HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » rustbeltvoice » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Current location:
Member since: Fri Nov 29, 2013, 03:09 PM
Number of posts: 264

Journal Archives

inquiry question: Lincoln

For those of you that had elementary and/or secondary education in the southern states, how was Abraham Lincoln presented?
Secondary question: since the major political party in the South is the Republican Party, how does that party there present President Lincoln?
Posted by rustbeltvoice | Wed Jul 15, 2015, 01:26 PM (8 replies)

Rome affirms parishioners, and circumscribes US bishops


...Vatican’s Congregation for the Clergy, in a recent ruling on an appeal by St. Ann parishioners, has made it clear that repairs of up to $12 million are not a good enough reason for the building to be demolished or converted into something other than a Catholic church.

...So why have hundreds, if not thousands, of Catholic churches, including several dozen in Western New York, been allowed to close during the past few decades?

Simply put, it’s because bishops were not challenged on their decisions, and if they were, the people making the challenges did not follow procedural requirements as spelled out in canon law.

“The people had no clue they could take recourse,” Kuenstler said. “Bishops were not telling them about it.”

In Europe, Catholic churches may not get used to the extent they once were, but they’re almost never completely shut down or demolished, and it’s only within the past 30 years in the United States that bishops have moved to close many churches....
Posted by rustbeltvoice | Mon Feb 10, 2014, 03:17 PM (1 replies)

definition of terms: ultra

Many describe the Republican Party as composed of two large subgroups. Often a term that is used is "moderate". This is cloudy and inaccurate. If we start that they are all 'conservative', and the distinction is really that of degree, and the "ultra-conservatives". The press, and the public shy away from saying "extremist"; and there is more than one type of extremist in their ranks.

'Ultra' and 'ultras' have been used in other political and historical contexts elsewhere. I propose that the distinction is to be made between conservative Republicans, and ultra-conservatives Republicans; and relegate the term "moderate Republican" to join the terms "liberal Republican", and "progressive Republican" to the historical past. They have no present currency other than obfuscation.

Posted by rustbeltvoice | Sat Feb 1, 2014, 09:34 AM (1 replies)

In this corner, the boy genius of the Republican Party

"The guy is from Argentina, they haven't had real capitalism in Argentina. They have crony capitalism in Argentina. They don't have a true free enterprise system." — Congressman Paul Ryan, boy genius of the Republican Party quoted in an hour long interview with reporters and editors of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. The article was mostly concerned with a casino. He also told them he wants to chair the House Ways and Means Committee. He has not made a decision to run for the presidency, and is waiting until after the November election to say.

Yes, i remember the Vice-President, Joseph Biden, in October 2012 making Ryan cringe. Ryan could only comfort himself by drinking water. Joseph Biden did what Barack Obama did not do. He challenged nearly every lie that his opponent uttered. He made Ryan uncomfortable. He showed the Republican his hypocrisy.

A season earlier, Sister Simone Campbell, of the social justice 'lobby' NETWORK, argued for a 'Faithful Budget'. She and a group of Catholic sisters travelled across the Mississippi to the Potomac (Nuns on the Bus), across the rustbelt to the citadel of government. The journey started at Des Moines, Iowa on June 18th, and they continued to the nation's capital. On the second day, there was a stop at Janesville, Wisconsin. Janesville is the home of the Republican budget guru, Rep. Paul Ryan.

Now, Biden, Campbell, and the guy from Argentina are co-religionists of Paul Ryan, supposedly. He can not defeat them in an argument, or in sincerity. Ryan is a propagandist whose philosophy comes from Ayn Rand, whom he made his staff read. Jesus' Sermon on the Mount discourse is a few sentences. Dropping Rand on your foot, would make it smart. Reading Rand has a contrary effect.

"Ayn Rand, more than anyone else, did a fantastic job of explaining the morality of capitalism, the morality of individualism. And this to me is what matters the most: it is not enough to say that President Obama’s taxes are too big or that the health care plan does not work, or this or that policy reason. It is the morality of what is occurring right now; and how it offends the morality of individuals working for their own free will, to produce, to achieve, to succeed that is under attack."
— Congressman Paul Ryan
Posted by rustbeltvoice | Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:46 AM (14 replies)

Yeah, good question.

I read through thirty responses on this thread. And maybe there is not one answer alone.

Several people have suggested in their own parlance, that they hate the "other", and several have included non-Christians as a constituent of the other. Sometimes this is true, but sometimes the Christian is a constituent of that other. Ayn Rand was never a Christian, and became a selfish atheist. Ayn Rand is considered a "Conservative" heroine. O, and by the way the worst writer in the English language. She is wretched in fifty pages, yet she puts a thousand in a book, and it still sells now.

Many of these hate filled conservatives profess to be Christians. Some are liars on that subject too, others are pharasaic, hypocritical Christians. But yes, that hypocrisy is a more salient characteristic; for it is not only in the religious sphere of morality, in which one shows hypocrisy. We have those who call for thrift, and spend lavishly on themselves. We have those who call for war, and made sure they never went. The listing of self contradiction in word compared to deed is quite long.

There is a meanness, it is very evident and palpable. I see where fear would explain some of it, i also see egotism, selfishness, mental aberration. I would suggest that the mean spirit is of an hateful nature; and to speak in theological terms, hate is like evil (or hate is an evil), and evil can be defined by the absence of love.

Posted by rustbeltvoice | Thu Dec 19, 2013, 02:38 AM (4 replies)

times change, but not really

To quote Tony Bennett, the singer:

"I grew up during the Depression and I have stayed a Democrat my whole life. My dad died when I was very young and my mother had to raise three children. She was a seamstress. She worked for a penny a dress. I could not believe the way the Hoover administration left everybody so stranded. I have never gotten over that. I know times change, but not really. I am against super greed."

The resiliency of the Republican Party just beggars belief. After 1929, they should never have outperformed the Democracy. Roosevelt and the New Deal saved the country. The US was a victor in WWII. What have the Republicans done other than resent the success of the Democracy? Then a generation later, Nixon and Watergate should have soured the country on Republicans again. Reagan was successful in a gathering of a great repeal of what FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ and the rest had achieved. Reagan was a fortunate blunderer, and was a hero to half the country. He was a disaster, and the progenitor of the great increased disparity we suffer from. bush jr is a complete disaster and usurped power for eight years, with the evil and repellant cheney next to him. Yet, the beast survives. Explain to me how? They get progressively, and continuously worse.

I have thought that this teabagger element would be fatal to the beast. How can ignorant goons succeed? That after 2016 there would not be a single effective party comparable to the size of the Democracy. Either the Republican party would transform, or there would be a splintering into separate entities.
nota bene: I am using older terminology, "the Democracy" is a synonym for the Democratic Party. It is a usage, which should be made common again.
Posted by rustbeltvoice | Mon Dec 16, 2013, 12:26 AM (0 replies)

what of Lincoln?...and Reagan.

When i was a child, and patriotism was instilled in elementary school education, i went to the Civil War monument in Public Square. I bought a little plaster bust of Abraham Lincoln. I still have it.

Lincoln is an historical personage of depth and importance. He was the first Republican president of the country, the country survived almost four score and seven years without one. There is much respect for the lesser Roosevelt, in some quarters. The positive contributions to the patrimony beyond these two are negligible (at best).

The modern Republican party has Ronald Reagan as their founder, and his politics was to eliminate Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. When does a Republican of to-day quote Lincoln? Reagan quoted Democrats continuously while president. Reagan was a pitch man who served to convince potential customers to become satisfied customers. As fortunate as Reagan's career was, his legacy to the patrimony is a disaster.
Posted by rustbeltvoice | Fri Dec 13, 2013, 12:36 PM (0 replies)

Is there to-day, a Republican more liberal than Goldwater?

But when one side is completely hysterical, conspiratorial and is leveling baseless attacks, should it be taken seriously? — Max Blumenthal

I have written other essays: Cogito, ergo Democrata.,
Cogito, ergo Democrata II elsewhere.

I have tried to point this out to acquaintances before, but they did not respond. Barry Goldwater of Arizona was considered an extreme conservative in politics, so extreme that his sanity was often questioned. To-day, it is not easy (perhaps not possible) to find a more liberal Republican than he.

