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

rhett o rick

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Member since: Fri Apr 22, 2005, 01:05 PM
Number of posts: 44,294

Journal Archives

Revolution anyone? This is for those among us that think we can always fall back on revolution.

I think people take that attitude because they are basically lazy and instead of taking action today, they say, "What me worry, We can always revolt if it gets too bad" Well, about that.....apparently they know nothing of history and dream of successful revolutions where good guys replace bad.

So to those that believe in the revolution dream, tell the rest of us how exactly it will work. Who specifically will join with whom to fight the whose. I bet in your dream the masses unite and drag out the guillotines for the Aristocrats, and when we wake up we have a constitutionally controlled democratic republic. I hate to wake you out of that dream, but the Aristocracy isn't that stupid. What the Aristocracy will do is militarize the police, institute for-profit prisons, clamp down on the black communities (e.g. stop and frisk policies, etc. aimed at the black community). Lock up a good share of the black men and blatantly brutalize others. Those that are locked up will be forced to work as slaves ($2 per hour).

Unless something changes the black community will be under more and more pressure to strike back, to revolt. And the Aristocracy would like nothing better. Their goal is to turn some of the masses against others. And guess why the Powers That Be let the idiots have guns? Guess whose side the idiots will be on.

When they come for the African Americans will you stand up for them?
When they come for the Occupy Wall Streeters, will you stand up for them?
When the come for the leftist, will you stand up them?
You can bet the Tea Baggers won't.

It's never too soon to fight back.

Support Your Local Foodbanks and Soup Kitchens

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.

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.

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?).

Please support your local foodbank.

Thanks Supremes - Down the Slippery Slope To a National Religion

The Supreme Court rules that government meetings can have an opening prayer. How can that not violate the Constitutional right of separation of Church and State?

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, said the prayers are ceremonial and in keeping with the nation's traditions. "The inclusion of a brief, ceremonial prayer as part of a larger exercise in civic recognition suggests that its purpose and effect are to acknowledge religious leaders and the institutions they represent, rather than to exclude or coerce nonbelievers,"


Let’s get this straight; Justice Kennedy says that the prayers are only “ceremonial”? I wonder what God thinks about that. And they should be allowed because they are “traditional”? Wasn’t that an argument to support slavery? Oops, shouldn't say that too loudly, next the Court might strike down the 13th Amendment.

I counter the “ceremonial” and “tradition” argument with the slippery slope argument. Next thing you know the theists will be including God on our money and in the Pledge of Allegiance. Seriously, if you allow non-proselytizing prayers, you will start to get more proselytizing prayers.

As I see it, praying out loud with head bowed and maybe hands together is proselytizing. In my opinion the words, "and thank Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior" or something similar, is Christian proselytizing and has no business at government meetings. It is certainly aimed at impressing someone other than God. I haven’t seen any evidence that God cares how you pray so why does it have to be demonstrative? If you want your particular god to bless the meeting, discuss it with him or her in the parking lot before you go into the meeting.

The bad thing about this is that it pressures others to conform to the will of the majority. Who wants to be the only one in the room that isn’t praying? And what about other religions? Do they get to say their own prayers?

The Constitution is crystal clear in it’s meaning of, “ no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” Having Christian prayers at the beginning of a government meeting qualifies as a test. You might as well ask public officials to raise their hand if they are not a Christian.

The religious Right-Wing has won another battle for "one nation under Christ".
Posted by rhett o rick | Fri May 9, 2014, 10:12 AM (0 replies)

This is only a secret to those that live in a naive denial bubble.

It has to be glaringly obvious what has happened to our "two party" system. It's only logical Captain, that the wealthy oligarchs would buy control of both parties. Duh!

The naive among us (maybe they're just lazy) want sooo badly to be able to know who to support from only their party affiliation. D's are good and R's are bad, and plez dont complicate things by pointing out the flaws in that thinking.

The naive are ecstatic that the Republican Party appears to be in major trouble. They believe that their troubles would all be over if the Republican Party just disappeared. They dont recognize that the value of the two-party system. They think we would have just one big party of good guys, that the right-wing ideologies die with the party (I think cherry is their favorite flavor).

I have been saying over and over that a Clinton vs. Christie race would be win-win for the Wall Street Oligarchs. Now it looks like a Clinton-Bush race*. Same difference. Maybe we should dispense with the election and flip a coin to see whether Clinton or Bush should be president with the loser being the Vice President. The Wall-Street Oligarchs are already celebrating.

The fact that Clinton is a favorite of Wall Street isnt a secret except for those with their heads in their sand.

*IMHO the BFEE still are a faction to be reckoned with KR's finger prints are all over Christie-Gate. Just sayin. Always keep your eyes on KR.

That would be the smart thing to do, but unreg-capitalism doesnt have a mechanism for that.

In unreg-capitalism the goal is having the greatest wealth. So who is going to step forward and "let loose" with their wealth?

Adam Smith thought that enlighten-self interest would drive individuals to build or create wealth. And I dont think he was wrong. But he was relying on these capitalists being "enlightened", and that is not practical in the capitalistic system. Those that are "enlightened" are soon buried by those that let greed lead the way. It is so much easier to steal wealth than create it.

