an esteemed member of this forum continues to start threads that push his particular take on religion...unfortunately when another member challenges his doctrine or presents an alternative view, the thread originator becomes defensive and attacks or dismisses the other members views...so, the purpose of this thread is to provide a place here for anyone who wishes to post his religious views to do so without fear of attack and ridicule, at least not from the thread originator.

Allah Ahkbar A-hole! How's that? Thanks for the forum where I could speak without fear or ridicule!

has anyone seen the play or made for tv movie titled "steambath"?

it presents an entertaining scenario of judgement day, as defined in the Christian tradition?

following is a link to a summary and reviews of the flick:

www.imdb.com/title/tt0167415

keith: the phrase "allah ahkbar" is not a religious doctrine... I always thought it was a battle cry of muslim soldiers that originated during the crusades. however, that aint so. interestingly it is of recent egyptian origin. following is link to its history...


Allahu Akbar (anthem) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allahu_Akbar_(anthem)‎

What church did Benny the great horned, grouse flushing, screech owl go to?

jrb: he was a barred owl...and do you wish to discuss religious doctrine? does not appear so...

Barred? Barred from what, the local drinking establishment? Come on ed I'm getting tired of waiting for your next installment of Benny The Wonder Owl.

jrb: if you wish to discuss religion here, fine. but please refrain from trashing this thread with other topics...as for the story of bennie, im workin on it...thank you for the encouragement. I was beginning to think no one much cared about an owl that flushed grouse in the direction of a waiting hunter.

Well, let's take a look see at this. Was that the serious Ed, or the entertaining Ed.

God,if there is one, has us by the balls. If we profess to believe than faith is all we need and if you are unsure and things go south you will rethink your position just to cover all the bases.There are no atheists in foxholes,cancer wards or other hellish places.

if there is no god, then how and why did we get here?

How about a billion or so years of evolution? Who can say what might happen given your primordial soup and enough time?

rh: are you suggesting that we and evevything else is a product of natural selection?

Whatever you want to call it when you have all the right materials and plenty of time for them to create all the possibilities.Maybe "God" chose that as his method instead of this instant creation thing that some people believe.I find it strange that some people presume to tell us how a God works and use a series of stories written thousands of years ago,by men, as a basis for their knowledge of "God."

In a similar way, it's interesting how secularists will fabricate evolution theory variations to explain the Cambrian explosion. It's curious how people of science and facts can get away with the assumption that evolution is the only possibility with very little fact as a basis.

Here it is! An intellectual viola !

The rationale du jour for geniuses who perpetuate another moronic ed good thread.

AND... the explanation for ed himself !

A "two-fer" of brilliance.

bb: you seem to have degenerated into a common thread trasher...cum now, I know you can do better...

which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Gee, I just wanna chat a bit about something that I find interesting. I don't agree with everyone on this forum but I do find it good to talk about things that I never get a chance to with my close friends.I don't think it is "moronic" to discuss the beginnings of life on this planet.

Who cares- Denny's serves both omelettes and fried chicken on a daily basis- Bon Appetite

It's bloody nonsense to even imagine this a forum for discussion of religious doctrine. No more proof is needed than ed's question blindsiding Drew who has never claimed that he, his congregation or denomination is the authority on God's word. It's mischief, pure and simple.

foxie: you are sooo clever and soo trashy...and I know you can do better as well.

gee king: don't recall blind siding drew. please e lab bore rate?

and why is it bloody nonsense to discuss religious doctrine here?

ever read the writings of a guy named martin luther? or was he a heretic, not worthy of your time?

I thought anything went on the "Misfires" forum.I'm open to just about anyone's opinion on anything. I've learned something from a lot of different people that others might shun because of various reasons.Keep an open mind and learn something.

I apologize to you if you were referring to a member other than Drew with: "an esteemed member of this forum continues to start threads that push his particular take on religion . . ." Drew's the only esteemed member I can think of who quotes from religious and other sources on how others think we should live. Which isn't pushing or a bad thing. Who were you referring to?

Misfires is a forum where anything goes. On the evidence, a mention of Bush, Obama, Reagan, Pelosi, PETA, Palin, Democrats, GOP, NRA, EPA or most anything else often sets off an incandescent display of incivility and foul language. Attempts at discussion always deteriorate to bloody nonsense. Even imagining an improvement with religious discussions is a fool's game.

Only a heretic would relate Martin Luther with a discussion on Misfires. Luther worked indefatigably with supportable evidence to reform Christianity. An honest and substantive discussion here of religious doctrine involving our long-abiding mysteries, our faith and struggles toward it, is not possible. I've been here long enough to know the will, tolerance and generosity is missing.

This seems to be a consistent thought. I'd tend to imagine that it takes at least two to discuss. Could it be that there is some confusion between 'on the evidence' and 'on emotion'. It seems the fools game starts when evidence is presented and ignored. How could civil discussion be possible when the honest message is, 'I don't care what the facts are, this is what I feel, and I'm right'.

I imagine the "facts" in regards to religion are few and far between as ideology gets in the way on all sides.I think humans trying to second guess a "God" are in way over there head.We have all the faiths that are certain that theirs is the one true way to God and none listen to anything that gets in the way of their chosen path to enlightenment.I think the answer is somewhere between evolution and creationism and that neither side has a lock on how and why we are here.Impossible to prove either way to those of us who lack blind faith and embrace other possibilities.Thinking about it gives me a headache.

Gee King, does this mean that you're leaving us heathens and savages?

Or does it mean you're finally going to do what you said on 3/7/13?...



And what you said again on 4/23/13???...



Wow King, for someone who so despises this venue and finds it so intolerable, you sure spend a lot of time here. Surprising after you have told us that you intend to mostly observe all of us racists, mysoginists, posturing bigots, birthers, fossils, Archie Bunkers, etc., and give us "a wide berth". (Some might consider those derogatory descriptions uncivilized, but not a hypocrite... like you)

Well, maybe it's not so surprising since you tend to, ahem, stretch the truth. A lot!

Matter of fact, since you told us you would sit on the sidelines and watch us knock ourselves out, you have posted in Misfires 173 times and in other forums only 16 times.

That's One hundred seventy three posts (173)in Misfires and only sixteen (16)in other forums King.

No wonder your credibility sucks!

and then there is this:

"there is only one god. one true god. and it is money!"


- Gordon Gekko

Craig and RHD45: I've never seen a civil discussion on Misfires. Nor should it be expected under its "rules." It's a representation of common frailties that usually don't burden discussions in the other forums. It's an entertaining and instructive glimpse into character, of what people say and what they do: civil and generous in one forum, filthy-mouthed, bigoted and insulting in Misfires.

Do you consider yourself a foul mouthed bigot, or an instigator who can reveal instructive glimses. You have been party to the incivility on occasion, haven't you.

And there's King's Misfires post number 174 since he told us he'd be an observer and infrequent commentator. He's like a moth drawn into a flame.

Who are you calling filthy mouthed, bigoted, and insulting Burger King? Oh, I get it... name calling is not uncivilized if it's not ad hominum... right? You think you're very clever, but you reveal your hypocrisy on a regular basis. And your dishonesty.

I leave it to others to make that judgement, craig. I've been called lots of things in 80-plus years but never a foul-mouthed bigot. I have been called a black-lover here, though. As for being uncivil, if I was it was not intended. Every newsman knows incivility gets a person nowhere---that's why it always makes the news columns---and a rule of interviewing is to give persons enough rope to hang themselves.

And there's Misfires post Number 175 for King since 3/7/13. This is like giving up drinking by drowning one's-self in alcohol. Is this some form of Aversion Therapy?

King, It seems to me that you were the one who referred to someone who shall go nameless as "filthy mouthed, bigoted, and insulting" to boot. No one referred to you as a foul mouthed bigot. Are you having reading comprehension difficulties again King?

Here's a little reminder... in your own words:



Is that a hangin' rope you're choking on King, or just your own words?

Well,I try real hard never to be bigoted and insulting unless it is in person so feel safe to respond to anything I may say in whatever manner you want.I am not close minded as I have lived long enough to know that there are few things that are black and white..at least to me.

You're right on few things being black and white. Needless silly confrontations begin with those who think differently, as they usually do in Misfires. True believers---not of faith but other circumstances--- are interesting subjects to me. Faithful I understand.

ok guys, I will try once again:

anybody ever read the writings of Thomas Aquinas?

an speakin of black and white reminds me of this quote by Ignatius Loyola:

That we may be altogether of the same mind and in conformity with the Church herself, if she shall have defined anything to be black which appears to our eyes to be white, we ought in like manner to pronounce it to be black. For we must undoubtingly believe, that the Spirit of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit of the Orthodox Church His Spouse, by which Spirit we are governed and directed to Salvation, is the same; ...

do any of you buy this? I have a hard time with it.

I find it revealing that all the great revelations,writings and discoveries in religion were all made when the average man was a completely ignorant clod.They happened when superstition ruled the day and magic and the supernatural were the explanations for the everyday happenings we take for granted.Ok, I guess "scientology" gets a nod as having been "discovered" in the 20th century.

Water was probably discovered back when the first pot of primordial soup was simmering, yet it's still around and probably still important. Maybe religion is special because if it's measured in earthly ways, it has certainly been shown to stand the test of time. There's tons of discussion up north of here on the general forum about nice guns hanging around and still being appreciated gun nuts who might be considered clods by their spouses.

I'm not against religion.I just don't think that it has the truth of how and why we are here.I think that there is a higher power in the universe but I don't believe man has been able to come up with what it is.I am leery of taking as the truth anything that was taken as fact without any skeptical research or independent thought.I think we greatly simplify to be able to grasp what is probably beyond our understanding.

Religion and upbringing is the reason I was not running the streets killing people 25 years ago.

Today lack of religion and family values is the reason for the high crime rate in the inner cities.

Today Religion in the inner city black churches only promote racism and hatred towards whites....most should be investigated and shut down.

Example Obama's pastor Rev'rin wright.

Combine that with the fact that most of the black race has only been civilized about 200 years and you have a recipe for wild disaster.

Religion has always been about control why you think the English brought the foreign religion of Christianity to England ?....as a way to control the money and populous.

My self I'd take religion over socialism any day.

Ole jOe don't pull many punches.

But I'm afraid I can't agree here.

He's waaay too optimistic.

Steinways being a possible exception- 55 white and 33 black keys!!!

Joe, I think religion got the blacks through the vigilante violence, enslavement, lynching and impoverishment for generations as it did whites as their masters. Turner and Brown aside, they never sought retribution.

Your prediction of a "recipe for wild disaster," however, is close to current writing that the American love affair with guns is because they are terrified that those who were subjugated will seek revenge. Do you think it will happen?

In spite of an imploding economy, white Americans becoming a minority, a lunatic far right and survivalist cults, I don't think so. But still James Baldwin said the film Birth of a Nation "is really an elaborate justification of mass murder."

And now, Joe.

wow! lotta mine blowin good stuff comin out here...

come on drew, chime in.

and then there is this:

http://news.yahoo.com/religious-people-a...23.html#upCr476

"... Even in extreme old age, intelligent people are less likely to believe, the researchers found - and the reasons why people with high IQs shun religion may not be as simple as previously thought."

