Brown Shirts Wannabes on the Move

Scott Walker Supporter Arrested At Bill Clinton Rally<http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/scott-walker-supporter-arrested-at-bill-clinton-ra>; A lone Scott Walker supporter was arrested at a campaign rally for Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett today, where Bill Clinton also spoke. The man had been arguing with rally attendees since before the rally began, and held a sign that said "Support Scott Walker, Not Union Thugs." A police officer on the scene would not say why the man had been arrested. Taos Police continue probe into political sign fracas<http://www.taosnews.com/news/article_4cf96cb8-ac19-11e1-8f00-0019bb2963f4.html>; According to the police report filed the same day, Eighth Judicial District Court judge candidate Ernestina Cruz was having a ?meet and greet? event at Plaza de Colores. At the same time, across the street, Cunnyngham and his wife were returning home from dinner to find several of Cruz? campaign signs in front of his property. As in the police report, Cunnyngham confirmed that three men approached him and demanded that he replace the signs where they?d been staked. Cunnyngham said he resisted. ?We were setting them in the car and we?d planned to call whoever they belonged to,? Cunnyngham said. ?I told them I thought it was very distasteful to put these signs in front of my property.? At that point, a younger man came across the street and again told Cunnyngham to put the signs back. When Cunnyngham refused, the man ?pounded me in the chest,? Cunnyngham said. While Cunnyngham says he knows a few of the people involved, The Taos News? policy is not to identify alleged offenders until they have been charged or implicated by law enforcement. ... At the time of the incident, Cruz denied having any knowledge of anyone involved in the incident, saying that it was ?unfortunate? that Cunnyngham removed signs that ?did not belong to him.? What followed was far from a fair fight, the Cunnynghams say. Cunnyngham was later checked out by a doctor who treated him for cuts and bruises, injuries to his mouth and a concussion, Cunnyngham said. ?They just attacked him, all three of them,? Joni Cunnyngham said. ?Someone was keeping me and my son from getting to them.? Democrat-Backed Group Pressures Wisconsinites With Voting Records<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303830204577446353605396764.html?mod=googlenews_wsj>; A Wisconsin political advocacy group with ties to the Democratic Party and Big Labor is circulating pamphlets to state residents revealing their neighbors' names, addresses, and voting histories. The campaign is an apparent attempt to pressure residents in the Madison area, which is overwhelmingly Democratic, to vote in Tuesday's gubernatorial recall election. The group is called the Greater Wisconsin Political Fund, a sister organization of the Greater Wisconsin Committee. The GWC does not reveal its donors, but a report from the Center for Public Integrity notes that it received a $900,000 contribution from the Democratic Governors Association in May. It also received $500,000 from the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union. ... University of Wisconsin law professor Ann Althouse received this mailing from the labor-aligned Greater Wisconsin Political Fund last week, according to a post on her blog: Information on individuals' voting histories is publicly available, but Althouse said the flyer "may be the most disgusting thing I have ever received in the mail." "This is an effort to shame and pressure people about voting, and it is truly despicable," Althouse added. If we can't win you with ideas, we'll just beat you, intimidate you, shame you, or something else.  It's going to be one hell of an election season. J - I will worry about the children when they can vote in union elections. - Albert Shanker (president of the American Federation of Teachers) Do we really think that a government-dominated education is going to produce citizens capable of dominating their government, as the education of a truly vigilant self-governing people requ

> If we can't win you with ideas, we'll just beat you, intimidate you, > shame you, or something else.  It's going to be one hell of an > election season. Elections? Shoot, turn on the TV... you just described nearly every corporate marketing department in the world. -Justi

nothing like hanging around the outside of a presidential speech with rifles etc - that the tea baggers did so often in 2010. Classy ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

"nothing like hanging around the outside of a presidential speech with rifles etc - that the tea baggers did so often in 2010. Classy" Did they break the law?  If so, they should be arrested.  If not, so what? Speaking of class: ?Kill Scott Walker?: Angry libs flood Twitter with death threats after Wisconsin recall defeat<http://twitchy.com/2012/06/06/kill-scott-walker-angry-libs-flood-twitter-with-death-threats-after-wisconsin-recall-defeat/>; Woman slaps Barrett for conceding<http://www.wisn.com/politics/wisconsin-politics/Woman-slaps-Barrett-for-conceding/-/10057500/14648102/-/yjeyb0/-/index.html>; J - ?That Scott down there that?s running for governor of Florida,? Mr. Kanjorski said. ?Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him [sic] and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he?s running for governor of Florida. He?s a millionaire and a billionaire. He?s no hero. He?s a damn crook. It?s just we don?t prosecute big crooks.? - Paul