Bad Analogy Time: Unreg-capitalism is like have no speed limits on our roads. Those with the biggest cars would bowl over everyone else.

And that's your justification for what exactly? When David takes on Goliath some people

immediately side with David and some immediately side with Goliath, revealing to me authoritarian issues on both sides. That may include me (not in this particular case) because I do have authoritarian issues. I tend to mistrust authoritarians unless proven otherwise. And I believe those that side with Goliath also have issues with authoritarians. They tend to trust authoritarians until proven otherwise. And in the case of priests, continue to trust authoritarians even after proven otherwise.

But because a few (several?) posters on a message board of thousands declared Snowden a hero shouldnt be used to rationalize that he isnt. But once again, and again, whether Snowden is a hero or not is beside the point. The important point is that we, as a society may have a trust problem with our elected and appointed people that are supposed to be working in our best interest. It is every bit our responsibility to assure that they are working in our best interest.

Most here recognize that the investigative report on Christie is most likely tainted. The same reasoning should lead us to be suspicious of investigative reports issued by the NSA about the NSA. And we should be suspicious of attempts by the NSA to smear anyone that dares to speak out in this democratic society.

If you want democracy you must demand it and be vigilant, and be very weary of those that ask you to blindly trust them.

I think to characterize capitalism as evil reveals part of our economic problem.

Capitalism is an economic system and itself isnt evil any more than a knife is evil. I know this sounds like I am being picky but believing that capitalism is evil goes along with the idea that capitalism is like a person and it isnt. Capitalism should be viewed as a tool which can be used for good or bad just like a knife.

Humans cannot live in society without rules. There is a natural tendency to look out for one's self. But to live in an orderly society, humans must some times sacrifice what's best for themselves to make the society function for the best of the society.

Also, it must be clear that when we say capitalism needs to be regulated, we mean "for the benefit of society as a whole" and not for a select few. Our capitalistic based system currently has lots of regulations, but they have been modified to benefit a very small, select few.

The SCOTUS did our society a great disservice in the Citizens United decision where they ruled that our Constitution restricted us as a society on how much we can regulate our capitalist system. They demonstrated their enormous power to overrule the Congress and the President. IMO this is out of hand. The SCOTUS has too much power (but that's a discussion for another day).

The argument that the capitalist (oligarchs) cant be regulated by society because it's not "democratic" is bogus. Our democracy isnt inherently laissez-faire. We as a society can and must control our democracy and economic system to benefit society as a whole and strip the oligarchs of their power.

Capitalism isnt evil, we must take responsibility to control it, by whatever means necessary.

Other than that, have a great day.

What's your position on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)?

The TPP of course is a trade agreement that is being negotiated in secrecy from the American public.

Corporations are being allowed to either participate or at least see the text.

Some of the text has been leaked and has union leaders and environmentalists worried.

Previous trade agreements, like NAFTA, have been devastating to the American workforce.

The Administration is trying to push this agreement thru Congress via "fast-track" which will not allow debate or public input.

How do you feel about the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

Why do some citizens have such hatred for whistle-blowers?

I think you will find that these are the same people that not only openly hate whistle-blowers also hate protestors like Code Pink and Occupy. They are quick to throw investigative journalists like Michael Hastings under the bus. They side with the corporations against WikiLeaks, Julius Assange and Pfc Manning.

So who are these people? Well we know that the Republicans fall into this category. They clearly have no empathy for the poor, seniors, the sick, our vets, working people, etc. They openly worship authoritarian leadership with leaders like Bush, Cheney, and Gen Clapper.

But Republicans aren’t the only ones that fall for the propaganda put forth by the corporate media and espouse hatred toward those trying to speak truth to power. It appears that some conservative Democrats are siding with the Republicans and the corporate media to try to silence whistle-blowers.

So apparently it’s not just a Republican thing to hate those speaking truth to power, but a conservative thing.

Fortunately we have DU where we are free to discuss these issues among politically liberal posters.

Having one big conservative party has effectively neutralized the progressives of the Party.

This wasnt an accident. Obama ran as a progressive and got support from the left. But immediately, starting at his inauguration he leaped right. I saw it with his choices of Rick Warren and Rahm Emanuel and the dismissal of Howard Dean. Couldnt wait to distance himself from the left.

Technically it's still a two party system but one party is conservative and the other party is wacko. This is the perfect system for the Powers To Be. They use the wackos to scare the hell out of us, then we are grateful for the party of Gen Clapper, Penny Pritzker, Tim Geitner, Lawrence Summers, Ben Bernanke, William M. Daley, Jeff Immelt, Dave Cote, Robert Gates, Gen Stanley McChrystal, Jacob Lew, Jeremiah Norton, Gen Petraeus, John Brennen, Chuck Hegal, Michael Taylor, James Comey, Robert Mueller, Rahm Emanuel, Gen Alexander.

And what is in our future? Eight more years of pro-Wall Street administrations and the sinking of American workers. How ironic that Citizens United may play a major role in getting H. Clinton-Sachs elected.

It's time we run the conservatives out of our party and back to the Republican Party where they belong.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »