Originally posted by joe beyser
Actually no it isn't FMF. It is the corporatism you dislike that I was refering to. I don't blame foreigners at all on this. Now remember, I do not blame foreigners on the US economy and loss of manufacturing industry in this country. That is what I am clarifying to you and I stand by this statement🙂

Thanks for the clarification. Because you said "It is very sad. They shipped our manufacturing jobs overseas to make a buck. They also brought in foreigners to do other jobs cheaper to make a quick buck" which could easily have been taken verbatim from the British National Party manifesto. Snip that one from your print out and wear them as epaulets, eh? I'm not sure your 'America 1st' grumble is an especially effective example of the broader "corporatism" that I bang on about, but it is a real life example of "globalization" which Americans love as long as it is to their explicit and undiluted advantage and if it's Johnny Foreigner who has to deregulate, de-protect, de-workers' rights etc. etc. Otherwise, it's the Big Bad World that becomes the Bogey Man, it seems.

Originally posted by FMF
Thanks for the clarification. Because you said "It is very sad. They shipped our manufacturing jobs overseas to make a buck. They also brought in foreigners to do other jobs cheaper to make a quick buck" which could easily have been taken verbatim from the British National Party manifesto. Snip that one from your print out and wear them as epaulets, eh? I'm not ...[text shortened]... ts etc. etc. Otherwise, it's the Big Bad World that becomes the Bogey Man, it seems.

You see, there is overlap there. Companies are exploiting cheap labor to make a buck. They don't really care to increase a foreigners standard of living at all. They definately don't care about a decrease in our standard of living in the process either. It is all about money in my oppinion.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Yes, and I have access to top universities with next to no funding from my parents. See the difference?

Yes. I see the difference.

If you can afford to pay for college, the taxpayers pay for your education anyway.

If I can afford to pay for college, unless I can get a school or private scholarship, I pay for my own schooling. If I can't afford to pay for college, the government helps me out with grants and/or low interest loans that I don't have to start paying back until after I graduate.

I'm not sure I see why your system is better or more fair.

Originally posted by FMF
Thanks for the clarification. Because you said "It is very sad. They shipped our manufacturing jobs overseas to make a buck. They also brought in foreigners to do other jobs cheaper to make a quick buck" which could easily have been taken verbatim from the British National Party manifesto. Snip that one from your print out and wear them as epaulets, eh? I'm not ts etc. etc. Otherwise, it's the Big Bad World that becomes the Bogey Man, it seems.

Winston Churchill looked across the rubble and said to himself-

Blimey, the bloody Germans used our money and built these nasty buzz bombs that keep raining down on our capitol. As he chomped on his BNP Manifesto cigar. He then said- Perhaps we shall levi a rubble tax.

Originally posted by joe beyser
the bloody Germans used our money and built these nasty buzz bombs that keep raining down on our capitol.

I can assure you that the money was moving in the opposite direction between WW1 and WW2, just one of the many things that can be said to have contributed to the outbreak of the second, even more horrific, war.

Originally posted by FMF
I can assure you that the money was moving in the opposite direction between WW1 and WW2, just one of the many things that can be said to have contributed to the outbreak of the second, even more horrific, war.

You know, the Bush family capitalized on the free deathcamp labor. I can't get Lee Greenwood songs out of my head when I think of the Bushes.

Originally posted by joe beyser
You know, the Bush family capitalized on the free deathcamp labor.

Do you have a source for that?

Originally posted by sh76
But Obama's only had the job for 6 months. How can you compare the over-all increase in national debt in 6 months to what others do in 8 years?

Apples and oranges.

Sure -- but it wasn't me who started that comparison. My original point was that the last three Republican presidents have screwed the country around $10 trillion into debt. (Granted, there was still around $1 trillion of WW2 debt when Reagan took office, but the Reagan-Bush era Republicans are responsible for the other $9 trillion of debt.) It's also Reagan-Bush policies that caused the present economic crisis, which requires deficit spending (particularly directed towards low-to-middle income earners and general domestic infrastructure) to remedy it.

Originally posted by sh76
Do you have a source for that?

http://www.geocities.com/bushfamilynazis/

There are many more but I liked this one. There is another that gives a good chronological breakdown of events before ww2 and during. There are sites that show that Brittain did in fact supply Hitler with fundage for his war industry. I don't know which are good and which are bad sources, but mainstream media is definately a propagandistic piece of donky dookey. Read the whole thing and see what you think of it. Also, what do you think about outside financial help for Hitlers war machine? I think he had to have help from somewhere.