> "This is an effort to shame and pressure people about voting, and it is > truly despicable," Althouse added. This is a bad thing? You can damn well bet that I badger friends, family and neighbors about voting. It's not only your right, it's your civic duty. Antonin Scalia has come out and said that not only is there no right to a secret ballot, he opposes the idea. I often don't agree with him but this one gives me pause and makes me wonder. He says that democracy shouldn't necessarily be easy and comfortable, that people should be willing to defend their choices. There's a lot to agree with there, for me. On the other hand, a hyper-politicized environment makes it all the more likely to have situations where you would get fired for voting for the "wrong" candidate or voting a certain way that a company thinks is against it's interests. But making people feel shame for not voting? Trying to pressure people to go out and vote? Yeah, I really don't have a problem with that so much. If your righteous anger is all about defending your civic apathy...well, I have a starkly different set of values. Cheers, Judah

----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- Everyone who does not vote, should be shamed. Everyone who does vote, should be allowed to do so in private and never forced to tell who they voted for.

How about a non voter's tax. 5% of your income for each time you did not vote in national or state elections in the previous year. Otherwise a wall of shame where the photos of those who do not vote are publicized, and mocked. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Be careful what you wish for. All those people who don't vote - how sure are you that they make good decisions? -Cameron On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: > How about a non voter's tax. 5% of your income for each time you did not > vote in national or state elections in the previous year. > Otherwise a wall of shame where the photos of those who do not vote are > publicized, and mocked.

> Be careful what you wish for. All those people who don't vote - how > sure are you that they make good decisions? Indeed...  I know people who don't vote but they also don't bother to make themselves knowledgeable about issues or candidates, so it's probably better that they don't.  On the other hand, I also know a lot of people who do vote and don't bother to make themselves knowledgeable about issues or candidates and just rely on party affiliations to make their decisions for them.  Frankly, I'd rather they didn't vote either.  In an ideal world, they'd all be engaged and care about what goes on around them, but there is a lot of apathy out there. -Justin

Reminds me of one of my fovourite quotes: "Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" -- Isaac Asimov And lately I've been running into a lot of people who fervently believe that. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Camer ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- Yowzers.....that is an AWESOME quote.

"How about a non voter's tax. 5% of your income for each time you did not vote in national or state elections in the previous year. Otherwise a wall of shame where the photos of those who do not vote are publicized, and mocked." Just to show how ridiculous this is, let's consider a .5% tax to vote. We'll call it a poll tax. J - Ninety percent of politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation. - Henry Kissinger Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. - John Quinton

----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more ----- How about we illegally purge voters from the rolls within 90 days of an election, ignore injunctions to stop illegal behavior, use flawed and prejudicial algorithms as the basis for the purge and ignore all the people who point out the very much alive and eligible voters that we've disenfranchised. We'll call it Florida. The right to vote is important. One of the most important we have. I do not believe that anyone should ever be punished for not voting, a right is a right even if you do not exercise it. I'd like to see a lot more focus from all sides, however, on getting everyone out and voting rather than trying to distract and divide and suppress the vote in the most duplicitous name of "integrity". Juda

"How about we illegally purge voters from the rolls within 90 days of an election, ignore injunctions to stop illegal behavior, use flawed and prejudicial algorithms as the basis for the purge and ignore all the people who point out the very much alive and eligible voters that we've disenfranchised. We'll call it Florida." How about creating an organization that prevents this when it is happening. Maybe we can call it the Department of Justice or DOJ for short. Better yet, how about legally purging the voter rolls every year in an open process so this shit doesn't come up every election?  Wonder which party keeps fighting this? "The right to vote is important. One of the most important we have. I do not believe that anyone should ever be punished for not voting, a right is a right even if you do not exercise it. I'd like to see a lot more focus from all sides, however, on getting everyone out and votingvrather than trying to distract and divide and suppress the vote in the most duplicitous name of 'integrity." Hopefully no one would disagree with this. J - Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual). - Ayn Rand

