My sister-in-laws hubby pissed me off yesterday.....

[Postman]

Started whining about "socialism" concerning Obama's stimulus plan. So it motivated me to write a letter to the editor of my local paper...

George H. W. Bush Was Right.

Supply-side economics, aka Reaganomics, is indeed voodoo economics. The CONservative economic policies of the past 28 years has put the country in the perilous position it's in.

FDR saved Capitalism from itself by using Socialism. Yet, it is the very same CONservative ideologues today who decry government intervention in the market-place as being evil when it has been the lack of government oversight and the deregulation of industries that has left the American people open to exploitation.

A new era of government regulation and oversight is needed. Start enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust laws once again. If a bank is too big to fail then it's too big to exist.

President Obama needs to do the work he was overwhelmingly elected to do. Correct the destruction CONservative economic policies have wrought, if it's not already too late to stop the second Republican Great Depression from happening...

[gratuitous]

1. Productive use of anger

Maybe it will get published, just to piss off your wife's brother-in-law.

[TahitiNut]

4. "your wife's brother-in-law"

GMTA

:D

[KharmaTrain]

2. Find A Way To Jam Her Radio...

...and block our Faux Noise, too. The right wing echo chamber fears reality, and that is the "Raygun Revolution" is over and it failed miserably. They need to revise history and ramp up the boogiemen, the fear and hate...it's the only way to avoid taking responsibility for the mess this country is in.

The wingnuts know that they've been rejected but are in denial about why. It's not cause "conservatism" failed, but the party. It was that booooshie wasn't "Raygun" enough...nor McCain. They refuse to blame themselves or else they would have to look down and recognize the blood on their hands.

That was a very good letter...and one that needs to be said over the noise of the repugnicans heading for the political and economic abyss.

:kick:

[SmileyRose]

3. "We don't want government intervention" is a total lie anyway

They want government to protect their patents, fight wars to get them cheaper resources (more profits), enact price supports, change taxes in their favor, limit the ability of their competition, suppress worker organization, suppress protest from the public at large, bail them out financially if they make financial mistakes, they want government to teach the masses the lie those who aren't billionaires are lazy and stupid.

The fact is, the top 1% would not be the top 1% if it wasn't for government intervention. They WANT government that works only for them. If it benefits the rest of us it's "pork" or "socialism".

[TahitiNut]

5. Exactly. "Conservatism" is all about government-enforced privilege.

:shrug:

[SmileyRose]

7. I'm jealous

It took me 2 paragraphs what you said perfectly and completely in 7 words. I wish I had that talent.

:) I stole it, and made it my sig.

[TahitiNut]

8. (lol!) Thanks ... I'm a great fan of the pithy and succinct. This, however, I get from Hayek.

"Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic, and power-adoring tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place. A conservative movement, by its very nature, is bound to be a defender of established privilege. The essence of the liberal position, however, is the denial of all privilege, if privilege is understood in its proper and original meaning of the state granting and protecting rights to some which are not available on equal terms to others."
—— F. A. Hayek, 1956 Preface to "The Road to Serfdom"

That's a pretty good and thought-provoking observation by the "father of modern Libertarian thought" and it's a guidepost for examining the plethora of government-funded and government-enforced privileges of 'ownership' -- from the equities markets to the military's global reach in service to "owners" not otherwise served in other countries. When I examine the manner in which we've toppled or propped up regimes all over the globe in the last century or more, I see nothing more consistent than the DEMAND that those regimes enact and enforce laws granting privilege to Owners - Global Corporatism. From the Afghanistan pipeline an the Iraqi "oil laws" all the way back to the Marines sent in to protect United Fruit's privilege to enslave 'workers' in Central America.

It's a theme that's COMPLETELY borne out in every act by Cheney/Bush and Conservatism (even Royalists!) over our entire history.

Hayek's quote stands for me even today as the most pithy and succinct distinction between liberal and conservative stances that I've seen. Like any such "bottom line" however, it's not as much an argument as a conclusion --and is useful to me mostly in the degree I'm familiar with the abundance of examples that lead to it as a conclusion. I find it nearly impossible to deny with any rational thought process whatsoever.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

6. My condolences! Your sister-in-law has an idiot for a husband. :( nt