HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » rhett o rick » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »

rhett o rick

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Member since: Fri Apr 22, 2005, 01:05 PM
Number of posts: 46,331

Journal Archives

Ah yes, the questions of insinuation. The technique used when one doesn't

have the confidence of stating their own opinion* regarding H. Clinton's integrity. Let's see if we can clear up your insinuations.

"Did you vote for John Kerry in 2004" The implication of course being that if I was a good Democrat and supported the Democratic candidate and since that candidate was one that betrayed us then I would be obligated to forgive H. Clinton for her betrayal. Even you should admit how weak that argument is.

"are you ready to throw Joe Biden over the side as well?" I guess the insinuation here is that before I can be critical of H. Clinton's betrayal, I have to acknowledge Joe Biden's betrayal. If I did would you then come back with a list of others that didn't have the integrity to stand up to George Bush and ask me one by one to denounce them?

Here are some questions for you:
Do you think the decision to invade Iraq was possibly the most disastrous decision in the last century?
Do you think George Bush was lying when he told us there were WMD in Iraq, the Iraq was building nuclear weapons, and that Iraq was aiding al Qaeda?
Do you think H. Clinton knew she was lying when she gave her famous speech that echoed the Republicans selling points for the war?
Do you think H. Clinton showed her lack of integrity at that important time?
Do you think she can be trusted now? If so, why?
Don't you think we can find other candidates that have integrity?

* This is a general statement, I am sure you are willing to clearly state your opinion regarding H. Clinton's integrity.

For the record, I condemn all that voted for the Iraq War, including John Kerry and Joe Biden. Some people claim there is not a difference between the major parties. Well this vote was a good opportunity to prove that wrong. To prove that the DEmocratic Party stood for principles and could stand up for the people. And bravo to those that stood up against the Oligarch's thirst for war and damn those that cashed in their integrity for whatever their excuse was. If we have no better choices than those that proved they have zero integrity, then we are already lost.

I got this right from the horses mouth. H. Clinton-Sachs will choose Goldman-Sachs as her running

mate. She has already gotten the nod from her pal Big J John Roberts. Hell if Corps are people, why can't they run for office.

If you don't believe this, just remember where I got it.
Posted by rhett o rick | Sat Nov 8, 2014, 11:42 AM (0 replies)

Obama Continues the Bush Policies of Secrecy

Some of us naively thought during the terrible Bush decade that we could replace the heavy handed Security State of the Republican administration by electing a Democratic president and that we could reestablish our tattered democracy. In hindsight how foolish we were. We thought that Obama, who campaigned on government transparency and rolling back the Patriot Act would end the dominating control of the most powerful NSA/CIA Security State made strong by 8 years of zero oversight and an unlimited budget. We were wrong. How could we think that those in power would relinquish that power just because a new president was inaugurated? Sadly, some here in DU think that’s exactly what happened in spite of the evidence otherwise.

In “The Nation” magazine of Oct 27, there is a good article, “The Government’s War on Whistleblowers.”

“To date, the Obama administration has charged nine people with violating the …… Espionage Act – far more that all other administrations combined.”

As bad as that sounds, that is the tip of the iceberg. Many others have undergone Espionage Act “investigations” that didn’t result in prosecutions, but most likely destroyed careers. Some see this as heavy-handed intimidation.

“In its 2011 Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, the FBI formally authorized the use of national-security letters to obtain the call records of journalists who are witnesses to a crime. (NSLs are secret orders that the FBI can issue with no judicial review. Recipients are prohibited from telling anyone they’ve received such an order.)”

The article goes on to detail how Obama’s DOJ used subpoenas to gather records of 100 journalists exposing their sources whether or not the sources were relevant to the justification for the subpoenas. This is more heavy handed intimidation.

It is apparent that our powerful NSA/CIA Security State, via the DOJ, has declared war on whisleblowers and investigative journalists.

When Obama became president he inherited a very powerful Security State from the Bush/Cheney administration that operated with an unlimited budget, carte blache authority and zero oversight. It appears that Security State has grown even more powerful under President Obama. This threat to our democracy should be obvious to all but those living in a state of denial. And those that applaud the president for the gains we’ve made must realize that without democracy those gains can disappear quickly.