I think only taxpayers should be allowed to vote.  You get one vote for each dollar you pay in taxes. Oh, and those who serve in the military get votes and don't have to pay taxes ever. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

OK that sounds like a very fast track to either living in even more of a plutocracy than we have now, or almost a guarantee of a military dictatorship. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

no, because all the corporate campaign donors we deal with now mostly don't pay taxes. I don't like the idea because people who are too poor to pay taxes are affected by laws even if they aren't paying to enforce them. But it might be marginally more fair than the current system. On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 6:25 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larryclyons@gmail.com>wrote: ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

It would force those who currently have power to actually pay their fair share, and allow those of us who actually pay for the system to have more say over how the money gets spent. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

"I think only taxpayers should be allowed to vote.  You get one vote for each dollar you pay in taxes." I have argued for years that only land owners should be allowed to vote on local bonds since property taxes end up paying for the bonds. I have also argued that those on federal assistance should not be allowed to vote.  It's like voting to keep paying yourself. However, I do not endorse having to pay taxes to vote.  Really wronging stay at home Moms who are often more valuable than many white collar workers. "Oh, and those who serve in the military get votes and don't have to pay taxes ever." Of course they should be allowed to vote.  It's unfortunate how often their absentee ballots get lost. As for taxes, they should pay like everyone else.  But, the tax should be a national consumption tax, not a progressive income tax. J - The short memories of American voters is what keeps our politicians in office. - Will Rogers

Nope cause they would get half the votes on the joint return. > > However, I do not endorse having to pay taxes to vote.  Really wronging > stay at home Moms who are often more valuable than many white collar > workers

Wouldn't that favor things on the rich's side like we have now? I think only taxpayers should be allowed to vote.  You get one vote for each dollar you pay in taxes. Oh, and those who serve in the military get votes and don't have to pay taxes ever. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Only if the rich actually pay their taxes.  But it would give enormous clout to the middle class, who paid the substantially more in taxes than the rich. > > Wouldn't that favor things on the rich's side like we have now? > > I think only taxpayers should be allowed to vote.  You get one vote for each > dollar you pay in taxes

Still so the Koch brothers decide that the best way to get rid of Obama is to spend 200 million in extra taxes, and get their friends and those beholden to them to do something similar. How is that different from buying an election? ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

200 million in extra taxes ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Buying an election is still buying an election. as I said it would make this country much more of a plutocracy than it already is. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

"Still so the Koch brothers decide that the best way to get rid of Obama is to spend 200 million in extra taxes, and get their friends and those beholden to them to do something similar. How is that different from buying an election?" Yep.  Or Soros spending 200 million to do the same. One vote per citizen. J - Ninety percent of politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation. - Henry Kissinger Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. - John Quinton

The government would have the 200 million in taxes instead of the politicians? > > Still so the Koch brothers decide that the best way to get rid of > Obama is to spend 200 million in extra taxes, and get their friends > and those beholden to them to do something similar. How is that > different from buying an election?

"The government would have the 200 million in taxes instead of the politicians?" And the government would be ran by the politicians put into office by Soros.  At this point now, politicians use tax dollars to pay off their contributors/cronies.  It would be ten times worse under your revised system. J - Ninety percent of politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation. - Henry Kissinger Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. - John Quinton

First, there is no way the super-rich are going to admit they owe taxes or pay any more than they absolutely have to.  But if in some alternate reality that happened, If Soros actually paid 200 million, so would the Koch Brothers, and they would cancel each other out. You'd have the taxpaying wars of the uber rich, outspending each other to try and retain their power.  Billions into the tax coffers.  How could that be a bad thing? Of course, if you eliminated SuperPacs and lobbyists and returned the power to those who actually work and pay taxes, have true taxation with representation instead of representation without taxation, my suggestion would not be necessary. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