In 1964 Barry Goldwater was the Republican nominee for president. Lyndon Johnson had signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and lost five of the first six states of the Confederacy (and it has been difficult for any Democrat to win such states since). The only other state Goldwater won was Arizona, his home state. It was the closest state of the fifty, he won by less than 5,000 votes. The country was scared of a Goldwater conservative America. In 1996, speaking to Bob Dole, Goldwater said, “We're the new liberals of the Republican Party”.

The press has now made a point of defining the teabaggers as conservatives, who happen to be in the Republican party. What are the rest? Is this some sort of drunken fraternity contest to see who can be the most extreme? there is a standard to surpass?
Posted by rustbeltvoice | Fri Dec 13, 2013, 12:12 PM (3 replies)

Dastardly Dick Cheney

the face of evil, Dick Dastardly

... Dick Cheney is the most evil man in US history. People once often pointed to Charles Manson as the embodiment of evil; he had his followers kill nine people, and his planned race war (or what ever the hell it was) was only a demented fantasy. Cheney worked years to achieve access to the greatest earthly powers. He has the blood of hundreds of thousands on his hands.

There are several [more than can fit to mention in this short essay] vignettes of episodic evil with cheney. He was all for the Viet Nam war, he got five deferments to make sure he didn't go. He stopped filing when he turned twenty-six, and was too old to be drafted. As he said, "I had other priorities in the 60's than military service. I don't regret the decisions I made". In August 2002 he told the world, through a speech, that the country was going to war with Iraq. Mid-March, his then puppet, gwbjr did start it on the false premises that had been invented, and no voice to the contrary was going to be respected. Often cheney was reported hiding "in an undisclosed location". That was bullshit too. ...

We all know he is "heartless", recently he received an human heart from a dead person. He has put out a book about the marvels of such medicine, he does not consider the dead man. ...

Laws don't apply to cheney, and his kind. He is an international war criminal, and in some countries he could be arrested, hell, if other countries followed his suit, he could be captured (extraordinary rendition) and tortured (water boarded) in a real undisclosed location. He approves of such activities. It would be poetic justice. ...

I remember a priest telling a story of how he refused a family's request of having "My Way" played at a funeral. See, a Christian is not supposed to be prideful in himself. A Christian is supposed to follow the Way of Jesus. Lucifer lost Heaven for his pride of having his way. Cheney, and Lucifer always made it sure they could say "I did it my way". Cheney was always self assured while lying, and wrong. He has never regretted anything, not even his lack of political etiquette. He told Senator Leahy, on the Senate floor, "go f@$# yourself". Leahy had criticised cheney over Halliburton (his source of mammon). Cheney had no regrets, he went on radio and said, "That's sort of the best thing I ever did".

Some people posit Hitler as the face of evil. It must be "sweeps week", one of the local television news stations is promoting a piece by that name, face of evil. They show a wax head of Hitler. Hitler had a sense of satanic theatre, cheney is blood thirsty, manipulative, but not theatrical. All men die, when cheney croaks, the sound of a colossal sizzle will emanate from Hell.
Posted by rustbeltvoice | Sat Dec 7, 2013, 06:15 AM (17 replies)

what can i say about Ronnie?

The esteem, sometimes foggy nostalgia, that encompasses many in regards to Ronnie Reagan is curious. Goldwater lost the presidency, primarily because the majority of people thought he was nuts. Ronnie, was often moreso than Barry. When Ronnie was in the Executive Mansion, i would often think, and say, "No, that can not be. I was dreaming something stupid".

Ronnie had no respect for history, and therefore, truth. He pitched falsity, but he pitched it well. He played Grover Cleveland Alexander, The Winning Team; perhaps he learned something; but for many of us he was the fellow who acted with a chimp, Bedtime for Bonzo.

With something (about Norman Thomas) he said fifty years ago, whether it originated with him or not, people will quote as true. He would later refer to events in a movie as an historical occurrence. Here is my question: did Reagan cleverly lie to promote his agenda? or did reality and fantasy blur in his mind? or what he wished to be true, became true?

Now granted, that when John Kennedy was president, Reagan was against civil rights, and therefore, human rights. Did a feeling against non-whites erupt with him then? or was it longstanding?

Reagan was a disaster for the United States, and very little correction has been accomplished. His legend only grows among idiots, conservatives, and Republicans. O, excuse me, i was getting redundant.
Posted by rustbeltvoice | Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:17 AM (0 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 3 Next »