Originally posted by joe beyser
http://www.geocities.com/bushfamilynazis/

There are many more but I liked this one. There is another that gives a good chronological breakdown of events before ww2 and during. There are sites that show that Brittain did in fact supply Hitler with fundage for his war industry. I don't know which are good and which are bad sources, but mainstream media ...[text shortened]... out outside financial help for Hitlers war machine? I think he had to have help from somewhere.

Interesting point. Apparently there was some resentment in Germany after WW1 towards international bankers and their role in financing WW1. So, it's possible that international conspirators brought Hitler to power, in part due to his prejudice against Jews, in order to use anti-Semitism as a distraction from the German people's legitimate grievances against international bankers.

Also (as horrible a thought as this is), Hitler and the Nazi holocaust may have been instigated by conspirators in order to put Israel in the Middle-East and thus fan the flames of future wars. Or at least, this may have been exploited after the fact.

Later on, Reagan (who seems to have been the military-industrial complex's most helpful president) sowed chaos in the Middle-East. No doubt, any international conspirators would take into account religious superstitions concerning Israel when figuring that the Middle-East would be a good place to provoke wars.

Much of this is just speculation, but IMO worth considering.

Originally posted by karnachz
Interesting point. Apparently there was some resentment in Germany after WW1 towards international bankers and their role in financing WW1. So, it's possible that international conspirators brought Hitler to power, in part due to his prejudice against Jews, in order to use anti-Semitism as a distraction from the German people's legitimate grievances against ...[text shortened]... good place to provoke wars.

Much of this is just speculation, but IMO worth considering.

There is as Paul Harvey would say " the rest of the story" . It is hard to piece together everything in history, as I believe history books are controlled by the same folks that control the media. There is so much BS out there that it is hard to tell what is true and what isn't. When things don't make sense and have a really simplified explaination, there probably is a "rest of the story".

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
dear friends, today Americans are celebrating, independence day, a sorry day at that, for if it were not for those miscreant Bostonians complaining about a little taxation, who knows what may have transpired. The British of course had spent a fortune, safeguarding the colony, but no, it was not to be recouped in the form of a little mild taxation, t ...[text shortened]... erica, if you can forget about us torching the whitehouse, we can forget about your little tiff!

I want to replace our Congress with the House of Commons. Those guys are pure entertainment.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
I want to replace our Congress with the House of Commons. Those guys are pure entertainment.

Are those guys a riot or what? The way they yell at each other and the guys in the background "oooohhh" and "ahhhhh" and hiss. It's like an 80s Sitcom. They should sell Season DVDs of that show. 🙂

Originally posted by sh76
Are those guys a riot or what? The way they yell at each other and the guys in the background "oooohhh" and "ahhhhh" and hiss. It's like an 80s Sitcom. They should sell Season DVDs of that show. 🙂

You may laugh !! , but how do you think we over here feel [in the UK] ? Those old fogeys falling asleep and waking up startled and then shouting "oooOOGH " and "BOO!!" [they probably dont know where they are for a minute or two] , well its those people that represent us , the common man !! Half of them leave top secret docoments on trains and tubes , and the other half are fiddling their expenses and fidddling with other things to rude to mention !!!!!
We are a sinking ship with the afore mentioned at the helm ....:'(:'(:'(

Originally posted by sh76
Are those guys a riot or what? The way they yell at each other and the guys in the background "oooohhh" and "ahhhhh" and hiss. It's like an 80s Sitcom. They should sell Season DVDs of that show. 🙂

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Parliament#Legislative_role_and_fist_fights_during_parliament_session

Legislative role and fist fights during parliament session
The Legislative Yuan has the power to pass all ordinary legislation. The amount of control the Legislative Yuan has over the Executive Yuan was unclear throughout the 1990s, but a convention has developed that the Executive Yuan is responsible to the President of the Republic of China and not the Legislative Yuan.

Much of the work of the Legislative Yuan is done via legislative committees, and a common sight on Taiwanese television involves officials of the executive branch answering extremely hostile questions from opposition members in committees. In the 1990s, there were a number of cases of fist fights breaking out on the floor, usually triggered by some perceived unfair procedure ruling, but in recent years, these have become less common. There was a brawl involving 50 legislators in January 2007 and an incident involving 40 legislators on 8 May 2007 when a speaker attempted to speak about reconfiguring the Central Election Committee. It has been alleged that fights are staged and planned in advance.[1] These antics led the scientific humor magazine Annals of Improbable Research to award the Legislative Yuan its Ig Nobel Peace Prize in 1995 "for demonstrating that politicians gain more by punching, kicking and gouging each other than by waging war against other nations." [2]