I can see I'm going to have to start weeding out my right-wing Facebook "friends". Some new gems:

"Leftism means a chronic denial of reason, reality and the bigger picture. No nation has ever taxed or regulated itself to prosperity."

"Radical environmentalism is about stifling economic freedom and perpetuating poverty and misery because it values rocks and trees more than human beings and depriving them of their ability to improve themselves. It is a socialist utopia gone wrong. Many of them are spoiled, white, rich urban folks who don't know what it is like to be poor and unable to buy the green vehicles they champion."

He also has an "Obama of Borg" video link.

then I'm all for some radical environmentalism.

As for taxing themselves into prosperity, Germany seems to do a pretty good job of balancing both.

great quotes and statements from right here at DU. Revenge is sweet, and all of your "Friends" will get to see it....LOL.

you a clue as to which other "friends" to get rid of. Or may give him a clue how truly isolated his ideology is.

imagine my disdain when I learned, also via facebook, that my friend is a 'fan' of Glenn Beck.

:(

I know she is a republican. I am hoping she doesn't post any anti-democratic crap.

Good fucking riddance. Dude's a punk rocker and one BROKE-ass motherfucker, but is TERRIFIED to the core of his existence of any state encroachment on anything, to absurd levels of paranoia. Literally believes Glenn Beck word for word. I'm glad to be rid of him, I got sick of his ignorant commentary on ANYTHING.

I have gotten rid of some people who have no redeaming qualities. And I have some other conservative friends and we respect each others opinions. We debate the issues and leave the nastiness behind and we get along just fine.

Is to have a conversation, where how much money you got or get is not the primary deciding factor of success or failure.

1)Job cuts, shipping jobs over seas, breaking unions, they all say are needed to stay competitive. IE all based on price or money.

2)Business should be free, government should not be involved in interfering with business. IE those with money to buy the stock should make the decision.

3)Prosperity, in there view, is when a single person has lots of, you guessed it, money.

4)When business is forced to protect the environment by not polluting it puts extra demands on their profitability making them less competitive. IE, it cost money.


If your first concern in all things is money, and especially if it is money for the self, not for all of society, it really makes a wide sweeping set of policies very easy to understand.

Lets look at the same ideas above with other primary motives besides money.

1)By realizing that a well employed work force, and localized jobs, helps many people in society, and that higher cost can then be supported by the larger employed base of people, you can see that even if everyone gets less, society gets more by people being able to find work and care for their families, thereby lowering the need for social programs, and allowing people to live in respect as they can care for their families. And if a foreign factory takes over production, that is because there is to much production not enough demand. So programs that create demand to move society in better directions should be created. And if companies treat workers well, the workers will not vote to unionize, so unions are competition not based on money, but based on the satisfaction of the workers.

2)An industry like media or business is not 'free' just because it is controlled by who has the money, it is instead bought. If an industry is an essential component in the prosperity of all society, then it should be in part managed by the decisions of that society. And those decisions are expressed by elected officials, not by people that have the most money. Unless you say how much money you have is some declaration of who is best able to run society. And since most money is created by thinking of 'self' first. Then that is not a good indicator of who should run the system.

3)A society is more prosperous when many people have the dignity of a living wage, and able to care for their families and have that feeling that they are able to provide. Even if the most important thing to them is not money, just a modest income to enjoy the truly prosperous ways of enjoying time with friends and family.

4)Since productivity has outstripped demand, if all industries are made to be less productive by protecting the environment, you actually help all of society. And you get a bonus, you protect the environment that we live in. The only time it does not work, is if money is the only factor in what a country allows to be imported. If it is cheaper it is better, forgets that cost is not just money. Do the workers have education as children, or do they work in factories? Is the environment in the source of trade cared for? Do people have safe work environments? Do they have collective bargaining powers? All these are part of the costs of goods besides just the race to the bottom of competition where money is all that matters.

Many arguments can be distilled down to ideas of wanting money first. Verses other important things in life.

It is quite entertaining to point out to many people that almost every argument they have revolves around money.

republicans do. hmm...

And I quote:

This video stands as a testimony to how open-minded and tolerant militant atheists are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYFa8Yn4klM

Okay, now I'm not quoting. The description of the video:

"Two Orthodox Christian confessors, Father Roman Braga and Father George Calciu, talk about their experiences in the Stalinist gulag of Pitesti during the 20th century communist era in Romania."