Support Your Local Foodbanks and Soup Kitchens

I am reposting this as we move into Nov and the cold weather. People need help this time of year more than ever.

Local foodbanks are struggling. In tight economic times, donations to foodbanks tend to dry up. And this is the time when help is most needed as more and more people are relying on local foodbanks for help.

Please donate non-perishable foods. Even if the cans are dented or past expiration date they may still be good. Let the foodbank make the decision.

Canned meats and meals are always needed. Chili, tuna, canned salmon, pork & beans, etc.

Donating cash is the best because foodbanks usually can buy about three times more food for the dollar than you can.

It’s also important to donate time. At our foodbank about 75% of the labor is volunteered.

Some foodbanks take clothes and household items that they give away for free so keep that in mind.

Foodbanks usually need simple things like boxes, plastic grocery bags, and glass jars. Ask your local foodbank what they need.

Some people are wary that their donations are distributed fairly and efficiently. Volunteer to be a member of the Board of Directors and influence the operations of your local foodbank.

Also help the homeless. Our foodbank works with local soup kitchens and street ministries. Here are some specific items the homeless value:

Hats*, socks*, coats, rain ponchos*, space blankets*, tarps, tents, sterno, canned meats and meals that can be opened w/o opener, bottled water, hand sanitizer and first aid items, granola bars*, bus tokens, grocery gift cards, etc.

*Some items can be purchased in quantity at low prices online like at smile.Amazon. Note, if you use smile.amazon.com, they will donate to your designated charity (foodbank?).

Have a happy holiday season and please support your local foodbank.

When you buy a share of a company from another individual you are not "investing" in the company.

The company does not see a dime of your money. The person you bought it from gets the money. The value of the stock is based on it's popularity. That popularity can be influenced by the performance of the company but it can also be influenced by a lot of other things. For example, a number of years ago it was discovered that Wall Street Journal advisers were influencing stock prices and cashing in. They would tell people that they recommended a certain stock then they would buy a significant quantity which made the price go up. When the public saw this, they took the advice and drove the price up further. Then the advisers would cash out at the higher price. Of course the price would return to normal and those that "invested" on the way up, lost value. My point is that the value of the stock increase had nothing to do with the performance of the company. CEO's have been found manipulating the value of their company stock via business practices and cashing in via their stock options.

What is investing? Some say it's purchasing something with the hope of

profit. Of course inherit is the possibility of loss. That is very close to the definition of gambling.

After the initial release of stock your "investment" does not go to the company. It makes little moral difference if you "invest" in green stocks or WalMart. They don't see a dime of that money.

You essentially buy a ticket, like at the race track, and hope your "stock" is in the lead when you sell it. While the value of the stock may have some relation to the performance of the company, it is essentially a measure of the popularity of the stock.

When you "invest" in the Stock Market you are exchanging money for stock with another "investor". While you are betting the value will go up, he/she is betting the value will go down. This is clearly gambling.

The average "investor" is at a large disadvantage as the Big Money investors have inside knowledge and also can manipulate stock prices. The average of 10% gain you quoted is shared between the Big Money "investors" and the average Joe. Guess who gets the biggest share of that 10%.

Will the result of the DoJ investigation in Ferguson be just a band-aid?

The Real News interviewed Glen Ford th Executive Editor of the Black Agenda Report.


Mr. Ford points out that we need to look at the bigger picture. The problem isn't just Ferguson and fixing Ferguson, even if it's "fixed" won't touch the bigger problem. The problem is a system that is working fine and, "is accomplishing the mission of criminalizing a whole race of people, black folks,"

"The New York Times has a very interesting article out this week in which it notes that the state of Florida, which is not the worst, not the best, pretty indicative of Southern justice, certainly, the state of Florida has not even charged, much less tried, a single police officer in 20 years for using deadly force against a civilian. Not once in 20 years. And Florida doesn't really stand out too far from other states."