"First, there is no way the super-rich are going to admit they owe taxes or pay any more than they absolutely have to.  " I think we can agree on that.  Makes it amusing to watch politicians talk about raising the taxes on the wealthy since they will end up avoiding the new taxes by various means. "If Soros actually paid 200 million, so would the Koch Brothers, and they would cancel each other out." Nah.  They would either cooperate with each other or target specific elections. "You'd have the taxpaying wars of the uber rich, outspending each other to try and retain their power.  Billions into the tax coffers.  How could that be a bad thing?" Because it would go right back to the people who paid the billions via subsidies, contracts, and other BS. If you are interested in different democratic voting systems,  you should check out the Hare system.  I am not advocating it, but it is interesting to read about. "Of course, if you eliminated SuperPacs and lobbyists and returned the power to those who actually work and pay taxes, have true taxation with representation instead of representation without taxation, my suggestion would not be necessary." We can only dream. Anyway, the only true fair tax would be a national sales tax.  No loop holes to jump through and everyone pays.  Also, a built in mechanism to punish bad government.  Reduced spending by angry constituents. J - Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program - Milton Friedman

I agree 100%.  And it cannot happen too soon. > > Anyway, the only true fair tax would be a national sales tax.  No loop > holes to jump through and everyone pays.  Also, a built in mechanism to > punish bad government.  Reduced spending by angry constituen

Disagree with you both on that one. Demand for some products is inelastic. You can be as angry as angry gets and you will still need to buy food, for example. Gas is a necessity in most rural areas as well as in some urban ones, for another. Addicts will still buy cigarettes no matter what, for a third. There may be a valid argument for a national sales tax. I'm not sure what it would look like, but it wouldn't include "people will be able to punish the government by spending less." In my opinion anyway. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Every single proposal for a national sales tax excludes food.  Gas and cigarettes already heavily taxed. Addicts will likely buy cigarettes regardless of how mad they are at the government. However, everyone will pay the sales tax, including all of those in the black market economy who currently reap the benefits without paying at all, and the uber rich who will no longer be able to benefit from hiding their income. > > Disagree with you both on that one. Demand for some products is > inelastic. You can be as angry as angry gets and you will still need > to buy food, for example. Gas is a necessity in most rural areas as > well as in some urban ones, for another. Addicts will still buy > cigarettes no matter what, for a third.

excluding food would make it somewhat less regressive. I don't want to say what a good idea,  though, when the devil is in that sort of detail. Depending on what exactly is being taxed, though, and how, it might be fairer than what we have now. Although that is a very low bar ;) What's to keep the uber-rich, for example, from buying their consumer goods in the Bahamas or someplace with no sales tax? I realize that some of the more obvious possibilities already have a VAT so I am just playing devil's advocate here -- a lot depends on the specifics, is the point I am trying to make. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

This is not just sometime I thought up in the last ten minutes. Smarter people than me have been working on the National Sales Tax for a long time.  They've worked out most of these details.  I think if you actually read up on it, you would find it substantially fairer than what we have now. As for buying off-shore, unless you are talking about small items like jewelry, the cost of shipping the goods back to the states would like be more than the sales tax.  Kinda self-defeating. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

I have read up on it, and had a couple of long discussions with Cameron about it. In the proposal he was talking about the sales tax supposedly gets rebated below a certain income level, which seems intrusive and bureaucratic. But maybe it felt like I was putting you on the spot; this was not my intention. For my rich people example I was in fact thinking of jewelry or say Scottish sweaters, shrug. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

Being a former smoker...it might even make them buy more... Every single proposal for a national sales tax excludes food.  Gas and cigarettes already heavily taxed. Addicts will likely buy cigarettes regardless of how mad they are at the government. However, everyone will pay the sales tax, including all of those in the black market economy who currently reap the benefits without paying at all, and the uber rich who will no longer be able to benefit from hiding their income. > > Disagree with you both on that one. Demand for some products is > inelastic. You can be as angry as angry gets and you will still need > to buy food, for example. Gas is a necessity in most rural areas as > well as in some urban ones, for another. Addicts will still buy > cigarettes no matter what, for a third.

Just a heads up. You can't disagree with someone in your killfile. That would make you look like an idiot. .. > > Disagree with you both on that one. Demand for some products is

"Disagree with you both on that one. Demand for some products is inelastic." Yes.  You are correct.  People have to buy food, pay for clothes, etc. However, they can spend less on those items.  Women can put off buying a Coach handbag for a month or two.  Men can wait on buying the newest compensating golf club.  Parents can put off buying their kids the newest video game console. People can even spend less on staples.  Instead of filet minion, they can buy sirloin. The mechanism is there and can be used even if some products are inelastic. J - The power to tax involves the power to destroy. - John Marshall

"What's to keep the uber-rich, for example, from buying their consumer goods in the Bahamas or someplace with no sales tax?" Tariffs. J - The problem is not that people are taxed too little, the problem is that government spends too much. - Ronald Reagan

"Gas and cigarettes already heavily taxed." And alcohol.  And tanning beds. J - GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It's now 15 percent. That's almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent. But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent. OBAMA: Right. GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent. OBAMA: Right. GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected? OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

"excluding food would make it somewhat less regressive. I don't want to say what a good idea,  though, when the devil is in that sort of detail. " There are plenty of regressive taxes in place now. As mentioned before, the gas, tobacco, alcohol, and tanning bed taxes are all regressive taxes. Social security and Medicare are regressive taxes. Even the "Progressive" tax system we have is regressive in that the super rich do not pay taxes. The stupid tax, aka the lottery, is also very regressive. And then one can get into fees and licenses such as vehicle registration. Basically, the poor and middle class are being screwed and neither party will do anything to stop it aside from paying the problem lip service. J - In other words, a democratic government is the only one in which those who vote for a tax can escape the obligation to pay it. - Alexis de Tocqueville

"How about we illegally purge voters from the rolls within 90 days of an election, ignore injunctions to stop illegal behavior, use flawed and prejudicial algorithms as the basis for the purge and ignore all the people who point out the very much alive and eligible voters that we've disenfranchised. We'll call it Florida." Judah,  you might get a kick out of this: Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) said he will sue the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to move forward with his controversial attempt to purge the voter-rolls in his state of ineligible voters. ?I have a job to do to defend the right of legitimate voters,? Scott told Fox News on Monday. ?We?ve been asking for the Department of Homeland Security?s database, SAVE, for months, and they haven?t given it to us. So this afternoon, we will be filing a lawsuit, the secretary of State of Florida, against the Department of Homeland Security to give us that database. We want to have fair, honest elections in our state and we have been put in a position that we have to sue the federal government to get this information.? http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/232099-florida-governor-to-sue-dhs-in-voter-registration-battle J - Ninety percent of politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation. - Henry Kissinger Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. - John Qu

It would pay for a telescope or two... ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

"This is a bad thing?" In the case mentioned, my humble opinion is yes. "You can damn well bet that I badger friends, family and neighbors about voting. It's not only your right, it's your civic duty." There is a big difference in annoying your circle to vote and threatening to publish their names if they do not vote.  The right to vote includes the right to NOT vote. The one positive I see is that these tactics probably encouraged some people to vote for Walker.  Sure, I'll vote, but I'll vote for Walker just to fuck with you. Next up will be list distributed with political contributions. J - Ninety percent of politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation. - Henry Kissinger Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. - John Quinton

> "You can damn well bet that I badger friends, family and neighbors about > voting. It's not only your right, it's your civic duty." > > There is a big difference in annoying your circle to vote and threatening > to publish their names if they do not vote.  The right to vote includes the > right to NOT vote. Of course you have the right to not vote and it is disingenuous to suggest I said otherwise. It is also, in my opinion, entirely wrong to characterize it as a "threat". It's your right not to vote. If people give you grief for your choice to not vote, you also have the right to tell them to fuck off and mind their own business. You say threat, I say knowledge. > The one positive I see is that these tactics probably encouraged some > people to vote for Walker.  Sure, I'll vote, but I'll vote for Walker just > to fuck with you. Getting pissed off at people is a common reason to engage in the political process. Hopefully it encourages people to not only vote but to also then look at who they are actually voting for. It's a start though. > Next up will be list distributed with political contributions. That information is already available and searchable. You can see all the political donations in my zip code here: http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/index.php?capcode=w8j6x&name=&state=&zip=97212&employ=&cand= If you just want top line numbers, they are here: http://www.opensecrets.org/address/summary.php?zip=97212 It doesn't get down to street level data there. Might be a fun project though with their apis. Jud

"Of course you have the right to not vote and it is disingenuous to suggest I said otherwise." I don't recall suggesting that.  I just said it's a right.  It may even be a "civic duty" to not vote if one is not happy with any of the candidates. "It is also, in my opinion, entirely wrong to characterize it as a 'threat'. It's your right not to vote." You know what they say about opinions. "If people give you grief for your choice to not vote, you also have the right to tell them to fuck off and mind their own business. You say threat, I say knowledge." Let me ask you this:  Do you think "Card Check" (the Employee Free Choice Act) is a good idea? Next, let me ack you this:  At this time, in the US, who is more prone to using violence and intimidation in order to induce conduct that they want: leftists or those on the right? "That information is already available and searchable." Of course it is.  I love OpenSecrets. How would you feel if someone made a list of all people in your neighborhood who donated to Democrats and published as a full page add in the newspaper?  Maybe even put their addresses. J - We took names. We watched how they voted. We know where they live. - Andy Stern Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote. - George Jean Nathan

> Scott Walker Supporter Arrested At Bill Clinton > Rally< > http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/scott-walker-supporter-arrested-at-bill-clinton-ra > > > > A > wow, last thread on HOF in over a day... Good job Jerry!

he probably broke it. ----- Excess quoted text cut - see Original Post for more -----

"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" -- Isaac Asimov "And lately I've been running into a lot of people who fervently believe that." Similarly, one should not do what an "intellectual" says to do or believe what an "intellectual" say just because he or she is an "intellectual". Here are some of my favorite quotes on intellectuals One of the surprising privileges of intellectuals is that they are free to be scandalously asinine without harming their reputation. - Eric Hoffer Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it - Thomas Sowell Not only have intellectuals been insulated from material consequences, they have often enjoyed immunity from even a loss of reputation after having been demonstrably wrong - Thomas Sowell From an early age, smart people are reminded of their intelligence, separated from their peers in gifted classes, and presented with opportunities unavailable to others. For these and other reasons, intellectuals tend to have an inflated sense of their own wisdom. It is thus arrogance, and not intelligence, that leads them into trouble. They?re so smart, hubris compels them to believe, that they can run everyone else?s life. But no one is that smart. What?s more, theorists devising systems for the rest of us to live under often have a difficult time running their own lives. Mundane tasks are to them what quantum physics is to the rest of us. - Daniel J Flynn What never fails inside the mind of an intellectual never works outside the confines of his head. The world?s stubborn refusal to vindicate the intellectual?s theories serves as proof of humanity?s irrationality, not his own. Thus, the true believer retrenches rather than rethinks; he launches a war on the world, denying reality because it fails to conform to his theories. If intellectuals are not prepared to reconcile theory and practice, then why do they bother to venture outside the ivory tower or the coffeehouse? Why not stay in the world of abstractions and fantasy? - Daniel J Flynn J - If you actual look at the actual track record of government spending, government employment, Reagan is the Keynesian. And Obama, mostly because of political constraints, a little bit because of lack of conviction from his own people, has been the anti-Keynesian. - Paul Kru

> Not only have intellectuals been insulated from material consequences, they > have often enjoyed immunity from even a loss of reputation after having > been demonstrably wrong - Thomas Sowell Hilariously true since Sowell, himself, is a brilliant example of just that point. Glad he seems to know it. He is quite the intellectual, though. Great writer, even when I disagree with his thesis. cheers, Judah

"Hilariously true since Sowell, himself, is a brilliant example of just that point. Glad he seems to know it." Just what I was saying.  Just because someone is an "intellectual", it doesn't mean they are always right. It doesn't matter if the "intellectual" is on the left, in the middle, or on the right. Whatever they say should be taken with a grain of salt. "Great writer, even when I disagree with his thesis." Everyone should read "Black Rednecks and White Liberals".  Outstanding. Follow it with "Basic Economics". J - We don't have a precise read on why this slower pace of growth is persisting - Ben Bernanke Some years down the pike, we?re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes. It?s going to be that we?re actually going to take Medicare under control, and we?re going to have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT. But it?s not going to happen now - Paul Krug