Repukes always overreach.

[bearfan454]

They let businesses send the jobs out of the country. The businesses don't have to pay matching SS dollars or workers comp insurance, they get to fire all their workers, they pay about $2.00 a day labor in China, they don't have to comply with any EPA or OSHA regulations, and on top of that bush gives them a tax break. It is win-win for the companies.

They overreached because when the products come back, hardly anyone has a job so that means no money to buy the products.

They are overreaching here. They always overreach.

[bryant69]

1. Well, I think this might be the Johnson Presidency for them

Johnson was the last really liberal president we had, and because of the failures of his adminstration, particularly in Vietnam, the left was "exposed" and we had to move right as a party (not that this is the only reason, but one of them).

Bush's administration could be the same for conservatives--if he fails, and, even if he wins reelection, it seems like his policies are certain to fail, than perhaps it will push the Republican party back towards sanity.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Deesh]

3. Your post today...

Hi, Bryant69. Just wanted to say your post today was right-on. Kind of a circuit-breaker in explaining what's happened to the Democratic Party. Thanks for this.

[RBHam]

2. and get away with it...

the media helps by jumping through hoops for Reichminster Von Rove.

[Vitruvius]

4. Overreaching is what sociopaths do. They never know when to stop.

Partly because they are cognitively incapable of understanding that actions have consequences.

Which is why the Bu$h gang is ruling as if there were no tomorrow.


They will ruin themselves with their overreaching; the only question is how much they will ruin America as well.

[SpaceCatMeetsMars]

6. Why ARE sociopaths incapable of understanding consequences?

Is it because they are like children, at a lower developmental level or something like that? I watch the actions of this admininstration with amazement because they seem to live in their own fantasy-land.

[Vitruvius]

9. Some interesting links:

Robert Hare's links page: http://www.hare.org/links/index.html ; Dr Hare's book "Without Conscience" is excellent, and available in paperback. Also: Is Psycopathy and Adaptation? at http://human-nature.com/nibbs/01/psychopathy.html, an interesting article by Arianna Huffington at http://archive.salon.com/news/col/huff/2002/08/02/ceos/ . Also http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/428/428lect16.htm , http://www.thedubyareport.com/bushnuts.html

There's tremendous diversity in human intelligence. And some humans have evolved to prey on other humans -- in biological terms, it's just another evolutionary strategy. One researcher (it may have been Hare) noted that humanity is at the top of the food chain, and evolved its' own own parasites. Their job is to prey on other humans -- same as a cat's job is to prey on mice. And they have no more conscience than a cat. Their thinking is directed at conning, deceiving, stealing, killing; and if they can do those things well, they do not need to worry about consequences -- because they can always con, deceive, or kill their way out of them...

And they feel the same sense of satisfaction in a good con, a good rip-off, a good killing as we feel in a job well done; most of humanity evolved to work; they evolved to prey on us.

Again, a successful sociopath does not suffer consequences; he goes unscathed thru life exploiting, ruining, maybe killing others. Some become criminals, some become managers and CEOs, some become crooked cops, some try and take over the government.

To a sociopath, other people are objects -- other people are just so many pieces of meat to them. They have no empathy, no remorse, no conscience. It's all manipulation, violence, getting the upper hand, and ripping people off.

As for the overreaching; sociopaths have no empathy for their prey (us), and therefore have no natural sense of when they've gone too far. And no matter how much they steal, it's never enough. (Just like a cat will kill mice even when it isn't hungry.)

About 1% of the population is sociopathic; with the incidence in men being about twice that in women.

And if you look at the diagnostic criteria in some of the articles, you will be reminded of our selected pResident. From his grandiose sense of entitlement, his blowing up frogs as a kid, his substance abuse, his blowing one opportunity after another, his inarticulateness and his errors of syntax and grammar (which are typical of sociopaths -- their brains are wired differently), his fascination with punishment and killing of others, his brazen lying (and when one lie collapses, he comes out with another. And another. All with a straight face.), his phony emotions (because he doesn't have real emotions apart from anger, envy, greed, vindictiveness, and the like), and so on. He fits the profile of a narcissitic sociopath to a "T".

[SpaceCatMeetsMars]

12. Thank you Vitruvius!

I will definitely read these. I have read some stuff about con-artists before and have always thought that is the one type of intelligence that Bush has. I think he will be seen in history as a banana-republic dictator-type that divided up and distracted the citizens while he looted the country for all could.

[Demeter]

31. Sociopaths Believe that there ARE no other People

Other people are furniture, to be bought, sold, pushed around, beaten up and trashed. Everything else follows.

[coda]

5. It's true and they have always paid a heavy price at election time.

People would see through it and there would be huge, seismic reversals in years past, like '48 and '58 and then the less dramatic, in '54 and '86.


Newt overreached and we won back a goodly # of seats in '98, but it's just flat disturbing that people seem to be exhibiting such a stubborness to seeing through the outright fraud of the last 3 years.

Amazing.

[Grover]

7. I agree.

But, how do you KEEP companies from sending jobs out of the country? In today's market if they don't they go under, so what is the viable alternative?