Mr. Ford says we shouldn't look at the problem as a "broken system":

"But my position is that the system works just fine. It does exactly what it was designed to do. It acts with uniformity all across the United States and delivers, like clockwork, millions of black bodies to be incarcerated in the biggest gulag in the world. It does it quite efficiently. It cost a lot of money, but the money that's spent is made by somebody. And it's the uniformity, again, the system that shows that it is a well-oiled machine that has been working at the highest possible speed for the last 45 years. That's not a broken system. If we look at it as a broken system, we're just going to tinker with it. If we understand that it is a system that is accomplishing the mission of criminalizing a whole race of people, black folks, then we have to look in a much more systemic, societal-wide way at what we do about a criminal justice system that is itself a criminal enterprise."

IMO Mr. Ford is pointing out that what we see in Ferguson is just an example of a culture that has developed over decades that criminalizes the Black Community and justifies that criminalization to the White Community. Why, one might ask? It is very profitable to those invested in the for-profit prison system. It also provides a good excuse for the militarization of the local police departments, which is very comforting to the paranoid American Aristocracy. And IMO the most important reason, it keeps the masses fighting among themselves instead of fighting the tyranny of the American Aristocracy. That is, when the Black Community stands up against the overbearing authoritarian dominance of the American Aristocracy will the White Community give support or look the other way. I bet the armed TeaBaggers will side with the American Aristocracy. I also believe that the Left will support the Black Community, but what will the Centrists do? Those that are so comfortable in their "status-quo"? Will they turn on the Black Community like they did OWS? Or will the simply hunker down and hope the Aristocracy won't see them and won't punish them? It's just like in the school yard: some side with the bully, some fight the bully, and some hide from the bully.
Posted by rhett o rick | Mon Sep 8, 2014, 09:43 AM (7 replies)

It was a little over a year ago when my wife and I got to stand up for a couple of our best friends.

We were the only ones there as the couple didn't want their families to attend. The lady judge that volunteers her time to perform marriages said after the ceremony "these are my favorite weddings", referring to the same sex marriage of my two female friends.
This was their third ceremony, the first happened 15 years previous as a quiet affair just between the two. The second was when the State of Washington allowed formal domestic partnerships. This one was important because the state of Washington officially recognizes them as married. Also, this allows one partner to be covered by health insurance from the others work, which wasn't allowed prior to this. It was a big day.

May you have a long and happy marriage.

Posted by rhett o rick | Fri Sep 5, 2014, 08:30 PM (0 replies)

So if you are making me guess your point then here goes: If you are saying that

the oligarchs are not exercising Totalitarian control, I will agree. But if you are using that to indicate that the oligarchs aren't in control of this country then I don't agree. Do they let us vote? Sure, but are the votes effective? Not so sure. Do we get to choose who we vote for? Not for the presidency. Do our elected representatives represent us? I don't think so.

The fact that the Aristocracy doesn't exercise 100% control doesn't mean they aren't exercising 80% and it doesn't mean they can't go to 100% should they so choose. I think they realize that many Americans will accept 80% where they might not accept 100%.

It's like the frog in the pot story. The American Aristocracy thinks that the slow boil works better than the fast boil. And those among us that accept the status quo are figuratively saying that the water isn't tooo hot.

Over the last 30 years the American Aristocracy has been stealing the wealth of the middle and working classes. They would like it all but are in no big hurry.

I guess I stumbled trying to make my points.

First, those among us that believe a revolution would solve our problems didn't pay attention to their history lessons and are living in denial. Historically revolutions destroy a lot of the property of the masses, and merely succeed in switching one tyrant for another.

Second, continuing down the roads the lower classes have been taking for the last 30 years will lead to civil unrest but it's not likely the lower classes will unite against the Aristocracy. Most likely the rednecks will fight the minorities. IMO we are already in the first stages as the police (arms of the Aristocracy) have been persecuting the Black Community by harassing them, arresting them, and murdering them in the streets. How far down this road can we go before the Black Community says "enough"? If the Black Community does take a stand, who will support them? Certainly not the well armed Tea Baggers that will side with the police and Aristocracy.

While I might agree that there isn't a specific conspiracy by the Aristocracy, I do believe that the members of the Aristocracy act in harmony for their common interest, which IMO amounts to a conspiracy.

Some here say that things aren't so bad, and if we just keep our heads down, support the status quo, then maybe things will get better. That thinking hasn't worked for the last 30 years.

We must regain control of our local police and our elected representatives.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »