations benefit would be RESTRICTED ...ONLY to African-Americans and thus would be racist and invoke a quite rightful sense of anger.
Plus again "reparations" for what? Slavery? There are no living ex-slaves. "Jim Crow"? Again, why will Northern and Western AND post-1964 generations be eligible? "Our racist past"? Then why not Chinese-Americans (discriminated against as well)...or women?
But more importantly is the politics. Reparations are a naive dream of the Hard Left...and a TOOL of the Republicans who want to use the boogeyman (because it will NEVER, ever be implemented) as a racial wedge issue to keep working class and other whites in the GOP.
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 08:21am
The politics of fear is stronger than ever whether it comes from the Republicans or Democrats.----Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 08:20am
Okay...how many non-Democrats and non-Republicans did you vote for last November, abell?
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 08:22am
WHOA!
GOLDMAN SETTLES SUBPRIME CASES IN MASS........
"The net of this story is that Goldman has agreed to pay the state of Massachusetts $60 million to settle a dispute regarding Goldman's "predatory lending" practices in and around Boston. $50 million will be made available to reduce the loan principle on 714 individual mortgages. Of note is that the agreement called for reductions in principal of as much as 30% for traditional mortgages and up to 50% on second mortgages. Also of note is that the State of Massachusetts gets to keep $10mm for their efforts. Not bad for Attorney General Martha Coakley.
This means next to nothing for Goldman Sachs. However, a very dangerous precedent has been set. In the critical years 2005-2007 Goldman was ranked 15th in the League Tables for sub prime and Alt-A origination/securitization. Goldman's management must be pleased as punch with that poor showing today. Those that ranked high on that list are no doubt consulting with their attorneys.
If Goldman gets its hand slapped for $60mm over 714 mortgages what does this mean for Countrywide Financial? They were very big in Boston. Merrill Lynch was at the top of those securitization tables. That is what got Stan O'Neal fired. If the settlement in Boston is representative of what will be forthcoming then Bank of America is going to be facing a very big number. And that is just Massachusetts. The AGs in the all of the other states, especially Florida, Nevada, Arizona and California must be licking their chops at this news."
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 08:26am
what is so civil-war-inducingly wrong with just one that would be targeted to benefit primarily Blacks? Posted by JakobFabian
Nothing is wrong with that as long as they are privately funded.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 08:30am
Okay...how many non-Democrats and non-Republicans did you vote for last November, abell? Posted by Mask
I was too afraid to vote for non democrats and non republicans
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 08:38am
I believe GE, NBC, and the Obama administration are all one big conglomerate.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 08:23am
MARXISTS!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 09:01am
Fascits actually
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 09:10am
Of course, we need to use different words with touchy White folks like "ibbleblibble."
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 08:03am | ignore this person | warn this person
touchy? you specifically advocated taxing me because i am white, reducing me to a sort of a "geneto-dhimmihood"...let me quote...
"I support reparations for slavery, and I believe they should come from income taxes paid by Whites."
what about that statement did i misunderstand?
look, i understand that your philosophy is more nuanced than that particular statement, but if anyone tries to tax me because of my ethinicity, all bets are off in terms of my moderation, loyalty to the government attempting to do this, and limits to the actions i will take to resist.
if this is a touchy overreaction, then so be it. it is also a statement of fact. i will not be taxed because of my genetic background nor the actions of my ancestors.
let me posit this discomfiting question...
what if we DID institute a geneto-dhimmi tax on "white people" (interesting how the politically correct left declares there is no such thing as race on one hand then some advocate geneto-dhimmihood for whites) and thirty years later little had changed in terms of income levels, imprisonment, etc.?
what then?
both left and right operate on certain assumptions accepted as canon, but neither proven nor disproven by hard science.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 09:17am
'You know, you might want to look into this, because I think maybe Rush Limbaugh was the 20th hijacker, but he was just so strung out on OxyContin he missed his flight. ... I hope his kidneys fail, how 'bout that?' -- Wanda Sykes
Posted by HonestLiberal at 05/13/2009 @ 09:20am
The answer was easy to find, and made perfect sense, from a plutocratic point of view: Keyes would exempt Blacks from income tax.
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 06:57am
I saw Keyes speak in 2000. It's very clear that he believes income taxes are no different from slavery. An entity owns part of your ability to provide for your family. That is slavery, he said.
Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 05/13/2009 @ 09:26am
let's see:
missile "defence" system ≅ $120,000,000,000
u.s. african american population ≅ 36,000,000
= $3,333 each
not great, but not bad.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 09:33am
lol - action/reaction...
the biggest threat to the democratic party and the left is...
the democratic party and the hard core left. because it SURE ain't the discreditted hard core right and the republicans...
but push this kind of politically correct politics of tribalism and division stupidity and...
WATCH THE RIGHT RISE FROM THE ASHES PHOENIX-LIKE WITHIN LESS THAN A DECADE...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 09:33am
= $3,333 each
not great, but not bad.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 09:33am | ignore this person | warn this person
oh hell yeah...that would lift the african american population to complete income equality with evil whitey and solve all their problems.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 09:35am
iraq boondoggle ≅ $3,000,000,000,000
u.s. african american population ≅ 36,000,000
= $83,333
ah, that's better.
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 09:37am
the OBAMAGARCHS are conservatives.
just ask martin wolf:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5e7dd89c-3f1c-11de-ae4f-00144feabdc0.html
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 09:38am
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 09:38am | ignore this person | warn this person
nice article.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 09:48am
Posted by HonestLiberal at 05/13/2009 @ 09:20am
HL, still waiting on that quote from Dubya at the 2004 White House Correspondents Dinner on WMDs.