This research thus seems conclusive:

Men like Washington, Jefferson, Adams and Lincoln, were all religious idiots.

Men like Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Castro were all genius atheists.

Then, there's Burger King...

Ah, so it's not the foul mouthed bigot. Seems to lean more towards factless emotion based pot stirring. If religion is going to be linked with trivial secular (sorry to snip out the talking points race play) justifications, maybe it could be thought of as the basis of the Constitution of a great nation.

The liberals have their own view of who to teach the children to pray to

The Constitution part is certainly interesting, Craig. There's the myth of a revolution providing a Constitution and great nation anointed by God. A foreign oligarchy was replaced by a native, slave-holding oligarchy. The Founding Fathers were deeply conservative with notions of blacks as property. Their Constitution carefully disenfranchised blacks, American Indians, women and the landless. Religion, I believe, prevented rebellion.

Thomas Paine came in handy during the Revolution but was persecuted for publishing a letter to Washington in 1796 in which he wrote: "The world will be puzzled to decide whether you are an apostate or an imposter, whether you have abandoned good principles, or whether you ever had any." Six persons attended Paine's funeral; two were black.

There's nothing trivial about religious faith and generally passive resistance of American blacks. Martin Luther King wasn't doing all that well during the civil rights struggle until Bayard Rustin of Quaker background introduced passive resistance strategies. God's teachings of fairness and love contributed to putting Obama in the White House. How else could it have happened?

"God" has never taught us anything. Men,"speaking" for God, have taught us the moral lessons that would seem obvious to anyone of average intelligence.

You can't be serious ?
God wanted (obama and his socialist doctrine ) to gut the middle class, enslave the poor-minorities in social welfare socialist "plantation" and bring massive reduction in those working for a living and the doubling-more then doubling of those on welfare food stamps and in poverty ? And thats "fairness" !

I'm putting on my waders.

Better get out the coal shovel too.

Heck...look at Chicago and Atlanta.....hell, look at Africa....not a lot of what we consider civilization in those places.

Now we all know coal is evil and makes the earth warm ,make that a grain shovel !

Obama, a man of fairness to the poor

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...liday-home.html

Obama got in the first time due to the natural tendency of savvy voters to elect the opposite party to national office, in order to provide a balance, as we go down the bumpy political road.

Obama got in the second time because more have nots voted than did haves. that is why the next time we elect a president, he or she will be from the opposite party. and they will promise to take care of everybody, haves as well as have nots...

Quote:
"Their OUR Constitution carefully disenfranchised blacks, American Indians, women and the landless. Religion, I believe, prevented rebellion"

Hmm:
Doesn't this strike you are perhaps the same groups of individuals, along with the 11 million leeches currently here illegally today, who could care less that we're now 17 TRILLION dollars in debt? Perhaps they don't care because they'll never be responsible for having to repay it.
I for one maintain that the U S Founding Fathers probably exercised a great deal of foresight in disenfranchising those who had NO VESTED INTEREST in assuring the ongoing prosperity of the United States.
Without those groups supporting him there would be no Kenyan occupying the White House today.
Jim

Americans wanted to put Obama in the White House. I never said God wanted anything, Dave. I said God's teachings of fairness and love contributed to it. Given a choice, Americans preferred a community organizer to a plutocrat. They set an example to a world burdened with racial and religious violence. The Bible gives short shrift to capitalism.

Fact is the white man let the blacks out of slavery....the blacks did nothing.

The way I see it they owe the white man....

Once again, Burger King is out with another bag of soggy Whoppers.

There is NOTHING in the US Constitution that specifies against any race (the XV Amendment was an affirmation) -- and most of the Fathers were adamant against slavery.

And, as to Kingy's second Whopper (with cheese) might I suggest (1) a completely corrupt media (2) a completely inept Republican party & candidate (3) the promise of endless "freebies" for the idiot masses and (4) massive voter fraud... just for starters.

Let me assure everyone that "God" had nothing to do with it.

(hell, He let Hitler get elected out of "fairness and love"!}

Jim, sanitizing lost glory, blaming have-nots for dysfunctional government and an economy imploding from weak regulations and greed, is a stretch to me. The prosperity of the United States grew on slavery, the blacks.

It will be interesting what citizens of colour make of our countries as whites become minorities within the lives of members here. Canada is muddling through a big multicultural experiment. God knows how it will turn out.

I expect the GOP will surprise all of us with its choices, its accommodation with the demographic realities. It won't look anything like the last time. The country clearing the colour barrier should make the rest easy.

To paraphrase a line from "Apocalypse Now"..

You are, quite literally, insane.

Actually, he's full of crap.

King:
What we have are vastly and extremely differing outlooks in regards to responsibility and accountability. I have no expectation that this abyss will ever be bridged. I've been observing what going on in the Country for 70 years and I find little positive that occurred due to the efforts of those with your extreme liberal views.
Fortunately by the time this Country sinks into the economic pit Liberals dug for it I'll be long gone. Again; I feel true sorrow for my grandchildren.
As an aside: Those of you who watched that Chinese commercial real estate development couple on 60 Minutes last Sunday were given some insight as to why China is now economically surging ahead after years of being smothered under the yoke of Socialism.
Jim

uh no, wrong again King
"Most" American did not want him elected,both times.Corrupt media,massive voter fraud-and and IRS in cahoots with the FEC to suppress tea party efforts and a very weak RINO (both times) is what got him elected.

He is now enjoying his vacation,playing golf with hedge fund titans and dining with the,again corrupt media (NPR last night) to further the goal of destroying thsi country just like Bill Ayers taught him !

Always entertaining King. One fellows 'have-nots', is another's constituent, or more literally, useful pawn. Actually, a constituent gets representation in return, not patronizing.

The US owes all to slaves and we need strong regs. If waders are in the discussion, it's much more interesting to read your stories of Black ducks dumping into a honey hole out on some pristine marsh.

"... stories of Black ducks dumping into a honey hole out on some pristine marsh."

Ooooo, now that's edgy.

And just another example of how black creatures can ruin something once pristine.

Like Detroit, Atlanta, Newark, Washington D. C., etc...


(no animus toward "Honey Holes," of course)

Bob, Americans almost unbelievably only came around in the 60s to a Catholic being president and not taking orders from the Pope. Few could have imagined a black president in our lifetimes. That's the fairness, tolerance and love I'm referring to, big changes of heart, rooted in Christ's teaching. It's a revolution in the country's ethos.

king: sadly, your faith in mankinds fairness, tolerance and love has little historical support. by our very nature, we have demonstrated for the most part, that we are an unfair, intolerant and hateful species. Christianity as preached by Jesus in the new testament, is a philosophy that strives to overcome mankinds natural evil side...thank god that we have the new testament as a road map to reform...now if we could just get everyone to follow it...what a better world we would have.

and joe, approximately 180,000 black men served in the union army during the civil war. so your suggestion that blacks did nothing to earn their freedom is false.

the tragedy was that the leaders of the confederacy did not recognize that if they did not enlist black soldiers with the promise of freedom, then the yankees would do it.

just think of the result, if general lee would have had a whole army corps of perhaps 50,000 black soldiers with him at gettysburg. and if picketts division was only the spearhead of a 60,000 man assault right through the center of the yankee army!

King: Your rhetoric is sickening. Why don't you keep your Canadian nose out of our American business? Why don't you spend your time finding a negro Prime Minister for Canada? I think that would be a great, great thing for you and Canada. Then, you really could identify with us and then we might then listen to at least some of your junk, which often times over complicates and makes little sense of the English language.

Less than 3% of Canadians are black so I imagine it might be hard to find one to run for office.

Mr. Billious Bob beat me to the punch on this statement which could only come from a hopelessly dillusional mind. Please show us one American city which became nicer and more prosperous after either Liberal Democrats or blacks (or both) became a controlling majority. Show us even one African country that ousted white colonial rule and did not either decline economically, or fall into murderous dictatorial chaos. Is it bigoted to merely observe and acknowledge the truth?



I could not have said it better myself. And it's nice to see so many people coming to that realization! It's not uncivil to tell the truth. It is uncivil to live a lie.

jOe is correct that the sin of slavery ended up being a blessing for their decendants. The poorest black in this country is likely better off than they would have been if their ancestors were not plucked from African nations that are now dirt poor, disease infested cesspools of human suffering and frequently tormented by depraved genocidal black rule.

And a story that is seldom told is that it was very often African blacks who conquered and sold other African blacks into slavery. To place the blame on the founders is inaccurate and dishonest. In the book, "A History of the American People" by Carman, Syritt, and Wishy, beginning on pg. 454, you can read about free blacks in this country who bought and held other blacks as slaves.

I also agree with those who understand that it was not God, but voter fraud, a corrupt Liberal Leftist media, fraudulent campaign funding by Soros and the Kochs, and Chicago style cheating that propelled Obama to two terms as the first non-citizen to become president.

The same Chicago style cheating allowed Joe Kennedy to tilt a very close race and elect his son John Kennedy. Nepotism gave his brother Bobby the Attorney Generals job. And Libtardism gave us forty years of dealing with baby brother Teddy and his rabid anti-gun attacks.

Willie Nelson's heroes have always been cowboys. King Brown's heroes have always been Anti-Gun Socialists.

I think the democracy we both aspire to requires a strong middle class, a reasonably good educational system, and a strong industrial base, all now sliding precipitously. The "abyss" isn't between our conservative and liberal notions of the pursuit of happiness and good government. The current social instability and political paralysis shaping the debate will cause a popular backlash (and breakdown of American society) from the bottom third that the corporate elite refuses to respond to---that's the both of us, Jim. I anticipate changes in non-reality-based belief systems. I believe in the United States.

Brown's hero is Walter Duranty.

buzz: your rhetoric is in fact very sad...do you really believe that ones race some how is a biological indicator of ones social and political values?

some people believe government can be a solution to our problems. others believe government is a source of our problems. both are right, depending on the situation...but, regardless of ones social and political beliefs, it has nothing to do with ones race or genetic heritage.

I ask you to consider the differences between say an al sharpton and allen west...both are black men; but that is where their similarities end.

keith: kennedy got elected pres. because he came across better on tv than did nixon. it was the hair doo that did it for him! plus, it was time for the pendulum to swing back the other way. ike was a good pres, but it was time to let the other side in for a while to balance things.

As in the US, many blacks here hold high office, including some of the most distinguished posts in the country. A recent Governor-General, the Queen's representative, is black. A woman.

Good point ed. A boy who is raised by wolves will probably act like a wolf. Al Sharpton was obviously raised by Libtards, race hustlers, and Democrats. Allen West was not.

It's not blacks that ruin American cities. It's Black Democrats and White Democrats who espouse the principals of the Great Society, redistribute wealth, spend more than they take in, and kick the can down the road to hide their irresponsible and idiotic behavior. The proof and the truth is all around you. To ignore the truth is no better than telling a lie. I was thinking of King as I wrote that sentence.

And I'd bet that if Detroit was populated with the likes of Allen West or Clarence Thomas, Condoleeza Rice, and Walter Williams... the Motor City would be financially solvent and a nice place to live.

edit: I should add that Nixon's hair was uglier when he finally did get elected... twice. But without Joe Kennedy buying enough votes to swing Illinois, Nixon would have been in the White House years sooner. And maybe even impeached years sooner as well.

king: i too believe in the united states. for better or worse the united states is not perfect. but it is the best society that man has come up with so far...

and in order to make ourselves better, we have to try different solutions to solving our problems...so, if some of what ob and his ilk works then that is a good thing...but, we gotta keep trying to make this a better place for us all...keeping in mind that freedom is not free and that someone will always have to pay the price of our freedom.

Buzz, we have a saying in Canada that when the US sneezes we get a cold. We're your biggest customer. Your business is our business. American culture is so pervasive here we hardly need a black prime minister to know who you are. (I had the good fortune to work in the US as a reporter for years. It's why I admire the country; its citizens usually get it right over time.) Sorry about the English language.

Sure ed, baby steps forward and $8 trillion in additional debt backward. Now there's a formula for long term health of a nation. Snuff out that crack pipe and come back to reality please!

There's plenty historical support for faith in social improvement, Ed, which I attribute in part to closer adherence to Commandments and scripture. (Back to doctrine!) What happened behind factory and mine gates, those horrifying Dickensian conditions, was once none of society's business. What happened behind closed doors in our communities was none of our business, either. Now it's a criminal offence here to not report suspected abuse. Than in more recent times---Canada's Michael Ignatieff had a hand in this one---what happened behind sovereign borders, ethnic cleansing and the like, was no other country's business until the Right to Protect (RTP) concept was imposed in southeastern Europe. Sort of Dostoyevsky's "Each one is responsible to everyone for everything."

King Brown,As an American I think you probably can guess what I think of royalty in general and their representatives.

Boy oh boy, King's really running the manure spreader now. First the self professed Athiest is again preaching about the Commandments and Scripture... then he goes on about the horrible conditions in mines and factories which makes one thankful that a Republican, Richard Nixon, signed OSHA into law... then he speaks about what happened behind closed doors in communities, and one can only imagine that he is talking about Democrat oppression of blacks and Ku Klux Klansmen like Sens. Rob't. Byrd or Strom Thurmond, who holds the record for a fillibuster to keep the Civil Rights Act from passing... then he talks about the "recent" ethnic cleansings and "recent" efforts by the southeastern European Right to Protect Act to stop these genocides which were "no other country's business" ... meanwhile, he expects us to believe that it was Liberal Socialist reforms that protected targeted peoples... I guess he forgot about all the times the U.S military came to the aid of oppressed peoples... maybe he forgot that Jews almost became extinct in the 1940's.

There has been plenty of "social improvement" over the history of this Nation. Too bad that precious little of it has come from Liberal Leftists. What little they can lay claim to is the embarrasing Great Society efforts which have impoverished minorities and led to the destruction of their families and social fabric and made them unwitting dependant wards of the Socialist State.

King must think we're all as stupid as the poor bastards the Libtards have screwed over in order to entrench their agenda driven madness. Either that or he's just plain dishonest. Considering that he's the guy who professes to despise Misfires, yet can't stay away from it, I would opine that he's just plain dishonest.

keith: ah...the national debt issue...how much is too much? it does not seem to matter how many trillons it is? is 20 tril too much? how about 40 or 100?

I'll bet your thoughts are the same as mine. I'll even bet there are more British royalty admirers in the US than there are in Canada.

Yup- me too- sort of like the thoughts of the men who signed our Declaration of Independence-- "Up Yours, Georgie Boy (III) or also AKA- King George The mad King (aren't they all_ Old Hank Windsor wasting all that good "Noble Nookie" by whacking off heads- what a shame, but Noblese Oblige, Pip Pip and Bloody (at least for Ann Boylen) Good Show, Eh???

Yeah Ed, I had a slight oversight and meant to qualify my statement with term 'socialist negroe'. Certainly I did not intend to appear a bigot. In terms of King, I really do like the old boy. I'm just growing weary of too much left wing liberal poppycock and would rather reminisce about how America used to be, like when my hero President Reagan was running the show. Sorry about being too vague.

Reading here the dimensions of American sorrow surrounding political paralysis, social breakdown and economic decline, mention of the national debt seems spurious, a red herring to divert attention.

With so many aspiring to the American dream of being rich and doing as they please---that's why so many vote to cut taxes of the rich and carry a greater burden themselves---are they really concerned about national debt?

You're onto something, Ed. Does the national debt really matter at this critical juncture of nine out of 10 Americans disapproving of their governance, of a country that built a world empire and now can't find consensus on anything.

Setting aside the value of its surpassing intellectual, creative and spiritual (doctrine) capacity, the US national debt is a gnat's eyelash of what the country is worth, and Americans are holding a lot of that debt themselves.

Debt is serious but making it a political issue now is mowing the lawn while the roof is on fire.

The rich are already carrying the lions share of the burden....the poor carry none of it....and the middle class pick up whats left. Fair would be making everyone share the burden....if everyone paid their fair share..then more of them would actually care about the waste and abuse.

The tax burden can be looked up, it's fact, but King doesn't care. His response is only based on feelings. What is note worthy though is his fiscal feelings do not consider cuts in government spending, only increases in taxing, borrowing and printing. Sure, Americans hold some of their debt particularly in a ponzi type portfolio, but so do enemies of America and King sounds like he would have us sell off more of the country to...? Not political, huh.

The color of a mans skin means nothing.

The difference is Allen West is a man....

Al Sharpton is a bigoted racist [censored] that will spend his eternity in a fiery hell if there is one..

guess you guys don't wana talk about religious doctrine...so its back to politics we go...how boring...so redundant.

anyway, gimmie five guesses as to who is going to be our next pres after ob...winner gets a prize.

Didn't you just scold someone for taking King's religious ball and running with it. I thought the love and tolerance of Christianity brought us all this racial kubaya based on nothing more than the election of color of skin.

Debt is least of your problems, Craig. The British Empire and American Empire were built on ever-expanding national debt. Borrowing paid for Wellington to defeat Napoleon, the Royal Navy to rule the seven seas, Halsey's fleet, Kaiser's Liberty ships, US financing of the Red Army and reconstruction of post-war Europe. Read the history of origin of national debt in England in 1692. Macaulay's History Volume IV page 259.

"The power of a society to pay debt is proportioned to the progress that society has made in industry, in commerce, and in all the arts and sciences which flourish under the benignant influence of freedom and of equal law. The inclination of a society to pay debt is proportioned to the degree in which that society respects the obligations of plighted faith." Page 265

Elites sucked the middle class into the notion that tax cuts stimulate capital spending by businesses, driving a wedge between the middle class and the poor. Spending is primarily influenced by GDP growth trends, interest and exchange rates and oil prices. Big business and finance is sitting on bags of money. In Canada business investment spending since the 80s has declined despite repeated tax cuts, while cash flow has increased. Most economists now are concluding that austerity is the wrong way to ending the recession.

The US is still the powerhouse of the world.

seems like our economy has been based on funny money since we started shippin our smoke stack jobs overseas...

we gotta come up wid somethin tangible to sell to the rest o de world, like maybe gas, coal an food?

Not sure what kind of crazy economics course you fell for but I sure hope you get your money back !

BTW austerity WORKS and that was PROVEN in Canada and the FACTS prove it

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/07/macroeconomic_austerity_works.html

"How did these 1993-to-2006 austerity measures affect Canada's economic performance? During the high-spending period between 1980 and 1992, per capita GDP-PPP in constant dollars rose by only 12.4%. During the corresponding austerity interval from 1993 through 2006, constant-dollar per-capita GDP-PPP rose by 27.4%. A clear win for austerity"

"After a massive increase (over fourfold as a percentage of the economy) in Canada's net debt between 1980 and 1992, the austerity period saw the debt reduced from 64% of GDP in 1993 to only 26% in 2006. Similarly, after gross debt doubled between 1980 and 1992, austerity reduced it from 96% of GDP in 1993 to 70% in 2006.

In 1980, Canada's unemployment rate was 7.5%. After years of excessive government spending, by 1992, it was 11.2%. Along comes austerity, and the unemployment rate falls from 11.4% in 1993 to only 6.3% in 2006.

Macroeconomic austerity doesn't work? Absolute nonsense. During its austerity period, Canada's per capita government expenditures fell, its per capita GDP increased far more rapidly than during the prior period of rapid spending growth, its large deficits turned into large surpluses, its debt was dramatically reduced, and its unemployment rate fell like a rock. This is a lesson that not only the rest of the world needs to heed, but apparently also Canadian economists who have recently advised a faux conservative administration.

Only a true liberal believes you can spend your way out of debt.....so its no wonder so many of them end up in bankruptcy court.

Nearly every liberal and conservative country is following the Keynesian formula to get out of recession, doc: spend when times are bad, cut when they're good. Investing in public (and private) capital and infrastructure projects are a more effective means of economic stimulation than cutting taxes.

A few of our members remember the Great Depression, as I do, when a generation benefitted from social programs which were expanded by post-war governments. People then thought of paying taxes as a gift we give to each other (doctrine drum-roll to keep on thread) but now for good reasons (paying more and getting less) most people consider taxes as something taken from us.

king: there is a big difference between relief, ie: helping the needy during hard times and redistribution, ie: taking from the haves and giving to the have nots, so they will vote your way...

a chicken in every pot is one thing. but, permanent government support in the form of electronic debt cards is something else, don't you agree?

Nope,right under your nose Canada has once again PROVEN that austerity WORKS ! Were are your facts King ??

The idiot we have in charge only talks of investing in our infrastructure....fact is anything comes out of his mouth is just talk.

By the time he leaves office our infrastructure will be dead.

ed, it really does matter how much it is. Debt has long been used to finance wars or expansion by nations, but whenever the ability to repay the debt is outstripped by additional debt and the interest costs to service it, the inevitable result is decline in economic power and overall decline in the standard of living for the citizenry. Look at France chasing away its' wealthiest citizens by imposing confiscatory tax rates. We've been doing the same thing here on a lesser scale. But the rich are just too smart to sit and watch it happen. When they go, so does their tax money AND their charity and philantropy. Raising marginal tax rates and limiting deductions is only a feel good solution that scarcely trims the debt while it just kills charity and philantropy. King Brown frequently references what he sees as America's choice for a talentless community organizer over a wealthy and successful aristocrat. He will never tell you about the tremendously higher percentage of income that Romney paid in toto... taxes, and charitable contributions vs. his hero Obama.

King Brown is an avowed Socialist, and he is fast and loose with the truth. Everything he has to say about this subject has been demonstrated to end in failure. We really shouldn't care what a certain percentage of economists have to say when our own eyes can see what has already happened. One of the classic ways to extend the inevitable is to inflate the currency in order to pay principal and interest in cheaper dollars, pounds, rubles, etc. We've seen hyperinflations in our own lives and in our own hemisphere. We've seen Argentinians spending their money as quickly as they made it because their pesos were losing so much value in only a matter of days. One of the greatest fears of the Great Recession of 2008 to present was that a hyperinflationary scenario could occur. It could still happen, and anyone who thinks we're out of danger is an ostrich with its head up its own ass. Obama is already trying to loosen the mortgage lending standards that Clinton started which caused the meltdown. Derivitives exposure by the big financials is almost too
large to fathom. The complexities and fragility of these markets is dwarfed only by the devastation that their collapse would create. Japan is still suffering from its' lost decade. It could be much worse here, and globally, if we stay on the runaway train with Socialist morons.

We all know what a gun or a truck or gasoline cost 40 years ago and what they cost now. We also know that for most, wages have not kept pace with inflation, and taxes take a larger percentage of what we do earn. But Socialist Libtards like King think that government ought to suck more out of productive citizens through taxes and inflationary monetary policy and redistribute it to those who are unproductive. Bigger government (which produces nothing) is always better to a Leftist Liberal. We see Greece and Spain and Italy becoming a huge drain upon the more fiscally responsible parts of the European Union. For King to come here and say that our massive debt is no problem is just stupid.

We are not spending more in times of recession and tightening our belts in better times. We are just constantly piling on more, at an ever increasing rate... in good times and bad. King knows this, but he is too dishonest to ever admit it. He can cite all the experts he wants. And I can cite Ph.D's who told us we were entering an ice age in the 1970's.

Although I've nearly always disagreed with King, I did think he was probably smarter than guys like homer or nca225. The gap appears to be narrowing.

Unaware of electronic cards, Ed, but surely efficacy dealing with unemployable (for whatever reason) social welfare dependants. The weak, poor and slackers will always be with us.

And in no part of the world has Kensian policies ever worked. And there is a difference, (picking one randomly) in fact a huge difference between temporary assistance...(like unemployment benifits)) and welfare where there is no end game or incentive to ever leave it once the free money starts coming in.

You don't even collect unemployment without showing weeekly that you have been applying for jobs..... Kensian crap like welfare is litterally pissing away good money after bad, when you know there will never be a positive return on the investment. Hell a life of liesure is mighty inticing if I didn't grow accustomed to the stuff I have that I worked hard to pay for.

US and Canada didn't engage austerity. They primed the money pump like crazy. They put the big boys back in business with blue-collar money, yours and mine, remember? Many citizens argued it would have better to let them go down. Facts: See The Great Revenue Robbery, edited by Richard Swift, Between the Lines, Toronto, 2013. It demolishes the theory that corporate tax cuts stimulate capital spending.

"Are there no prisons, no jails, no workhouses?"

once again your full of crap with NO facts to back up your posts !
In 1993, Jean Chretien (Liberal Party) won the election and appointed Paul Martin as finance minister with an austerity mandate. Chretien was prime minister from 1993 to 2003. Martin won the Liberal Party leadership race after Chretien left office in 2003, and he governed from 2003 to 2006.

Martin's financial reforms and steady economic management skills reduced general government total expenditures from 52.9% of GDP in 1993 down to 38.8% in 2006. Martin's last full year as prime minister was 2005, at which point the expenditures were only 38.6% of GDP.


Over the 1993-2006 timeframe under Martin's leadership, these per-capita expenditures declined from the 1992 high to $13,879 in 2006, reaching a low of $12,707 in 1997 -- only a few years after the austerity measures began.

How did these 1993-to-2006 austerity measures affect Canada's economic performance? During the high-spending period between 1980 and 1992, per capita GDP-PPP in constant dollars rose by only 12.4%. During the corresponding austerity interval from 1993 through 2006, constant-dollar per-capita GDP-PPP rose by 27.4%. A clear win for austerity.





Thats austerity !

Dave, Dave, you're talking about the Liberals balancing the federal books in the early 90s. It was tough, real tough.The recession and Keynesian consequences came 15 years later.

It's true Canada's earlier fiscal management got us through the recession better than any others in the G20 but Keynes entered during the recession. That's partly why the majority Conservative government is in high deficits now.

It isn't happenstance that The Bank of England has just hired our former Bank of Canada governor, Mark Carney, to get Great Britain on its feet. First time the venerable bank hired a foreigner for the job in its 400-year history.

I'm in your debt for bringing to the board's attention what a country can do to yank itself out of the hole, by putting its mind to it instead of playing to the gallery as it does in Washington.

Wow, that was an interesting way to attempt to bullshit your way out of multiple lies. After multiple posts citing the alleged benefits of putting our country into an ever deeper hole, you now tell us that austerity was beneficial. Is that because Libtards see any savings, or prosperity that comes from saving, as a potential pool that can be drained and redistributed?

Still not working Burger King. We are in your debt for telling us so many whoppers.

If it doesn't work, why do countries follow Keynes's theory? One of the most interesting Keynes engagements was with FDR during the New Deal. I was caught up in this while researching a story on the Nova Scotian from a nearby village, Lauchlin Currie, "a selfless soul who came south to save the Republic," according to John Kenneth Galbraith in his best-seller Age of Uncertainty, Page 220.

Currie's role was to explain Keynes to FDR's whiz kids, including Galbraith. Currie later lost his US citizenship and went off to do development work in Columbia. I wasn't interested in Keynes but casually sleuthing whether Currie may have been the never-found Washington mole mentioned in the Penkovsky Papers. Galbraith told me Currie, also formerly on the Harvard faculty,was not a Communist.

If it works, why are so many nations that follow Keynesian theory in dire straits? Answer: You can't just follow the parts you want and continue to pile up debt in good times and bad just so you can advance a Libtard utopian vision. When you see the Libtard utopian vision fail, you cannot keep repeating the same stupidity and expect different results.

Keynesian economics has NEVER worked and you have ZERO proof it ever did just babbling BS that you famous for !



In 1980, Canada's unemployment rate was 7.5%. After years of excessive government spending, by 1992, it was 11.2%. Along comes austerity, and the unemployment rate falls from 11.4% in 1993 to only 6.3% in 2006.

Austerity works and Stimulus DOES NOT

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-07/why-austerity-works-and-fiscal-stimulus-doesn-t.html

After five years of financial crisis, the European record is in: Northern Europe is sound, thanks to austerity, while southern Europe is hurting because of half- hearted austerity or, worse, fiscal stimulus. The predominant Keynesian thinking has been tested, and it has failed spectacularly.

The starkest contrasts are Latvia and Greece, two small countries hit the worst by the crisis. They have pursued different policies, Latvia strict austerity, and Greece late and limited austerity. Latvia saw a sharp gross domestic product decline of 24 percent for two years, which was caused by an almost complete liquidity freeze in 2008. This necessitated the austerity that followed.

Yet Latvia’s economy grew by 5.5 percent in 2011, and in 2012 it probably expanded by 5.3 percent, the highest growth in Europe, with a budget deficit of only 1.5 percent of GDP. Meanwhile, Greece will suffer from at least seven meager years, having endured five years of recession already. So far, its GDP has fallen by 18 percent. In 2008 and 2009, the financial crisis actually looked far worse in Latvia than Greece, but then they chose opposite policies. The lessons are clear.

Doesn't US have highest incarceration rate in the world, Joe, a big private and public employer, economic stimulus---and enormous drag on taxpayers. Are you suggesting it's less expensive than social welfare?

I don't know if US crime is going down, as it is here, but our federal government is following the US example by building more jails and penitentiaries. I don't know latest figures but think cost is around $50,000 annually per inmate.

Workhouses? My guess is it's less expensive to bring in hundreds of thousands of motivated immigrants on work permits to do seasonal work our citizens won't do or can't do. Productivity of the dragooned would be near zero!

DaveK, I'm sure you are noticing how King deftly dances around any facts and simply moves on to even more Libtard fantasy. Now he's talking about the costs of incarceration while ignoring the fact that a career criminal costs society much much more when they are on the street committing crimes. I'm only talking about monetary costs and omitting the human suffering they cause. And he ignores the fact that it was the Great Society, which is a breeding ground for fatherless men, with no morals and no values, who go on to become incarcerated. Why debate whether incarceration of violent career criminals is more or less expensive than social welfare programs when it is social welfare programs that exacerbate the problem in the first place? King seems incapable of telling or even grasping the truth. You have to wonder about his mental state.


King, under Canadian National Health Care, how long do you suppose it would take you to get the psychiatric help you obviously need?

Point one: Compare the US to Russia or Communist China...

Point two: Welfare blacks are driving MB cars here...

Point three: "motivated immigrants" take jobs from US citizens. Period. Except blacks on welfare who get MORE that way than by working.

(it's waaay too easy jousting with a vacuous mind)

There are no flies on Aslund, a free marketer. Krugman, another esteemed practitioner, provides evidence to the contrary. They are opinions.

Unregulated, anything-goes fiscal policy---which anticipates busts as integral to the blow-and-go "capitalist" system---got us in this mess in the first place.

We may agree on that.

Greenspan told us this couldn't happen, safeguards were built into the system. He admitted later he didn't see it coming. So much for weak fiscal regulation.

There were few complaints when Washington started spending.

Your 'facts' and role models King, and the anecdotes you choose to frame them look like intolerant left wing ideological extremism. Is there room for a person or thought that sits in the center or on the right side of the aisle. Civility seems like a petty charade.

Most of the crime IS committed by people already getting Social welfare benifits.....they never earned anything so they have no respect for other peoples things.

If they had to actually work if they wanted to eat...they wouldn't have time to be committing crimes.

What was that???!!!??? You've got to be kidding. No, you've got to be lying again. Unless you are talking about George Washington.

So, how much time do we give bo to see if his policies, not his skin color, work. Is it possible to move beyond blame Bush and own an economy. As a journalist, you'd know there're many complaints about spending 'to not let a crisis go to waste, and do things you thought could not be done before'. As an extreme ideologue, I gather that there could never be enough tax and spend to satisfy your feelings.

Yes Keith I did notice and pleased to see it was not lost in the pile that comes out of the other end of the horse !.
Typical liberal tactic, ignore facts,regurgitate rhetoric and when faced with overwhelming evidence your wrong change the subject ! He pulled the same crap when he thought the NRA was losing the gun control debate-and was once again proven wrong.

And then quote's Krugman the worlds laughing stock economist ! The drink yourself sober of Keynesian economics that has failed time and time again !

http://reason.com/blog/2010/06/24/paul-krugman-now-laughingstock

"

Wolfgang Franz, who heads the German government’s economic advisory panel known as the Wise Men, tore into Krugman — and the US — in an op-ed in the German business daily Wednesday, titled “How about some facts, Mr. Krugman?”

“Where did the financial crisis begin? Which central bank conducted monetary policy that was too loose? Which country went down the wrong path of social policy by encouraging low income households to take on mortgage loans that they can never pay back? Who in the year 2000 weakened regulations limiting investment bank leverage ratios, let Lehman Brothers collapse in 2008 and thereby tipped world financial markets into chaos?” he wrote."

Dave, a person saying something they know is not true is a liar. Aslund, Krugman, Friedman and others are contradictory but they are not liars. Their different opinions are part of the reason why economics is often called the dismal science.

Religious denominations interpret and proclaim differently from scriptures of what they believe but few here would call them liars. My point is that when things went bust the big economies generally went to Keynes as a reasonable option.

The financial sector and auto plants were deemed "too big to fail."Leaving another crater in downtown New York, one of the world's great financial centres, wasn't a rational option. Public spending put Humpty Dumptys back on the wall again.

It pleases me, from your Franz quote above, that we appear to agree on what "tipped world financial markets into chaos." But essentially the choice is between low tax, high private consumption and one with higher taxes but also more public services, programs and stronger communities: Scandinavia and others.

As a liberal Canadian I'm inclined more to fairness. The US generally places a higher value on freedom although from the last votes that seems to be changing for reasons earlier identified here by many members.

King ,
you agree with this quote ?
"Which country went down the wrong path of social policy by encouraging low income households to take on mortgage loans that they can never pay back"

This of course refers to the CRA ( which forced banks,through community organizer's like B Hussien Obama, to loan money to people who could not and did not pay it back !)

I don't know the meaning of your post, Craig. Who are my role models you are referring to? Galbraith spoke to Currie's credentials. I cited Currie's mentoring Keynesian theory to Galbraith and others during the New Deal. What "facts" look like intolerant left-wing extremism?

Civility, Craig, doesn't enter into it. Civility is the glue that hold society together. It's the idea of toleration. It's not being "nice." It's the tie that binds people and countries dedicated to peace, order and good government. It's not looking for bogeymen where there aren't any.

so, if god is dead? who killed um?

The bogeyman doesn't enter in to it, at least not for me. What matters to me is policy based on socialism ideology. I'd hope you might imagine your grandkid's future. Tough to recommend work hard, keep you nose to the grindstone and it'll pay off, when you would punitively tax them to redistribute to a neighbor who you deem has some unfairness in their life.

Our six children have decent educations, work hard and it's paid off in healthy and happy families in strong communities. They consider it a privilege to pay taxes, as Nancy and I do and my parents did, because it pays for the amenities of civilization.

We think taxes should go to those less fortunate in need, just as Americans do, because taxes also go to sectors and causes for which we don't agree. You bet I'm willing to pay through universal healthcare for a neighbour in need. Gladly, and pay and pay, grateful that I don't need the care myself.

Do I like paying for unemployment insurance and social welfare for slackers? Of course not. Who would? I also don't like topping up the treasuries of corporate welfare bums. Citizens of the US and Canada realize that millions currently on the street with little hope were put there by corporate greed.

They are cast in a lonely orbit of despair through no fault of their own, Craig. It may be your way to say suck it up, you're on your own. It's not the American way. Turning your back on the deserving, weak and poor is neither Christian or human. It's the antithesis of any common religious doctrine.
.

uh king, may I suggest that most of those millions currently on the street were put there by there own failures. corporate greed has little to do with their situation...we used to live in a capitalist society where competition and change were the driving forces of the economy. those who were eager to compete and those who anticipated change thrived. those who did not, were left behind or became redundant. that used to be the nature of our world. the strong survived. the weak perished...now we are living in a nanny state, where failure is excused. one no longer has to work in order to survive. government will now take care of us all...and all we have to do is give up our freedom and put ourselves in their care...

and remember, the lord helps those who help themselves...and, all pigs are equal, but some are more equal.

No, Ed, the workers in those plants whose jobs were shipped offshore and who lost their jobs and benefits from the Great Recession were casualties of marketing and fiscal mismanagement They didn't fail in their obligations to their employers. Employers reneged on their social and fiduciary responsibilities.

You must have a memory longer than mine if you can remember a capitalist society in the United States, Canada or anywhere else in the western world. There was a time when our societies were bloody in tooth and claw with money crushing any dissent, union-busting, lynching, power accruing to everyone but citizens and the electorate held in contempt and derision.

None of that occurred within living memory, Ed. Today we lived in a mixed economy of private and public enterprise as mutually dependant on each other as Siamese twins where citizens demand closer adherence to their constitutional rights. Call it socialism, nanny state, whatever you like but the US today is an expression of the will of the people through their legislatures.

Americans made, deliberately and consciously and democratically, conservatives and liberals together, the most powerful country on earth, generous and violent and empathetic, of surpassing church attendance with a belief, American critics have observed, "of a right, even a divine right, to kill others to purge the earth of evil."

Some members' Misfire sentiments---they're not representative of the great majority of Americans---sometimes make me wonder if the core faith of the United States can be found in the Gospels. But reality always emerges and, to answer your question above, it's apparent to me the God of love and tolerance is alive and well in America.

king: I grew up in the dog eat dog, competitive business world of nyc, in the seventies and eighties...much of what you describe above did not exist in that world.

and much of what you describe above sounds very nice...but, who is going to pay for it without a vibrant capitalist driven economy generating the gnp necessary to support it?

to paraphrase Maggie Thatcher: socialism works until you run out of other peoples money to spend.

Quote:
"No, Ed, the workers in those plants whose jobs were shipped offshore and who lost their jobs and benefits from the Great Recession were casualties of marketing and fiscal mismanagement They didn't fail in their obligations to their employers. Employers reneged on their social and fiduciary responsibilities"

This above statement simply isn't true and I have first hand experience from working in the automotive industry. The UAW and IBEW ran wages and benefits up to the point where the companies were no longer competitive. At one time the Japanese automotive companies had, for example, a $600 assembly edge over the American companies. I don't know what the advantage is today.
Yes mistakes were made at the managerial level as well. Clinging to outmoded manufacturing processes was certainly one of them. Robotics was not embraced here until well after it was in common use elsewhere.
However; The primary management failure was caving into the excessive union demands which put American manufactured at a competitive disadvantage.
A more current view of extreme union abuse is what occurred in Wisconsin until the new Governor took on these public employee unions and reversed the stranglehold they had on that State.
Jim

That's the big question, isn't it: Who's going to pay for strong, safe communities when the top 10 per cent is creaming it and the rest are falling behind, both parents working if they can, low birth rate, robots, globalization, cheap labour overseas, increasing costs of looking after you and me. Biblical injunctions of neighbour's keeper, Good Samaritans, eye of the needle won't get us through. (Jesus raging, long black whip cracking, just popped in my head!) Which circles back to members' notions here of social breakdown, public backlash, revolution, and speculation that fear of a vengeful underclass is driving survivalist cults, private militias, guns and ammunition on back order, and America's love of guns. Washington is Nero. Political theatre is comedy. The country, according to US polls, has forgotten how to govern.The looney right blames all of it on a "born-in-Kenya black moron in the White House."

Holy crap!

For once in his deranged (and endless) blather, Burger King is correct!

He must be sobering up.

Maybe because the "born in Kenya" half black moron is STILL keeping all of his records as greater secrets than actual national secrets are.

Anyone that sneaky is hiding something for a reason.

And since he's been in charge the last 5 years...it actually IS all his fault. Bush got blamed for everything that didn't go wrong for the 8 years he was in office....and Obama spent 4 years blaming Bush for everything Obama actually screwed up.

He probibly still is only its not getting reported like it was.

Jim, what you say is true from your experience, and you spread blame around. I was a trade unionist with the American Newspaper Guild which evolved into a Canadian union of its own. A very rich man, Robert Kelly, made comments similar to yours to Halifax business people recently. The Canadian/Nova Scotian former head of the Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, also chancellor of St. Mary's University here, blamed unions for our current economic woes.

A Canadian professor of the university's Faculty of Commerce with a doctorate from University of Warwick, England, School of Industrial and Business Studies would have none of it. Larry Haiven wrote an op-ed for the province's newspaper of record, The Halifax Chronicle-Herald, headed by editors "Don't Blame The Unions." This is part of what he said:

"How unfair and inaccurate. After a financial meltdown caused by financial speculation, it is indeed rich to blame the 99 per cent for pursuing a better life through one of the most effective vehicles available---unions.

"Evidence across the country is that unions, even the strongest and largest bargaining units, have not done better than the workforce as a whole and the public sector workers have done worse than private. Were it not for trade unions, earning figures for the entire workforce would be lower than they are.

"Right-to-work states in the US, by and large, happen to be the low productivity ones. Across the world, highly unionized countries tend to be among the most productive and prosperous. A World Bank report a few years ago touted collective bargaining as an important contributor to coordinated labour markets.

"The financial crisis still plaguing us was fuelled precisely by the growing inequality in earnings, placing piles of capital in the hands of speculators dreaming up even more unstable tricks to produce results."

Another view, Jim. Germany is a high-wage economy with strong unions. I think they build cars.

Thank you.

Quote:
"Another view, Jim. Germany is a high-wage economy with strong unions. I think they build cars."

Those in the automotive trade fully understand that the German car manufacturing situation is somewhat unique. The demand for Porsche's,Mercedes and BMW's is essentially inelastic to use the economic term. In other words a prospective Porsche buyer doesn't really care whether the car is priced at $80,000 or $120,000. The want a Porsche and they'll buy one essentially irrespective of the cost.
But we digress:
Again all one has to do is look at the economic abyss that Wisconsin was pulled back from or the unionized worker situation in Greece and it's apparent that the negative effect of public unions cannot be tolerated forever. These two crisis were caused by bloated union demands and there is NO other explanation for them.
We went through a horrific economic and budgetary crisis in my own State of Arizona when Napolitano was running the show. I am grateful to Obama for ONE thing and that was getting her the hell out of Arizona. Under Governor Jan Brewer, a fiscal conservative, we're gone from a billion dollar annual deficit to a projected 800 million dollar surplus in 2013.
IMO: Public employee unions should be outlawed period!

Thanks, Jim. I don't know anything about cars and the German circumstance re marketing is certainly interesting. I just noted on google that Germany as world's fourth biggest manufacturer produces nearly 12 million motor vehicles yearly, half and half at home and overseas, including millions of cars besides Porsche. Any idea how Germany is prosperous and productive with strong unions while others vote for lower wages without them to make ends meet? Is it more technically advanced than the US? In this dog-eat-dog world, is US competing with lower wages the road to the bottom? I respect your opinion.

I think you just told us a bit ago that you grand kids are going to pay and happily so. They must be perpetuating that top ten percent cream thing because it doesn't sound like they're falling behind.

Sorry to snip out your attempts at civility, but why all the gloom and doom. Can't you see a healthier and thus happier nation due to money saving o-care. All our energy costs have gone down and climate change has been reversed by 'investment' in some things green. Food stamps have eliminated the hungry. The world loves the US and military is becoming unnecessary. Gay pride has taken a fair share of the money pot.

How could you call him a black moron. He has confirmed your feeling about the importance of division and prejudice to advance an agenda.

Good for you and your kids, I pay taxes too. You don't know a bit about me. I'd never turn my back on the truly needy. 'Deserving'?, deserve what, a double gun or maybe a 'strong community'. 'Weak' as in can't hold your liquor, or can't climb up on a bar stool. 'Poor', are you attaching a stigma, are you saying if they receive welfare then they are in their place.

On all those points King, you and your kids can bypass the tax system and give away money directly in the way you see fit. Just one catch, not a little bit to make you feel better about yourself, but redistribute until your kids live in a middling community and you elevate those poor communities to the standard that your kids will step down to.

Oh, I see, not for you and yours, just those who you are able to demonize.

this declining economy of ours goes back beyond ob...nafta is a good place to start tracing the recent decline of our domestic economic capitalist system...

and then there is the fact that gw increased the federal debt greater than any pres since fdr....medicare d, without revenues to fund it is really dumb! and making war, without revenues to pay for it is even dumer!

and then, the icing on the cake is the keynesian economics that ob has been pursuing for the past several years...never has worked here in the past. no reason it will work now.

hopefully, a guy like trump will be our next pres and along with a friendly congress, begin to bring us back to a capitalist, profit driven society.

I am going to defer to one of our European members in regards to the question about other cars like Volkswagen which certainly have price sensitive buyers. I am not aware of what the relationship is between Volkswagen and their unions.
I had to go back and re-familiarize myself with J M Keynes as I've slept a few nights since reading anything about him. Yep: He's the government must control the economy economist and he's recently fallen out of favor in many courts.
As an Aside: I didn't realize until I looked the Keynes was a avowed homosexual.** Well he was an avowed homosexual until he reached middle age and fell in love with a Russian Ballerina whom he married. From that point on he was apparently straight which raises a question for me.
The Gays and their supporters claim they are born Gay and no effort to turn them straight will be successful. Keynes seems to pretty much belie this belief.

**I doubt if this was brought up in my Macro economics class back in the 1960s!!

Yeah, Keynes was gay as so many other luminaries reveal themselves to us every day. Spiritual belief aside, sexual preference isn't worth thinking about to me except when it comes to pedophiles.

I suspect many marriages are arrangements, peculiar or otherwise, maybe even a majority before their end. I go along with our former brilliant and outrageous prime minister Pierre Trudeau who said "Government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."

Good on you, Craig. You've found a way to pay directly from your pocket for clean water, safer highways, better social services and environment and all those other amenities for the common good.

My kids pay taxes like most of us here, rather than subscribing to your notion of bypassing the system to allow discretionary money to drip from their hands like charity to where they think it is needed to make them feel good.

Your notion is a peculiar conservatism, an euphemism for selfishness.

Keynesian economics (also called Keynesianism) describes the economics theories of John Maynard Keynes. Keynes wrote about his theories in his book The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. The book was published in 1936.

Keynes said capitalism was a good economic system. In a capitalism system, people earn money from their work. Businesses employ and pay people to work. Then people can spend their money on things they want. Other people work and make things to buy. Sometimes the capitalism system has problems. People lose their work. Businesses close. People cannot work and cannot spend money. Keynes said the government should step in and help people who do not have work.

This idea is called "demand-side policy". If people are working, the economy is good. If people are not working, the economy is bad.

Keynes said when the economy is bad, people want to save their money. That is, they do not spend their money on things they want. As a result there is less economic activity.

Keynes said the government should spend more money when people do not have work. The government can borrow money and give people jobs (work). Then people can spend money again and buy things. This helps other people find work.

Some people, such as conservatives, libertarians, and people who believe in Austrian economics, do not like Keynes' ideas. They say government work does not help capitalism. They say when the government borrows money, it takes money away from businesses. They do not like Keynesian economics because they say the economy can get better without government help.

During the late 1970's Keynesian economics became less popular because inflation was high.

When a big recession happened in 2007, Keynesian economics became more popular. Leaders around the world (including Barack Obama) created stimulus packages which would allow their government to spend a lot of money to create jobs...

So how come it aint workin?

Most of the yip-yapping is whether it's working or not, Ed. Gun slingers of both sides can provide evidence it is or isn't, depending on particular circumstances and interpretations of the economy.

The Keynesian remedy worked against unemployment and depression but not in reverse against inflation. It worked during Depression years with FDR, faltered when big business got him to dump it, and the ensuing slump was rescued by the war.

I look at it this way: It's working or it wouldn't be used. When financial chaos descended around the world, we heard of corporations being too big to fail and then within a few years, as in the EU, governments too big to fail.

Angela Merkel spent German treasure to keep weak economies afloat on terms of reform. Economies, by and large, were so interdependent there was no other option. Germany didn't want an invasion of jobless from southern Europe.

The US had already screwed up with weak regulations. Under stress from a waning economy and military adventures, it chose between letting its financial and industrial infrastructure go under---as capitalism is supposed to work---and spending with hopes of evading chaos.

Hopes. Expectations of something better.

Maybe, you might recall rahm e.'s, former chiefostaffs', comment that I like to beat like a dead horse. 'Never let a crisis go to waste, what I mean by that is it lets you do things that you didn't think were possible before'. A good for example is, you can get lock step libs to repeat the corporate bashing talking points when in fact the bailouts were nothing more than selectively showing appreciation to political supporters, in this case unions.

I can understand you calling me selfish, but again you know nothing about me. Time and time again though you've shown you advocate redistribution, as long as there is minimal impact on you and yours. I'd never presume to speak for your situation, but do you have some thing you're willing to do to level the 'strong' community that you get to live in down to some mid level community and elevate the weak community. Or, are you too selfish to give up what you have in the name of achieving fairness for others.

Keynesian economics is the science of kicking the can down the road by applying temporary patches and band-aids which eventually fail. It is the science of gov't. hacks picking winners and losers. We are over $17 trillion in debt with no obvious way of repaying the principal, and just the interest costs are chewing up a large portion of yearly incoming revenue. Proponents of this idealogy can only point to the fact that we haven't yet gone down in flames as proof of success. They ignore the kindling and the gasoline and the matches.

The problem with propping up losers over an extended period of time is that it compounds the problem and places more and more capital at risk. The snowball gets larger as it rolls down the hill. When it finally hits bottom, the damage is much greater. Then the very people who allowed the snowball to get larger will point to the damage and say we should have done more... by making the snowball even larger.

The economy is cyclic by nature. Often, when good times return, the snowball is slowed down or may even temporarily stop rolling. This is when dishonest folks like King and Obama can claim credit for something that they and their policies had absolutely nothing to do with.



Here, we have Dave K asking King a question about the real and true cause of the Great Recession of 2008. Again, King totally ignores the question and moves on to put it behind him by spouting more bullshit. King did the very same thing to Dave K previously in this thread. And he has done it many times before this.



King also ignored this. We all know he uses the very feminine tactic of pretending to ignore me, using the lie that I put words in his mouth several months ago. But he also ignores others who posted similar concerns and facts about the subject. Careful there, if you press him too hard, his estrogen will reach boiling point and he will pretend to ignore you forever!

I've called this the dance of the Gnomoron, because Gnomoron used to use the very same Libtard tactic of ignoring uncomfortable facts or refutations of Liberal lies and stupidity.

craigd has apparently noticed this too, and he has called King out on it several times recently. King always responds with some vague and totally unrelated blather and completely sidesteps the question. Yet some say they still like the guy and apparently give him a pass because of his advanced age. I too used to give him a pass because of his advanced age and I also fell for his fake civility for a time.



Here's an excerpt from King's post here at 1:11 PM today. Read the whole thing for yourselves to see how King used three short sentences to call craigd selfish. More name calling from Mr. Civility. Yet King is always piously lecturing us about the incivility here in the Misfires forum which he claims to despise. And still he can't stay away, having now made 210 posts in Misfires since 4/23/13 when he dishonestly said he'd just be an observer here.

This is why I've shared my opinion that King is a fraud and a pathological liar. And I'm done giving him excuses because of his age, because, in my opinion, it's obvious he's been a liar and a fraud all his life.

The rest of you can continue to think you can have a civil debate with a guy who will just ignore you when you counter him with a fact or figure which he cannot refute. Me... I'll just call liars "liars, and frauds "frauds".

craigd, Burger King (home of the Whoppers)is not going to admit to calling you a derogatory name because he used the same clever ploy that he always uses to call people names. He thinks that if he doesn't come straight out like a man and say "craigd, you are selfish", that he has not been insulting. Or at least, that's what he wants us all to believe. Once a fraud, always a fraud.

edit: Oh wait, since I have brought his dishonesty into the daylight, we can expect a phony quasi-apology that goes something like this; "If you think I have called you selfish, that was not my intent." We've all seen that ploy used by Burger King before. I just wanted to beat him to the punch this time. Now he'll have to try something he doesn't usually do. Maybe admit he was wrong or act like a man.

Perhaps he will simply blame the statement on an unnamed president of a White Southern University. Or Wiccan Priests. Or computer hackers... there's a good one for you King!

so, how cum key nes ian economics aint workin here in 2013?

King, I hate to pile on....haven't been following this too closely lately as I have been working but you do know these statements to be false.

We all know now the smoking gun of the economic collapse was the move by the Democratic Clinton administration to change the rules on mortgages to ensure just about anyone could qualify.

So knowing that, as we all do, we can't be agreeing that there is some other cause. It certainly was not caused by free and unfettered markets.

And, there were plenty of complaints from all corners when both Washington and Ottawa started spending.

Quote:
"We all know now the smoking gun of the economic collapse was the move by the Democratic Clinton administration to change the rules on mortgages to ensure just about anyone could qualify"

This above point is essentially correct although it is now known that the seed that initiated this process began with the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 passed when the original Libtard Bumbler was in office. Left wing radical groups such as ACORN(Obama's Goon Squad) threatened to bring suit against banks that refused to grant No-Doc - No down payment loans to minorities and otherwise unqualified individuals after the rules were further loosened during the Clinton administration. The damning evidence to support the CRA is published right in the 1992 Democratic Platform so its impossible to deny this was the facts. I watched this whole sorry situation unfold first hand in Maricopa, AZ where about the only requirement that had to be met to get a loan was to demonstrate you were a breathing human being.
Libtards will continue to deny this CRA/Democrat initiated fiasco because to admit the truth is to confirm the utter financial disaster ultimately caused by this program under the Clinton Administration. What the hell, If you're a Libtard and if a 17 trillion dollar national debt doesn't matter what's just mere untold billions in bad housing loans?
I cited specific factual examples of extreme mortgage abuse in previous threads that I was personally familiar with and won't bother doing so again as the Libtards on this forum in typical fashion just ignore facts anyway.

There is no sense or advantage to making a false statement. Financial blow-outs usually have more than one cause.

Clinton/Fanny was part of it. So was Wall Street and the Federal Reserve/Greenspan.

The short of that is "unregulated, anything goes . . ." Regulations were weak.
They were selling stuff that couldn't be explained.

Free and unfettered markets didn't enter into it. Do you know of any?

There were few complaints from the hoi polloi.

The one I remember is the California agricultural field worker buying a $700,000 house. Why did it take a collapse to broadcast the stupidity? Why did the public put up with it? Regulations wouldn't permit it in Canada.

King, here's my point. The de-regulation that occurred, instigated by the left leaning Democrats, as a method of harnessing what they saw as market forces, to advance a social agenda, blew up in everyone's face. But those same liberal Democrats consistently blame "greed" and "capitalism" for the problem while glossing over their rather significant role and objectives. It is intellectually dishonest. I think when you gloss over it, you are smart enough to know you are either being dishonest or disingenuous.

As far as outcry from the hoi polloi on the Keynesian spending of the last few years, I'll say I heard a lot and suggest we have a difference of opinion on that subject.

I must extend my heartfelt congratulations to everyone in this thread.

They have managed to take a stupid concept, change it at least three times, and end up with only one resolve:

It's all pointless. And 17 pages worth if it at that!

(and yes, I chipped in)

Keynes is dinner table around here when friends get together, too. We have different opinions but few complaints. I didn't hear anyone anywhere say we should shut-down Windsor and Oakville. Did you?

On your point, Greenspan said before collapse that safeguards were in place to prevent serious recession and in post mortems he didn't see it coming.

I don't know why the chattering classes, including liberal and conservative commentators, even refer to capitalism because we live in a mixed economy with the public as significant shareholders.

On corporate greed, I agree entirely. I don't think Lehman and others can be sanitized as anything other than greedy and perhaps criminal in their repackaging of spurious wares.

Some are glossing; I'm not. I didn't name Republicans or Democrats as culpable in the debacle. Saying "unregulated anything goes" isn't intellectually dishonest. It's a mystery to me Americans let their administration get away with it.

Remember the Canadian uproar when the Conservatives changed their mind on trust funds? My investor friends were outraged. My religious sister, bless her, said "I deserved it. I believed the government and gambled and I lost."

We're all guilty, Bob. (I get dinged for not answering every post!) Redistribution of money is a hot topic. It touches a Christian ethic. We did well under those circumstances.

It may be a hot topic, but here's a reason to B Bob that the reams of pages are not pointless. Unrelated convolutions should be pointed out to let the ideologue that his concept of 'dinner table' discussion is not the new inevitable normal.

I like your anecdote about the ca farm worker. Would you have a thought on what could possible be wrong with not being able to afford something if we could somehow touch on fairness.

Quote:
"There is no sense or advantage to making a false statement. Financial blow-outs usually have more than one cause."

Yep: Same old tied Libtard argument. "Everybody is doing it so you can't just single out the instigator".

The onset on the housing market meltdown was the Community Re-investment Act of 1977 and the "loosening"; elimination is a more accurate term, of lending requirements under the Clinton Administration.
If neither of those had occurred the housing meltdown in all probability would never have happened.
You can still go down to gang ridden drug infested Maricopa and buy a 5 year old 2300 square ft. home for under $100,000. Replacement cost would be over $200,000. Guess who is picking up the tab for the difference.
Hint: It's NOT the leeches that support Obama!!

King, we didn't need to shut down Oakville. That's Ford and they didn't come begging. They actually spent several years getting prepared for the shitstorm.

As far as GM and Chrysler goes, I said we should have let them fail. And I heard many agree with me. Yes, there is pain and dislocation. But there is no subsidy and from the ashes rises something new.

The unions would have been toast, and in this day and age of government safety nets, unions have lost their raison d'etre. It's obscene that they are allowed to hold our public service hostage.

Since 1980 in real numbers, union membership in Canada has risen. Yet private sector union membership has fallen from over 30% of the work force to less than 15%. The implications are obscene. And the far left has their dirty hands and grubby fingers all over this. Pigs at the trough! Incredible they can complain about Senate expenses. Hypocrites all!

It would have also been much harder to extend the next round of corporate welfare to anyone.

What most forget in these discussions is that when you let a giant (e.g GM) fail, many other companies and employees are hugely benefited. Ford, for example, could have soaked up 100s of thousands of new vehicle sales without having to compete with the government. The people who were going to buy a new car, would still buy a new car. They would just make a different choice as to brand.

Just read some hack PR VP from Bombardier try to explain how his company hasn't been on the dole since they began making more than snowmobiles. I wanted to retch.

Holy crap! What a bowl of ignorant blather we have dripping from the mouth of Burger King Brown now. The Community Reinvestment Act reforms which were signed by Bill Clinton in 1993 were the extreme exact opposite of "unregulated, anything goes". Here we had the government telling lenders that the standards they placed upon borrowers, to insure eventual repayment of loans, were racist, discriminatory, and now even illegal. We had regulation. The problem was that the regulations were the cause of the eventual meltdown. And in typical Leftist lying Liberal fashion, once the house of cards collapsed, those Democrats responsible did all they could to deflect blame in every other direction... mostly to George Bush.

In my opinion, this is what King does, and this is why he is here. craigd, Dave K, Jim, Canvasback can ask all they want for answers from King about his mis-statements, or glossing over, or disingenuousness. You guys will never get a clear and direct and honest answer from King. But I do hope you'll all keep asking, because it illuminates just what King does and what he is. I'll call it just what I think it is. Bullshit, and disgusting lies piled upon disgusting lies... personal attacks and slander concealed under a thin veneer of fake civility. Just what you'd expect from a lifelong liar and fraud.

James, et al, you are damn right Burger King knows better. But he doesn't care about the truth, and he intentionally refuses to answer directly to charges about his previous lies. Burger King says he gets dinged for not answering every post. Fact is, he answers virtually nothing or no one directly. He drops his load of crap and dances away from the smell. Any reply from him will never contain a direct answer to a direct question, but simply more bullshit. Facts and figures will be totally ignored by the Burger King. He is still trying to tell us that the masses (hoi polloi)had no complaints about reckless Washington spending. This comes from the guy who is now saying "there is no sense or advantage to making a false statement". Has he perchance ever heard of the Tea Party? Of course he has, but a true pathological liar can only answer a lie with another lie.

And do pay attention to how the Democrat Party and the Liberal Left Media are trying to recast the Tea Party. There has lately been a constant drumbeat that the Tea Party is racist, bigoted, mysoginist, and potentially violent haters. All of the bad attributes of the Occupy Wall Street movement are being heaped upon the Tea Party by filthy lying libtards.

King answered craigd's comment about being called selfish by simply ignoring the statement. Let anyone else engage in name calling, and we hear the somber lecture about the low brow incivility in Misfires that is not found in any other forum anywhere.

My opinion about him remains the same: He is a liar and a total fraud. I still wonder how the Great King Brown could be left off of this list of past and present CBC television and radio personalities. Maybe it's a case of "The older I get, the better I used to be".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_Broadcasting_Corporation_personalities

He can pretend to be civil, but it's apparent to me that he is beneath any low class trailer park trash.

hey guys, one of you please start a new thread...this is getting so redundant...

I would do it, but then whiny little joe would get a knot in his shorts again and go tattling to dave about me dominating him and this forum...again.

How about if I get back on the topic of Religious Doctrine and ask the Muse of Nova Scotia, once again, how his father converted to Catholicism as an adult without believing in the ressurection of Jesus? See King's post #330954 from 7/16/13 in the "A Puritan Metaphor" thread.

How did he answer the question about belief in the Ressurection during his baptism? That is one of the questions that adult converts are asked. It is the most basic tenet of Catholicism and Christianity. It is one of the questions that Godparents answer for an infant. And then the child is asked the same question, to answer for themselves, when they are old enough for the Sacrament of Confirmation. Is King telling us that his Dad lied in order to convert, or was that whole story a lie which was used to explain away a prior lie? Enquiring minds want to know.

I've asked King this question numerous times since he posted that B.S. Is it that he won't answer me directly, or that he can't answer without looking like an ass?

Does that untie the knot in your shorts ed?

Bombardier is a bit much, and so is Harper with Verizon. Sticking to free and unfettered markets? Do you know of anything big in industrial development not needing a thumbs-up from the PMO?

You must have smiled about a list of personalities associated with CBC. Any Canadian would have noted it's "a" list of persons "associated" with our biggest broadcaster. Nowhere the pioneers and bedrock of Canadian TV journalism:

Morley Safer, Frank Willis, Keith Boag, Neil MacDonald, Romeo LeBlanc, Laurier Lapierre, Doug Leiterman, Tom Gould, Beryl Fox, James M. Minifie, Michael Maclear, Peter Stursberg and on and on.

TV started in Canada 1952; I joined next year from CP, left in '67.

King, the Verizon thing is a bit much but it's a ham handed attempt to move away from the all too cozy relationships fostered by the CRTC. My old classmate David Asper's father, Izzy, is just one example of many who worked that system. He made it to over a billion dollars before his children pissed it away and lost the company.

Our governments should be involved in regulation, not management, of businesses and industries. They err greatest when they believe they are managers.

On a side note, I have looked at the list. Not hard to see that many are missing.

Jeez, I didn't know they pissed it away. What about the museum? Still funded?

Agree regs, not management.

Gee, when I Google "Morely Safer CBC", "Neil MacDonald CBC", "Frank Willis CBC", "James Minifie CBC", "Doug Leiterman CBC", etc., I get page upon page of results related to those personalities.

When I Google "King Brown CBC", or "Kingsley Brown CBC", I get next to nothing... for a brilliant 14 year career. I don't even find the pattern for the world famous Kingsley Brown fly. Same thing happens with another search engine, Bing. Oh, there is that 1965 documentary on Nova Scotia's racist past where you called Africville "an indictment of white society". Why am I not surprised that something like that would be one of your crowning achievements?

Did you really make such a documentary film? I couldn't find it... just your reference to it in your 2007 letter to the editor of the Halifax Chronicle Herald.

I did watch the old video of you interviewing the crackpot who was trying to fire a projectile into space from a large gun. Impressive! Chuckle! Who'd want to cover Yuri Gagarin or Alan Sheppard or John Glenn when you've got bigger fish to fry?

Oh, speaking of guns, and your famous efforts on reversing the Canadian Long Gun Registry... that must all be highly classified information. I looked for that way back when you were doing your lulling of U.S. gun owners after Newtown. Zip. Nada. Nothing!

Of course, I've known all of this, and more, for many months now. Believe it or not, I've exercised great restraint. I still am. I liked what you said about giving a man enough rope... I've been dropping hints and hoping you'd cut the crap you dump on us here. No such luck.

You must have been quite the luminary. Bet they were sorry to see you go.

Hey King, you forgot to tell us how your Dad successfully converted to Catholicism without believing in the Ressurection of Jesus.

We don't want to get ed upset with us again!

I mean... like who cares?

keith: the way you go on and on...its almost as if you and mikee went to the same bull dog charm school!


give it a rest already!

to paraphrase henny youngman:

take my thread...please...

dave are you listening? shut it down!

Don't start whining now

You started the stew'pid thread as a personal attack on a member of the board.

Maybe Dave should dig into that and ban yer sorry arse ?

Oh Dave.

I sent Dave a PM...."Dave you need to ban this trouble making gun butcher...."

NOT BY THE ASPERS!
By getting everybody else - Yes even the Governments - to fund that "Memorial to Izzy".
The Aspers need aspirins these days.

Piss off ed... I'm just warming up.



...and the Dance of the Gnomoron goes on and on and on and on!

un keith: I am beyond being pissed off...

Ah cud knot unnerstan yew. wat ar yew tryin' ta say?

[/quote]

Very well said OSF.

Bump, just because it piss's Ed the torch off and I got such a laugh out of my friend Keiths excellent posts,especially this one,hits the nail on the head !

" Burger King says he gets dinged for not answering every post. Fact is, he answers virtually nothing or no one directly. He drops his load of crap and dances away from the smell. Any reply from him will never contain a direct answer to a direct question, but simply more bullshit. Facts and figures will be totally ignored by the Burger King. He is still trying to tell us that the masses (hoi polloi)had no complaints about reckless Washington spending. This comes from the guy who is now saying "there is no sense or advantage to making a false statement". Has he perchance ever heard of the Tea Party? Of course he has, but a true pathological liar can only answer a lie with another lie."

Cause greed.. result reap what you sew. going to get worse. david

I guess you believe there was a real Jewish Holicost ?

Joe- the Holocaust was inflicted on the Jews of Europe by Adolph Hitler, Heinrich Himmler and other Nazi party leaders who viewed the extermination by genocide under the term "The Final Solution" as part of the Aryan racial purity policies-- First off, that is a bit of a mis-nomer, as being Jewish is a matter of religious beliefs, nothing to do with race at all. Strangely enough, Hitler's ally in Italy, Benito Mussolini, did not share that Nazi viewpoint towards the Jews that condemned millions of Jews, gypsies, insane asylum and physically deformed Europeans to death-

One of my best buddies from my years in the USMC, he still lives in the Bronx where he grew up- his uncle Solomon was one of the brave prisoners at the Sobibor Totenslager (Death Camp) in Poland, and helped in the riot/revolt that overcame the SS guards and gained freedom for a lucky few.

My first father-in-law (now gone 12 years) served with Patton's 3rd. Army, and after Bastogne, and his recuperation from the shrapnel wounds in his legs- was promoted to Staff Sergeant rank, and as he was fluent in German, was assigned to interrogation of the captured Germans- He once remarked to his C.O. that he had not yet interrogated any captured SS personnel, to which question the Captain replied- Sergeant- that's because we never captured any- we shot them on sight- Later he learned that some SS units were shooting fellow German regular Army troops (Wehrmacht) to get their uniforms- but the Germans with their passion for record keeping and thoroughness, had a flaw in that scheme- Every SS man who graduated, besides received his dagger with the inscription "Meine Blut und Meine Ehre" My blood and my honor-- also had his individual SS serial number tattooed under his right armpit area- That's how the British discovered they had actually captured Himmler- good old strip search-

Oh, in case you think that was cruel -to shoot dead a SS man with his hands above his head "Nicht scheissen -Kamerade" or some other such Hundenscheisse Wurden!!-- The Germans had standing orders from Hitler that no Negro allied troops were to be taken prisoner, they were to be shot on sight- War is one cruel piece of business--

So, now that you know that the word you struggled with is properly spelled Holocaust-- It means, in a literal interpretation- a Firestorm. Isn't it a bit ironic, that the very same deranged man who started this campaign to exterminate the Jewish people in Europe, and approved the gas chamber/showers and the crematoria- also was cremated at his own orders after his suicide in the underground bunkers in Berlin- "Live by the sword, die by the sword" if you'll allow a bit of a je ne sans quoi segue here.

Fox that's just political bull we've been told to justify the war....true enough the Jews were enslaved and used in the Nazi war effort and towards the end of the war lots were found starving to death in prison camps but the furnaces and gas chambers couldn't have handled the numbers we've been led to believe were executed by the Nazis.

Why you think we went to war with Japan ?


Pearl Harbor was a staged event so we'd have an island to test the A bomb on....all the ships that were left at Pearl Harbor were out dated decoys.

As an aside:
The inscription on the SS dagger is "Mein Ehre Heist Treue" which translated means "My Honor is my Loyalty" which was the SS motto. These daggers were privately purchased and not issued so every SS member didn't necessarily have one.
Another Point: Tattooing the blood type under each SS members arm became lax as the war wore on and was dispensed with completely in the last days. The SS guys who were turning themselves in knew his tattoo was a dead giveaway regarding their membership and often attempted to remove it with acid.
It didn't take the Allies long to catch onto to this stunt.
Many SS did their best to turn themselves in to the Americans who did not routinely shoot them on sight.
The Waffen SS for those who are students of WW II were probably no better or worse that any other elite forces in their conduct. In the case of the Germans the true worst were the Einstatzgruppen(sp?) who were the special police units charged with "cleansing" the civilian population after the German troops had captured an area.
It should also be noted that oftentimes the non-Jewish populace in those area were ready accomplices in turning in Jews.
Jim

The scariest part of all this is:

That many of the posts on Misfires come from people who advocate the responsible ownership of...

Firearms.

And what about the 2650 American lives lost in that monumental FUBAR- were they "decoys too" ??

That is also true Jim- but I have seen three Waffen SS daggers at gun shows and all of them were inscribed as I wrote- could be each of the different SS (protective echelon or guards- literally translated) had their variant of the Blood and Honor code- Waffen (assigned mainly to Wehrmacht and Panzer Gruppen- Leibstandarten Adolph Hitler-Hitler's personal bodyguard unit of the SS- and the SS units most closely associated with the termination of the Jews and others Hitler despised- the TotenKopf- or Death's Head with the skull and crossbones emblem--

The unit my late father-in-law served in after Bastogne were well-warned of the various tricks the highly motivated to survive SS troops had- so they took no chances- anyway, even if they had taken the SS troops alive, they would have been hung for war crimes eventually- "Shoot 'em and loot 'em" as the sidearms, daggers and insignia were war booty prizes then- and just look at the RIA and other auction catalogues and see what WW11 German weapons, medals, flags, banners, pins, Eisen (Iron) und Ritter (Knight) Kruzen (Crosses) bring today- and the War in Europe ended in May 1945--

Oh, and one final thought- the 2009 spoof movie of the OSS in Europe in 1944- "Inglorious Basterds" Damn Quentin Tarantino- it's Bastards- but I digress- near the end, just before the give-way scenario in the La Lousiana Tavern in middle France (Drei Glazer)-- when the British Leftenant who studied German films asks the German turncoat Hugo Stiglitz if he can be calm, Hugo is sharpening his dagger and on the blade is clearly inscribed the words "Meine Blt und meine Ehre" No kidding- Hollywood? Go figure!!

jOe,

I like your humor, usually, but this post makes me really wonder about your seriousness. It is idiocy to think we would have sacrificed as many men as were lost there to "decoys".

And, if this was an attempt at backhanded sarcasm, it is in very poor taste.

SRH

RWTF:
"Blut und Ehre" "Blood and Honor" is the motto found on Hitler Youth daggers. These are very similar to the Boy Scout daggers many of us had when we were in that organization as youngsters.
The Hitler Youth were somewhat similar to our own Boy Scout organization although the training they received was really along the lines of Nazi indoctrination.
The ONLY motto ever found on legitimate SS daggers is "Mein Here Heist True" as I indicated above. You can further research if you want to.
Jim

If you watch movie 'Stalingrad' it's mentioned that there is something along 'God is with us' on their belt buckles. Not sure if true or not as I have never looked at WWII vintage wehrmacht buckle.

The SS belt buckle has the same SS motto on it "Mein Ehre Heist Treue". Again this was the official SS Motto and used in many instances.
I didn't intend to get into SS Militaria 101 here since this is a double gun forum. However I collect WW II pistols in addition to shotguns so I am familiar with this area. Everything I've posted on this subject is easily verifiable on the Internet.
Below is a Browning Hi-Power SS rig I own. Since my interest is pistols not belt buckles this is the best picture I have of the buckle.
Jim

This isn't something I just dreamed up.

Our President at the time couldn't get approval to wage war on Japan....in war sacrifices are made.

The Japanese were fooled into attacking Pearl Harbor thus giving war the go ahead from the American people.

Watch the Pearl Harbor documentaries....the government knew that attack was coming that's why our best ships weren't there.

Stan let me get one thing straight.

I had 3 relatives that fought for the South in the Civil war....Another 2 that fought in World War I and 3 uncles that fought in World War II. Had another good friend that died a few years ago that went down on two different ships in the Pacific another friend that got his lower jaw shot up by machine gun fire on some Japanese occupied island. I've only personally known a couple of Korean war vets.

Had a couple of close buddies that fought in Vietnam they both made it home only to die at an early age from Agent Orange related diseases (both died from a rare form of brain cancer).

Coming of age at the end of the Vietnam War is the only thing that stopped me from being there.

I'm proud of them all but that doesn't make me believe it was all righteous....

Our Great Country stopped being righteous about 160+ years ago.

As a student of WW II I have been studying this period for over 50 years.
The facts are, like it or not, that Roosevelt was a closet Socialist and a supporter of Stalin. He know it would take some extreme event to get us directly involved in WW II as the majority of Americans were opposed to it. I have concluded that the proof available is indisputable that Roosevelt goaded the Japanese into attacking us, knew in advance that Pearl Harbor would be hit and did nothing to prevent it.
As far as I'm concerned he still should be retroactively impeached and removed as the President of the United states for treason.
Additionally he stated the United States down the road to Socialism a condition many of us are painfully aware of today.
Jim

I take it some still think the World Trade Center destruction and the Pentagon bombing wasn't an inside job.

I agree 100%--FDR, as Commander-In_Chief- bears the responsibility for the Pearl Harbor disaster- He cut off the shipping of US oil and scrap metal to the Japs in 1038--and ignored the warning signs of their impending attack in Dec 1941-

You got that point straight, jOe, not that I had any doubt about your patriotism, never have. Just your judgement, if you seriously think that we used all 8 battleships of the Pacific fleet, 3 cruisers, 4 destroyers, 6 other ships and 350 aircraft, all of which were damaged or lost, as DECOYS!! Give me a break.

I agree totally that we stopped being righteous a long, long time ago. But, we weren't bad enough to do that in 1941.

SRH

I have a government printed think tank book written in the mid 1930's about the coming conflict with the Japanese in the western pacific. It is a series of essays about the Japanese urge to expand and our reluctance to allow them to do so.I have it around somewhere and as soon as I find it ....we knew that we were going to be butting heads with the Japanese long before 1941.

Do some further research and you'll find that we snookered Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor so we could declare war and test our new A Bomb on live people on a island.

If not then why did we rebuild a country that we destroyed in war ?

And crazy as it sounds 9/11 was an inside job....it accomplished two things....it drug us into war and also covered up trillions of dollars of unaccounted spending/money at the Pentagon (funny thing the missing money was announced on live TV by Secretary Rumsfeld the day before 9/11 and no mention has ever been made of the missing money since).

This was all on Jesse Ventura's TV show....last I heard they ran him out of the country.

I heard you were up north, drinking shine with RWTF. Maybe it was methanol.

Quote:
"(funny thing the missing money was announced on live TV by Secretary Rumsfeld the day before 9/11 and no mention has ever been made of the missing money since)."

jOe:
Would you provide some documentation or a source for this statement? I would like to follow up and pursue this.
Jim

Funny how the missile hit right in the Pentagon records room...

About eight trillion is missing over the last five years. Does that count. I think, in the big picture, President Bush had the fore thought to provide bo with a victory lap for the taking of binladen. Only problem, no proof, some slipped and fell overboard story. Maybe he's a cabbie in ny on the friends of alla relocation program.

Is this all just hogwash...

Or meth-ampheademine- like Hitler got daily injections of from Dr. Morrell- bad *&^% indeed. Nope- if Homeless was my guest here in Da Nawth- we'd be drinking George Dickel or Rebel Yell- branch water, a few rocks-

Ok jOe:
I will check all this out.
Jim

Won't do any good to check it out....the cover up has been done and there is nothing no one will ever do about it.

how can you tell a poli tic ian is lyin? his lips are movin...