[Robbien]

8. Have Bush stop granting these companies tax breaks

if they manufacture offshore. Instead of a tax break, there should be a tax levied on these companies. But no, Bush will not do that, he needs the contributions he gets from these companies.

[Grover]

10. Doesn't that create a problem?

Doesn't that then make them uncompetitive with other companies that don't have to deal with that tax?

I believe I have heard some candidates suggest a tax break for keeping jobs here in the US. I'm not sure if that would work either.

[Robbien]

11. Yes, it makes them uncompetitive and that is the whole point.

Bush giving credits to companies to manufacture off shore is speeding the whole exodus. If any company wants to remain here, they are the ones who should be getting the tax break. Any company which sends American jobs offshore should not be allowed to undercut companies loyal to the US.

[Grover]

13. If they are uncompetitive how do they provide jobs?

It's a double edged sword.

[Robbien]

14. They move the jobs back and they will not be taxed

and then become competitive again. No, no double edged sword. If you think beyond republican party line propaganda, there is always a better solution.

[Grover]

15. That is not what I am saying.

They are moving jobs out to remain competitive. If you tax them if they send jobs out they remain uncompetitive. If they remain uncompetitive there are no jobs. I guess instead of a double edged sword it's a catch 22.

[Robbien]

16. They are moving jobs out to remain competitive

with the companies who have already moved their jobs offshore due to Bush's sweet deals over the last three years. If you punish offshoring companies instead of giving them tax breaks, they will all have to move back to become competitive with the companies who remained here.

Again, no republican double edge sword talking point, just good common sense.

[Grover]

17. The problem being ...

Is that you aren't just competing with US companies. With all of the trade agreements you are dealing with a global economy, not just US companies. It has nothing to do with republican, it has to do with free markets.

[Robbien]

19. So since we are now global

We should just follow the republican party line of giving credits to companies who offshore jobs. Sure that will help. If a company wants to stay here, tough luck kid. And yes this has everything to do with keeping in step with republican party line. Republicans are the ones who sneakily attached those offshore tax credits onto bills.

[Grover]

18. Is there a link to info on the sweet deals.

I'm not familiar with that. If he is doing that then that should be stopped immediately.

[Robbien]

20. I read that disrupters are told to make sure

that they ask Democratic posters to support their arguments by doing research and providing links. So, no I will not fall for that ruse and waste my time by supplying you with links. If you are interested, look it up. And you are invited to supply any refuting links if you wish.

[Grover]

22. That is so lame.

If you don't want to provide a link that is fine, but why the need to sit here and hurl insults?

Maybe a few key words and I will find it myself. I'm just saying I have never read anything about incentives that we are giving US companies to export jobs. Geeez...

[Robbien]

24. Not lame, just calling it as it appears

After doing a search on your posts, it appears almost every one spouts the republican propaganda. Just not buying it, sorry.

And your post yesterday that Iraqi mass graves justifies our killing more Iraqis was typical propaganda.

[Grover]

26. I didn't make a post about mass graves.

.

[Grover]

23. Here's a couple of links, but they don't really address the sweet deals.

http://www.laborresearch.org/story2.php/321

http://newsoutpost.com/article381.html

[alfredo]

30. Tax breaks for offshore companies has been a sticking point

for a long time. Clinton tried to stop them but the Republican congress made sure they were attached to any bill he wanted passed.

Clinton did stop the US government from promoting US companies in foreign land. Reagan/Bush had the US government helping with the cost of moving companies off shore. Clinton also fought against the GOP tax breaks for billionaires who renounced their citizenship to avoid taxes.

those guys would move offshore, renounce their citizenship, buy an appointment as an ambassador to the US. They live in the US for the maximum time per year. They also enjoyed diplomatic immunity. Because they retain some operations in the US, they can funnel money to their partners in congress or the whitehouse.

[leftofthedial]

21. consumers, not manufacturers, drive the US economy

"Competitive" is a misused neocon buzzword.

Prior to this mass migration of jobs out of the country, and prior to the neocon corporate tax cuts and de facto deregulation, corporations, the economy, the stock market AND the middle class were doing very well.

This migration is not about competition, it is about greed and a desire to destroy the American middle class.

[Grover]

25. Walmartitis

Over the past few years consumers have demanded lower and lower prices. The days of paying full price for anything have gone out the window. It has now affected every industry.

[leftofthedial]

27. markets are not "free"

Allowing countries that use slave labor or do not pay living wages to "freely" import products into the US is the problem. allowing US companies to perpetuate these practices by moving their manufacturing offshore is the problem.

[Grover]

28. Tax penalties

Tax penalties for moving jobs out. Do you see that as the best tool?

[kaybea]

29. The days of paying full price

are alive and well and living in the industries that supply the things one can't live without--

like energy

like food

like medical care

like pharmaceuticals

like housing

These aren't industries? These aren't Bu$h's closest pals?

I'll tell you what days are over: the days that Americans believe the cost of living is really stabilized because they can find a cheapass $40 DVD player.