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 09:51am
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 09:10am
So, abell, since your "Dubya? Who's Dubya?" redemption....
are you a "Ron Pauline" or a "Glenn Beck-head"?
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 09:59am
"The "greens" use the idea of manmade global warming and the rising sea waters to push their agenda even though Nasa's data has shown that the earth is actually entering a cooling phase"
(quote of the day)
Posted by darladoon at 05/13/2009 @ 10:31am
thanks for noticing this, DARLA...
-----------------------------------------
The "greens" use the idea of manmade global warming and the rising sea waters to push their agenda even though Nasa's data has shown that the earth is actually entering a cooling phase. Our government rules through fear.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 08:20am | ignore this person | warn this person
please reference the NASA data.
wheter its manmade/accelerated or not eventually we will face disaster on this world.
but seriously, it DOES appear that the vast majority of reputable scientists agree that billions of filthy shaved apes spewing out polution for decades has indeed affected the environment. is it so hard to believe? really?
there is nothing "left" nor "right" about this, unless either the left or the right chooses to stick their heads in the sand.
and it IS the right that is engaged in this reaction...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 10:44am
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 10:44am
It's why none of the GW Deniers will take my bet.
(That the 2012 GOP nominee will NOT repudiate McCain's position that GW is real, man-made, and needs addressing...even Gingrich has admitted that!)
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 11:01am
Just help poor people.
I have no objection to the banks and various other entities still in existence that profited from the slave trade being sued blind in class action cases, but reparations for blacks is simply a non-starter.
Provide a decent education for all, food stamps to all for the asking - just show good ID - and rent/housing vouchers. Then guarantee a job and medical care for all.
Waaay back in the late 60s or early 70s, I read that we were providing over $40,000 per poor person - mostly eaten up by the bureaucracy. The cash equivalent now would likely be over $100k - so we can afford this easily.
Trickle UP works. Trickle down is the same cruel lie that has perpetrated on the masses since the beginning of history.
Posted by UnEasyOne at 05/13/2009 @ 11:07am
GW remains a hoax
<New Jason Satellite Indicates 23-Year Global Cooling By Dennis T. Avery, 5/7/2008
Now it's not just the sunspots that predict a 23-year global cooling. The new Jason oceanographic satellite shows that 2007 was a "cool" La Nina year--but Jason also says something more important is at work: The much larger and more persistent Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has turned into its cool phase, telling us to expect moderately lower global temperatures until 2030 or so. For the past century at least, global temperatures have tended to mirror the 20-to 30-year warmings and coolings of the north-central Pacific Ocean. We don't know just why, but the pattern of the last century is clear: the earth warmed from about 1915 to1940, while the PDO was also warming (1925 to 46). The earth cooled from 1940 to 1975, while the PDO was cooling (1946 to 1977). The strong global warming from 1976 to 1998 was accompanied by a strong and almost-constant warming of the north-central Pacific. Ancient tree rings in Baja California and Mexico show there have been 11 such PDO shifts since 1650, averaging 23 years on length.
Researchers discovered the PDO only recently--in 1996--while searching for the reason salmon numbers had declined sharply in the Columbia River after 1977. The salmon catch record for the past 100 years gave the answer--shifting Pacific Ocean currents.
The PDO seems to be driven by the huge Aleutian Low in the Arctic--but we don't know what controls the Aleutian Low. Nonetheless, 22.5-year "double sunspot cycles" have been identified in South African rainfall, Indian monsoons, Australian droughts, and rains in the United States' far southwest as well. These cycles argue that the sun, not CO2, controls the earth's temperatures.>
continued
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 11:15am
Global warming cycle over-new cycle of global cooling continued
<Dr. Henrik Svensmark's recent experiments at the Danish Space Research Institute seem to show that the earth's temperatures are importantly affected by the low, wet clouds that deflect more or less solar heat back into space. The number of such clouds is affected, in turn, by more or fewer cosmic rays hitting the earth. The number of earthbound cosmic rays depends on the extent of the giant magnetic wind thrown out by the sun.
All of this defies the "consensus" that human-emitted carbon dioxide has been responsible for our global warming. But the evidence for man-made warming has never been as strong as its Green advocates maintained. The earth's warming from 1915 to 1940 was just about as strong as the "scary" 1975 to 1998 warming in both scope and duration--and occurred too early to be blamed on human-emitted CO2. The cooling from 1940 to 1975 defied the Greenhouse Theory, occurring during the first big surge of man-made greenhouse emissions. Most recently, the climate has stubbornly refused to warm since 1998, even though human CO2 emissions have continued to rise strongly.
The Jason satellite is an updated and more-accurate version of the Poseidon satellite that has been monitoring the oceans since 1992, picking up ocean wind speeds, wave heights, and sea level changes. Jason is run by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and a French team>
http://tinyurl.com/555qft
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 11:20am
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 11:01am | ignore this person | warn this person
i would think so. its getting harder to deny every day, but underrate not some folks' ability to deny.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 11:35am
Evidence growing that El Nino conditions increase levels of CO2 in atmosphere
<During a warm El Nino year, more CO2 is released by the ocean into the atmosphere (and less is taken up by the ocean from the atmosphere), while during cool La Nina years just the opposite happens. (A graph similar to the first graph also appeared in the IPCC report, so this is not new). Just how much of the Mauna Loa Variations in the first graph are due to the "Coke-fizz" effect is not clear because there is now strong evidence that biological activity also plays a major (possibly dominant) role (Behrenfeld et al., 2006).
So, I keep coming back to the question: If warming of the oceans causes an increase in atmospheric CO2 on a year-to-year basis, is it possible that long-term warming of the oceans (say, due to a natural change in cloud cover) might be causing some portion of the long-term increase in atmospheric CO2?
My primary purpose in presenting all of this is simply to stimulate debate. Are we really sure that ALL of the atmospheric increase in CO2 is from humanity's emissions? After all, the natural sources and sinks of CO2 are about 20 times the anthropogenic source, so all it would take is a small imbalance in the natural flows to rival the anthropogenic source. And it is clear that there are natural imbalances of that magnitude on a year-to-year basis, as shown in the first graph.
What could be causing long-term warming of the oceans? My first choice for a mechanism would be a slight decrease in oceanic cloud cover. There is no way to rule this out observationally because our measurements of global cloud cover over the last 50 to 100 years are nowhere near good enough.
Michael J. Behrenfeld
http://www.drroyspencer.com/
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 11:41am
I will gladly pay my slave holding ancestors reparations to the slaves they held.
Crabs ancestors slaves = 0
Amount due = 0.
Thank you for your business.
Posted by crabwalk at 05/13/2009 @ 11:49am
http://tinyurl.com/555qft
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 11:20am | ignore this person | warn this person
source: Hawaii Reporter
writer: DENNIS T. AVERY, a senior fellow for the Hudson Institute in Washington
Hudson Institute in Washington:
*described by US foreign policy scholars John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt as "closely associated with neoconservatives"
*The Hudson Institute is an American, non-profit, think tank founded in 1961, in Croton-on-Hudson, New York, by futurist, military strategist, and systems theorist Herman Kahn and his colleagues at the RAND Corporation
*The Institute has taken positions critical of environmentalism[3]. Dennis Avery, as Director of the Hudson's Center for Global Food Issues, has written in opposition to those who favor the adoption of organic agricultural methods.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 12:00pm
Don't let Larry hijack another thread. I would much rather see him defending the entertainer/celebrity that is now the titular head f the GOP. I would love to see him write how Rush certainly does not engage in race baiting. Can Larry do that with a straight face? Probably.
and how does his normal rant of "typical leftist" fare when many "leftist" posters today have expressed contempt for the idea of reparations for slavery?
Posted by crabwalk at 05/13/2009 @ 12:13pm
The most overpaid and under-worked person in the world and Rush still doesn't have a clue. He won't debate and rarely gives interviews yet his loyal followers mindlessly accept his word as gospel. Even as Clear Channel goes broke and has had to lay off over 3000 employees Rush babbles on oblivious to the suffering around him. Kind of like the rest of the wacko right.
Posted by mkpoorman at 05/13/2009 @ 12:31pm
Posted by crabwalk at 05/13/2009 @ 12:13pm | ignore this person | warn this person
lol - indeed. although i DO support GOOD science, including that which questions our understanding of the causes and effects of man's activity.
legitimate scientific voices of dissent should not be drowned out nor ignored...
although as i've said, regardless of the source, the earth will "blow up" one day, regardless, perhaps sooner than later.
maybe a little scaring of folks in this regard is not so terrible after all. having a hard time seeing any other way to get folks thinking about it...although i'm seeing some hopeful signs from our youth in terms of concern about the future, even the far future beyond their own personal lifespans...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 12:33pm
Cheney & Rush as the GOP voice/face ...
Posted by sloper at 05/13/2009 @ 05:00am
More than even money can buy!
Posted by schnellerheinz at 05/13/2009 @ 12:42pm
Global warming cycle over-new cycle of global cooling continued
<Dr. Henrik Svensmark's recent experiments at the Danish Space Research Institute...
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 11:20am | ignore this person | warn this person
Careful.
Sven there is from one of those "old Europe" pinko socialist countries!!
Posted by schnellerheinz at 05/13/2009 @ 12:53pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 11:15am
Larry, curious, which "obvious conclusion" did you come to FIRST...
1. "Global warming hysteria is just a chance for socialists to take more of our rights"?
or 2. "Anthropogenic global warming isn't even possible"?
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 1:27pm
another death blow to the GOP:
"Craigslist to remove 'erotic services' section"
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 1:46pm
"Craigslist to remove 'erotic services' section"
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/13/2009 @ 1:46pm | ignore this person | warn this person
LMAO - naw - that's just a lifestyle crimp...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 1:47pm
from jeff masters:
"Is global warming slowing down? The global average temperature has declined over the past three years (Figure 1) and global average sea surface temperature (SST) has not increased over the past seven years (Figure 3). Is global warming slowing down, then, and taking a break? That was the theory advanced by a group of German climate modelers (Keenlyside et al., 2008) in the journal Nature in 2008. Using a climate model that offered a unique way to handle the initial distribution of SSTs, they concluded that over the next ten years, natural variations in the climate may temporarily mask the global warming due to greenhouse gases. They stated: "North Atlantic SST and European and North American surface temperatures will cool slightly, whereas tropical Pacific SST will remain almost unchanged. Our results suggest that global surface temperature may not increase over the next decade, as natural climate variations in the North Atlantic and tropical Pacific temporarily offset the projected anthropogenic warming". However, they go on to state that greenhouse-gas driven global warming will resume full-force after the ten-year break is over. Other climate modelers disagree with this predicted "break" in global warming. Both theories are reasonable ones, and it is possible that the recent cool years portend the ten-year "break" from global warming hypothesized by Keenlyside et al. It is too early to tell, since the relative coolness of the past few years could easily be natural "noise" (weather) imposed on the long-term global warming trend. The fact that we've had a cold winter in eastern North America and in the UK--or any other anecdotal cold or snow-related record you may hear about--can't tell us whether global warming may be slowing down or not"
Posted by darladoon at 05/13/2009 @ 1:50pm
key words from that statement:
"However, they go on to state that greenhouse-gas driven global warming will resume full-force after the ten-year break is over"
Posted by darladoon at 05/13/2009 @ 1:50pm
Little doubt Global warming is happening, although I'm amazed at the abject refusal o intelligent men to acknowledge nature's role in any of it.Nature is always part of it.
The scary thing about it is GW has gotten political big time. And, if the current consensus is wrong or partially wrong, or things change, then what? Monies have been spent on projects now no longer needed: Investments have been made: Reputations are on the line: And the rush will be on to maintain the status quo even in the face of new "inconvenient" truths, so they don't all look like fools. Such is the nature of those in the political class.
Posted by PRESTERJOHNofASIA at 05/13/2009 @ 2:32pm
Little doubt Global warming is happening, although I'm amazed at the abject refusal o intelligent men to acknowledge nature's role in any of it.Nature is always part of it.
The scary thing about it is GW has gotten political big time. And, if the current consensus is wrong or partially wrong, or things change, then what? Monies have been spent on projects now no longer needed: Investments have been made: Reputations are on the line: And the rush will be on to maintain the status quo even in the face of new "inconvenient" truths, so they don't all look like fools. Such is the nature of those in the political class.
Posted by PRESTERJOHNofASIA at 05/13/2009 @ 2:32pm
Posted by PRESTERJOHNofASIA at 05/13/2009 @ 2:32pm
CHIP, isn't saying "It's happening, but I don't really want anything really DONE about it"....being "political" too???
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 2:53pm
When did I say that?
Posted by PRESTERJOHNofASIA at 05/13/2009 @ 3:06pm
Posted by PRESTERJOHNofASIA at 05/13/2009 @ 3:06pm
Okay, CHIP...what IS the "non-political" thing to do or NOT do about global climate change?
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 3:36pm
or 2. "Anthropogenic global warming isn't even possible"
Posted by Mask at 05/13/2009 @ 1:27pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 3:49pm
"Anthropogenic global warming isn't even possible"
(statement of the decade)
Posted by darladoon at 05/13/2009 @ 4:47pm
Reparations are being paid one way or another.
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/13/2009 @ 4:52pm
<"Anthropogenic global warming isn't even possible"
(statement of the decade)
Posted by darladoon at 05/13/2009 @ 4:47pm>
Just for argument's sake, let me post some data that assumes all of the increase in CO2 is manmade.
Due to human activities such as the combustion of fossil fuels and deforestation, the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by about 35% since the beginning of the age of industrialization.[
Sounds like a lot but what does it really mean?
In the 1800's the CO2 level was approx. 285 ppm by volume or 2 1/100th's of 1%
Currently the CO2 level is approx 387 ppm by volume or 3 1/100th's of 1%
Human CO2 emissions amount to 2-3% of the natural emissions
Five hundred million years ago carbon dioxide was 20 times more prevalent than today, decreasing to 4-5 times during the Jurassic period and then maintained a slow decline with a particularly swift reduction occurring 49 million years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide
And danger, danger, human beings produce CO2
"Typically the gas we exhale is about 4% to 5% carbon dioxide and 4% to 5% less oxygen than was inhaled.
According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, The average person breathing produces approximately 2.3 pounds (1 kg) of carbon dioxide per day"
So the Darla's of the world want to destroy the economy and impose drastic changes on Americans for what is nearly an immeasurable change in the atmosphere, if you even accept that all of the change is of anthropogenic origin.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 5:11pm
back on the reparations thing...
Will one of you pro-rep people explain how you figure out who gets the money or qualifies for whatever the compensation will be? Does the person have to pull out a decaying parchment proving slave blood? Is it enough for the skin color to be darker than 18% neutral gray? Just what is the legal definition of black? Is it based on what you checked on the last census form? Is it based on walking into a gov't office an having a clerk eyeball you and decide if you qualify. If I and 50 generations of my family back live in Senegal, and I come to the USA can I qualify for some of the goodies?
Posted by sntauri at 05/13/2009 @ 5:23pm
back on the AGW or ACC or whatever thing...
There is no conceivable natural problem (climate, disease, pollution, glaciers, ice ages, comets, gamma ray bursts, rogue black holes) that does not have the same solution. And that is increased taxation, more public transit, higher density housing, more diversity, banning of all synthetic materials, drastic limitation of personal freedom, confiscation of guns, a 55mph speed limit, more tofu in the diet, reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine, and college speech codes.
Posted by sntauri at 05/13/2009 @ 5:29pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/02/19/ january-2008-4-sources-say-globally-cooler-in-the-past-12-months/
but seriously, it DOES appear that the vast majority of reputable scientists agree that billions of filthy shaved apes spewing out polution for decades has indeed affected the environment. is it so hard to believe? Posted by ibble
Well of course it has! It just hasn't created global warming.
(That the 2012 GOP nominee will NOT repudiate McCain's position that GW is real, man-made, and needs addressing...even Gingrich has admitted that!) Posted by Mask
That's because they are politicians and not scientists. Do you believe everything a politician tells you?
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 5:48pm
Also the "vast majority" of reputable scientists are not climatologists.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 5:50pm
Posted by sntauri at 05/13/2009 @ 5:23pm
This has nothing to do with reparations. Just as abortion has nothing to do with women's rights, the environmental movement is not really about the environment, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan aren't about spreading democracy. Reparations is about redistributing wealth and power. Don't expect a sensible plan of awards to individuals 150 years areter the end of slavery in the US. That has nothing to do with the goals of the reparations crowd.
But you know that already. We all do.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:00pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 11:20am
I'm sure all that global "cooling" is responsible for all those droughts world wide. Or for all that ice floating away from the far north. Or all that permafrost that is no longer happening in certain areas. Yeah cooling, that's what does it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:02pm
Also why is the subject of this thread now global warming instead of Rush being an idiot?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:04pm
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 06:57am
Posted by JakobFabian at 05/13/2009 @ 08:03am
Sometimes I come here only to read in absolute and utter AMAZEMENT the thoughts of people like JacobFabian and Darla, et.al.
It is really good fun. And coming here is a great reminder just how uncommon common sense really is these days.
Side note: Imagine my surprise on Sunday when Melissa Harris-Lacewell's Nation's article "Mom and Chief" was featured in the Op-Ed section of my local paper! Congratulations on that. Don't get me wrong, Ms Harris-Lacewell is a racist, but I applaud the paper for presenting diverse viewpoints.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:05pm
Reparations can be considered - good and equal healthcare, equal pay for equal work, equal access, a 30 hour workweek!-- while I was at it, an improve way of life and lifestyle, ... etc. That takes not only the poor digging out but also the rich easing up control and monopolies.
Redistribution of wealth is a natural thing as a bigger and stronger middle class emerges and that can also be considered reparation. Consider that the one of the first major social hierarchies was pretty much a top - bottom thing-- royal fam/emperor and peasants...
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/13/2009 @ 6:12pm
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/13/2009 @ 6:12pm
Who determines equal pay for equal work in your world hsuBfools? Consumers? Or the Government?
Just curious.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:20pm
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/13/2009 @ 6:12pm
Who determines equal pay for equal work in your world hsuBfools? Consumers? Or the Government?
Just curious.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:25pm
Oops, I guess I'm TWICE as curious! =8>)
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:26pm
"So the Darla's of the world want to destroy the economy and impose drastic changes on Americans"
again, this is why the GOP is doomed.
Posted by darladoon at 05/13/2009 @ 6:38pm
"So the Darla's of the world want to destroy the economy and impose drastic changes on Americans"
again, this is why the GOP is doomed.
Posted by darladoon at 05/13/2009 @ 6:38pm
Thank you for confessing. I thought this was your intent all along.
Posted by sntauri at 05/13/2009 @ 6:45pm
Also why is the subject of this thread now global warming instead of Rush being an idiot?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:04pm
Because "Rush being an idiot" is old news. Us commie pinko lefties have known it for years! But like most things, the rest of America is just waking up to the fact. :-)
Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:54pm
Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:54pm
Yeah! Rush's ratings prove you right!... No, wait a sec... I was looking at Air America's ratings. Sorry.
:-)
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:58pm
Also why is the subject of this thread now global warming instead of Rush being an idiot?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:04pm
Appears to have been Abelll2ct and Darladoon
<Obama used the fear of "another depression" to push his takeover of the banking and auto industries. The "greens" use the idea of manmade global warming and the rising sea waters to push their agenda even though Nasa's data has shown that the earth is actually entering a cooling phase. Our government rules through fear.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/13/2009 @ 08:20am
"The "greens" use the idea of manmade global warming and the rising sea waters to push their agenda even though Nasa's data has shown that the earth is actually entering a cooling phase"
(quote of the day)
Posted by darladoon at 05/13/2009 @ 10:31am>
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 7:03pm
I doubt a single 'environmentalist' here can identify Maurice Strong.
You should. You are his useful idiots.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 7:09pm
I don't know about rush but has anyone seen Olbermann's ratings?
Looks like bush was the best thing for his show.
Maybe they can make room for him at ESPN.
mediabistro
Posted by bleedingheart at 05/13/2009 @ 7:20pm
nice little conspiracy theories you silly controlls have cooked up.
of course we all know maurice strong.
we are his slaves and you will be assimilated!!!!
BOO!!!
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 7:39pm
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/13/2009 @ 7:39pm
Hi ibble,
I never said anything about being his slaves, or mentioned assimilation, or conspiracies. You did.
I said environmentalists are his useful idiots.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 8:47pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/13/2009 @ 7:03pm
I see. We seem to be incapable of keeping a thread on subject lately.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/13/2009 @ 8:54pm
Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:54pm
Yeah! Rush's ratings prove you right!... No, wait a sec... I was looking at Air America's ratings. Sorry.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:58pm
It is unfortunate that by some Rush still seems to be regarded as some type of antithesis to progressive thought.
The man is no conservative in the traditional sense.
Much like many of our (im)poster friends here, Rush is a neocon. One who favors massive governmental, statist action in certain vectors coinciding with their own interests, be that the military-industrial complex Ike so warned us of, or in various costly overseas adventures, executed in purely mercenary fashion.
They're ok with big guv all right, as long as it's not wielded for YOU.
Posted by schnellerheinz at 05/13/2009 @ 9:06pm
Go Red Wings.
Posted by schnellerheinz at 05/13/2009 @ 9:12pm
Posted by schnellerheinz at 05/13/2009
I agree actually.
But Rush's not a racist.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 10:24pm
But Rush's not a racist.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 10:24pm
I'm sure when he said "get that bone out of your nose" it didn't mean anything about race. Just like if I yell wetback at a Mexican it has nothing to do with his race.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/13/2009 @ 11:16pm
"Yeah! Rush's ratings prove you right!... No, wait a sec... I was looking at Air America's ratings. Sorry"
when you act like a drug-addicted, loud mouthed, thrice-divorced, sex-addicted, fat, obnoxious buffoon, you should definitely attract a good deal of attention. that's entertainment for many americans.
air america is not exactly what i listen to, but it's definitely more intellectually engaging than rush limbaugh. i think any seriously intelligent person would agree that rush limbaugh is a dick. any party he shows up at is OVER. a total buzzkill, that guy. wanda sykes gave him a taste of his own bullshit.
the public owns the airwaves, and deserves radio that engages the community, not some fat blowhard dick spewing out his extremist, hateful opinions.
and since when does having good ratings mean that you're......uh.......interesting?
is fox news interesting?
is the miss america pageant interesting?
sheesh, do i even have to mention this?
Posted by darladoon at 05/13/2009 @ 11:20pm
It was the Miss USA Pageant, Darla.
Miss USA and Miss America organizations are entirely different. But in your bigotry you have no sensitivity to that at all. You just don't care.
Yes, the Miss America Pageant is very interesting with a long, fascinating history.
You know Darla, you have a lot more hatred in your posts than anything I've heard from Rush Limbaugh.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 11:55pm
"yes, the Miss America Pageant is very interesting with a long, fascinating history."
sorry, but i have to scramble to find a pen and paper. i need to preserve this particular gem.
"long, fascinating history"
it's history, all right. at least i would hope so.
and if you think i'm as hateful as rush limbaugh, it's because he's winning, and yet complaining that the cards are stacked against him. rush, you see, is the victim. everything is just soooo bad for him.
yeah, right. the guy is the devil. so is cheney.
even lawrence wilkerson told him to go "shut up" on national television tonight.
Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009 @ 12:26am
Who determines equal pay for equal work in your world hsuBfools? Consumers? Or the Government? Just curious. Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:25pm | ignore this person | warn this person Oops, I guess I'm TWICE as curious! =8>) Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 6:26pm
Well in the real world that we both live in-- and as stated , we all do.
And while I'm at it, reparations are paid one way or another in: crime, jails, strikes, unions, corporate lobbies, no bid contracts, slave labor, civil war, ...
Or as I stated previously we can fix it by making it right all 'round. Reparations are paid one way or another.
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/14/2009 @ 01:01am
You know Darla, you have a lot more hatred in your posts than anything I've heard from Rush Limbaugh. Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 11:55pm
Now that's just obviously horse manure straight up.
Oh perhaps frei doesn't ever listen to Rump Limppaw! Well then ok. Never mind.
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/14/2009 @ 01:10am
Miss America is the largest scholarship program for women in the world, Darla. What have you done lately to advance women?
Settle down Darla, I said advance women, not make advances on women.
Women can't all be narrow-minded, pot smoking, bigoted, lesbian socialists like you, Darla. You have that crown and good for you. I actually love that this country has Darlas.
But 50th place in any Miss America Pageant has infinitely more to offer the world than your ignorant vitriol.
But as usual you are pontificating over something you know nothing about.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/14/2009 @ 01:25am
"Miss America is the largest scholarship program for women in the world, Darla"
we should all reflect on this for a minute.
"What have you done lately to advance women?"
does the miss america pageant "advance women"?
last i checked, it subjected them to breast enhancement, a swimsuit contest, and extremely superficial standards
if that is your idea of "advancement," then it is no wonder that you defend a obnoxious, hate-filled, pig-headed sexist like limbaugh.
Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009 @ 01:34am
does the miss america pageant "advance women"?
last i checked, it subjected them to breast enhancement, a swimsuit contest, and extremely superficial standards
if that is your idea of "advancement," then it is no wonder that you defend a obnoxious, hate-filled, pig-headed sexist like limbaugh.
Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009 @ 01:34am
He just showed how it helped to advance women, which is by being one of the largest scholarship programs for women not just int he US, but in the world. You are just sticking to your line in order to be stubborn.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/14/2009 @ 03:44am
Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009 @ 01:34am
An education is one of the most guaranteed forms of advancement for anyone and Miss America helps to give it to the most women of any organization. You don't like that it objectifies women and I can see having qualms with that but it serves a good purpose that I believe far outweighs it's evils.
And have your qualms with the women all you want, but almost all of them are college educated.
"In 1989, the Miss America Organization founded the platform concept, which requires each contestant to choose an issue about which she cares deeply and that is of relevance to our society. Once chosen, Miss America and the state titleholders use their stature to address community-service organizations, business and civic leaders, the media and others about their platform issues. Since 1989, Miss America titleholders have appeared at thousands of public speaking engagements and charitable events to generate awareness for a variety of causes, including homelessness, HIV/AIDS prevention, domestic violence, diabetes awareness, character education, and literacy."
In 1994, the Organization provided its first National Community-Service Award of $5,000. All community-service winners at the state level may apply for this national grant even if they have not won their state titles. Scholarship America (formerly known as Citizens' Scholarship Foundation of America) administers the National Community Service Award.
Continued.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/14/2009 @ 03:52am
"In 1994, the Organization provided its first National Community-Service Award of $5,000. All community-service winners at the state level may apply for this national grant even if they have not won their state titles. Scholarship America (formerly known as Citizens' Scholarship Foundation of America) administers the National Community Service Award. Since 1997, Miss America participants nationwide have taken part in Make a Difference Day. Local and state titleholders, volunteers and Miss America make a difference through community service initiatives in conjunction with the Points of Light Foundation and USA Weekend. In 2000, state and local contestants collectively participated in 12,384 community-service projects, dedicating a total of 571,177 hours and raising millions of dollars for worthy causes."
Complain all you want Darla, but they do a lot of community work. I'll bet the average Miss America contestant does more for their fellow man and woman in a month than you do. So in the end what gives you any right to bad mouth the organization?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/14/2009 @ 03:54am
What about their profit margin? Just asking. First thing that popped into my head.
As our pres jus' said, we can always give more...
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/14/2009 @ 07:45am
But Rush's not a racist.----Posted by freiheit1 at 05/13/2009 @ 10:24pm
FREI, a radio DJ told an African-American caller...
"Take that bone out of your nose and call me back!"...
care to guess who that DJ was?
Posted by Mask at 05/14/2009 @ 08:39am
There is no conceivable natural problem (climate, disease, pollution, glaciers, ice ages, comets, gamma ray bursts, rogue black holes) that does not have the same solution. And that is increased taxation, more public transit, higher density housing, more diversity, banning of all synthetic materials, drastic limitation of personal freedom, confiscation of guns, a 55mph speed limit, more tofu in the diet, reimposition of the Fairness Doctrine, and college speech codes.
Posted by sntauri at 05/13/2009 @ 5:29pm
See, how to debate with someone that is so afraid of boogeymen?
Who's freedoms have been limited in the last 120 days?
SNTAURI? What "freedoms" have you "lost"?
YOu gave away your freedom to be free from federal govt wiretapping, with a smile on your face.
You gave away your freedom to buy books without federales looking at the receipt.
You gave away your habeas rights.
You gave away 450,000,000,000 of your tax dollars.
This is just more of the same crapola we have heard form you clowns for years. LOOK OUT! Christianity is under attack!!! The UN is coming take down the street signs!! Saddam has nukes!!! Obama is going to take your guns!!!
You still pray.
The UN never made it here.
Nobody has taken any guns from law abiding citizens.
Not having a dove hunting season in MI did not lead to the outlawing of all hunting.
Gay marriage has not harmed a single hetero couple.
Just think what you could accomplish if you spent that energy working on REAL problems, like child hunger, early education, medical treatment for poor kids. Why, you could be like Christ instead of Rush and Hannity.
Posted by crabwalk at 05/14/2009 @ 08:55am
So tell US SNTAURI, what has the GOP proposed other than:
Tax cuts
deregulation of multi-national corporations
More pollution
Posted by crabwalk at 05/14/2009 @ 08:59am
fei FYI: a long long time ago I worked as a student financial aid officer/director, upping the amount of funding to students by about a 1000% during my tenure. I did it because it was fun to see how much I could help students get through school and sure the satisfaction of seeing them graduate and make better lives. My salary was never tied to the amount I brought in when in the public schools. Much different when I was in the private schools. Although I enjoyed making 4 times more, it always bothered me the push to get me into more photo-opps, bringing in more money for the always growing school rather than for the students. The little percentage-wise that was done for the students was made into a big deal, in the public schools-- not so much. Big PR is there for a reason and it's usually because it's needed to cover for other stuff that's not so altruistic.
And true, girls in bikini's is a part of our culture and mating rites of passage for some, but to say it's totally different than a gentrified wet t-shirt contest because of community work... huh no, not so much. I get Darla's opposition and agree, but on the other hand and for totally different reasons, still like the bathing suit show just for itself. Perhaps just a little reminiscent of the good old days when I spent summers on the beach surfing...
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/14/2009 @ 10:53am
everyone here knows that i'm not opposed to women getting an education; i'm opposed to women having to take off their clothes in order to get an education.
Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009 @ 11:00am
i'm opposed to women having to take off their clothes in order to get an education.---Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009 @ 11:00am
So just be clear. You express the SAME kind of outrage over a woman being a STRIPPER to earn money for college, right?
Posted by Mask at 05/14/2009 @ 11:20am
mask, no i don't.
but let's go back to the original claim: that the miss america pageant is the leading scholarship provider in the world. and yet, in order to obtain scholarship money, you need to engage in the most ridiculous and superficial contests, one of which includes wearing a swimsuit.
and btw, i'm not outraged at the miss america pageant. i said "we should all reflect on the fact" that is the world's leading provider of scholarship money.
btw, i'm not a prude, by any stretch. i encourage women to be as sexy as they possibly can. and, frankly, i like women in swimsuits.
Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009 @ 11:46am
"and btw, i'm not outraged at the miss america pageant. i said "we should all reflect on the fact" that is the world's leading provider of scholarship money."
Exactly how much? I gave out millions every semester to thousands of students at just one of the schools. None of it from any pageant.
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/14/2009 @ 12:01pm
FYI at just one online website:
Search 2.7 million scholarships & grants worth over $19 billion
Search for local, state & national college scholarships & grants
Find scholarships based on your academics, talents & interests
Review your scholarships by deadline, dollar amount & more
Create one-click custom scholarship application request letters
Search colleges & universities, get admissions info & more
Start early & find scholarships while applying to colleges
I'm wondering if the $19 billion is accurate, what % is from pageants? And how much from stripping? Bet more from stripping...
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/14/2009 @ 12:31pm
More pollution Posted by crabwalk
I don't remember that plank in the Republican platform.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/14/2009 @ 12:47pm
Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009 @ 11:46am
DD, you seem to be backpedaling...do you believe this or not-
"i'm opposed to women having to take off their clothes in order to get an education.---Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009 @ 11:00am
and as far as engaging "in the most ridiculous and superficial contests, one of which includes wearing a swimsuit"
Isn't it even worse if the woman in question ...gets totally naked and grinds herself on a guy's lap?
I'm for any choice anybody wants to make, but not for some arbitrary even hypocritical stance on "exploitation" to be taken.
BTW, cuts the OTHER way too, some Righty telling us that "beauty pageants are okay, but strip club 'scholarship money' is bad"....is hypocritical too.
Posted by Mask at 05/14/2009 @ 12:52pm
I don't remember that plank in the Republican platform.---Posted by abell12ct at 05/14/2009 @ 12:47pm
Do you remember a plank that had calls for LESS pollution?
Posted by Mask at 05/14/2009 @ 1:12pm
<i>Posted by Mask at 05/14/2009 @ 12:52pm </i>
Yes...they're both bad.
<i>Posted by Mask at 05/14/2009 @ 1:12pm </i>
This is a silly response for two reasons. One...yes? The fact that Republicans defend things like cap-and-trade that you think will increase pollution doesn't mean Republicans defend increasing pollution. Two, your argument is invalid anyway. Not having a specific plank against pollution wouldn't means that they like pollution, any more than not having a specific plank against eating babies would mean that they eat children for breakfast. This is silly.
Posted by Thrawn at 05/14/2009 @ 2:28pm
Posted by Thrawn at 05/14/2009 @ 2:28pm
The GOP supported Bush's "Clear Skies Initiative" which would have allowed 42 million MORE tons of air pollution than the EPA proposal.
The environment is not a "We don't eat babies" plank, THRAWN. It's a key element of ANY major political party's agenda...like economic growth, healthcare, education, defense policy.
YOUR argument is flawed.
Posted by Mask at 05/14/2009 @ 3:22pm
Posted by darladoon at 05/14/2009
Darla honey, you are mixed up again. in your sterotyping mind, you are calling Miss USA and Miss America one in the same. They are entirely different programs.
Bit bigots like you could care less about the facts.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/14/2009 @ 3:37pm
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/14/2009 @ 03:54am |
Thanks for the air cover Cc.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/14/2009 @ 3:40pm
Posted by Mask at 05/14/2009 @ 08:39am Mask, every public official out there has made so-called racist statements, including Biden, Both Clintons, Obama, Pelosi, well, let me save time by just saying, Congress...
Are they all racists too because of their comments? Bottom line, two left leaning posters have cited the bone in the nose quotes to support Limbaugh's racism.
He's not a racist. But if you think he is, good for you.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/14/2009 @ 3:44pm
every public official out there has made so-called racist statements, including Biden, Both Clintons, Obama, Pelosi, well, let me save time by just saying, Congress...
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/14/2009 @ 3:44pm
Got a link?
Rump Limppaw is a big fat lying idiot. And that's a fact. I got a link.
http://tinyurl.com/pgw89m
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/14/2009 @ 4:34pm
Thanks for the air cover Cc.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/14/2009 @ 3:40pm
Always happy to give it when I agree. Darla is already backpedaling and being hypocritical.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/14/2009 @ 4:44pm
He's not a racist. But if you think he is, good for you.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/14/2009 @ 3:44pm
How was his comment NOT racist? Does he need to call the caller a stupid nigger before you agree he's racist?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 05/14/2009 @ 4:46pm
"when you act like a drug-addicted, loud mouthed, thrice-divorced, sex-addicted, fat, obnoxious buffoon, you should definitely attract a good deal of attention. that's entertainment for many americans. " posted by Darladoon -
Darla! You know me too well! You've figured out EXACTLY why I went into the theatre! Now I know I should have gone into radio! hahahaha
Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 05/14/2009 @ 4:53pm
And to be clear, I didn't post the statement about Air America's ratings....herr frieheitz did.
I think Rush is a buffoon and an idiot who is afraid to debate anyone (he doesn't even let liberal callers on his show), because they tend to have facts and all he has is his opinion. He is allowed to his opinion, as are all Americans, and if someone wants to pay him $400MM for his opinion, good for him. In my opinion, he IS an entertainer and the people who listen to him are obviously entertained, as they keep coming back. But in just the past two weeks, I believe he has done more to damage what little remains of the GOP than Richard Nixon did with Watergate. Perhaps Rush is one of those guys who thinks ya gotta hit rock bottom before you can begin recovery...I mean he HAS been in a drug treatment program....
Posted by Stephen_Carver1 at 05/14/2009 @ 5:06pm
Rump Limppaw is actually a covert agent for GW (guerillawomen). The agent is meant to destroy the last remnants of the new con repubs. The agent hides way way inside a giant fat suit. Underneath it s/he's doing all the wincing and puking to the stuff s/he's having to say. Thus, how big the suit has to be and why it giggles so much. But the agent knows the whole horrid time, s/he's taking it for the team.
Posted by hsuBfools at 05/14/2009 @ 5:42pm
Do you remember a plank that had calls for LESS pollution? Posted by Mask
That is quite different from calling for more pollution.
Posted by abell12ct at 05/15/2009 @ 06:34am