Re: "Focusing on wrong issues" Letter to the Inky May 14

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/members/phillyimc/sites/phillyimc.org/web/sites/all/modules/mailhandler/mailhandler.module on line 855.

I respond to a letter in the Inky concerning priorities and agendas.

The writer sets out a number of propositions, that:

  • the $15 trillion debt,
  • the $1.5 trillion annual deficit,
  • the high unemployment rate,
  • a failed strategy in the Middle East,
  • and 50 percent of the population paying no federal income tax in an ever-expanding entitlement society.


are all very serious problems that need to be tackled and all of which are far more timely and urgent than marriage equality between gays and straights. I wrote about this letter to the paper on the subject of whether or not marriage equality was a meaningful issue (I think it is), but the above is an interesting list. The first two items on the list, debt and deficit, cannot be pursued at the same time that the third item, unemployment, is pursued. The President and the Republican Congress spent all of 2010 and the first half of 2011 trying to lower the deficit and at the same time, promised that they were pursuing job growth. They couldn't do both and a quick look at employment growth for the last several years shows some progress in climbing out of the hole of the Great Recession, but very slow progress. The red line going upwards doesn't look anything like a strong, healthy financial recovery. In fact,at precisely the time when job growth should have been really taking off in response to the policies that the President and Congress were pursuing, job growth abruptly slowed down instead. This was a complete surprise to those who had put their faith in the "Comfidence Fairy ," but not all surprising to liberal Keynesians. An economist explains on The Real News what the agenda of the pro-austerity crowd is. It's nothing that regular citizens should support and there's a reason that Europeans are opposed to it. Back in 1999, anti-globalists spoke of the "race to the bottom," and that seems to be precisely what's going on.


Not sure how Obama's strategy in the Middle East is a failure. Certainly he's doing no worse than the last president did.


And no, first off, entitlements are not "ever-expanding," the number of people on food stamps has grown tremendously, but that's entirely because of the Great Recession. Why are so many people still on food stamps, years after the crash? Well, if Obama and the Republicans had not "pivoted" towards deficit reduction and away from getting Americans back to work, there wouldn't be as many people on food stamps. There would be more Americans paying taxes because there more of our citizens would have well or at least decently-paying jobs.



The Ponzi is in Charge

People make money with manipulation like Romney,Bernard Madoff, or when 666 won the lottery through cheating, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Pennsylvania_Lottery_scandal
The latest scam is to change the rules before the Ponzi goes bust to make it legal and have the tax payer guarantee the losses.

Bill Gates invented something people want rather than manipulate money around.

When it comes to the thieves stealing our world, George Soros breaks rant. He made his money all the wrong way but spends it the right way instead of guaranteeing the power of the ponzi, like the rest. George Soros is rare if not unique, and I think a real asset, and I think it is why every other Ponzi artist hates him

One game to keep the ponzi in charge is to get people to argue over abortion and gay marriage, making sure neither side ever wins so people will be distracted from the ponzi,


the Romney campaign and Republicans generally have been calling for an end to "distracting" issues like marriage equality, but when the Obama campaign obliges and looks at Bain Capital's "Heads I win, tails you lose" strategy, wel-l-l-l, it turns out they aren't so eager to talk about the economy either.

Don Quixote sticks to the important issues

Ron Paul avoids arguing gay rights and abortion and even when he is partly wrong arguing with him puts people back on track to discussing the important issues.

I think one reason that he hasn't tried to run as a libertarian again is that the only thing he would end up debating with the other libertarian contenders for the libertarian ticket would be abortion.

I almost want to say that the purpose of arguing gay rights and abortion is to get the rich richer and for people to forget the ponzi artists running things.

I don't think Sanatorium was actually trying to be President, he was just trying to serve, and he hopes get their help to join, the 1/10 of 1% in charge.

Rich Gardner the following link is what you want to argue,

I appreciate Ron Paul's peacenik views

but I remain very highly skeptical of his other views:

The animating force behind Ron Paul's endurance has never been campaign spending, it is indeed an idea. A really shitty idea, promoted by Right Wingers as a free market utopia without the horrible burdens of stable currency or child labor laws.

The originator of this idea is occasionally enthusiastically embraced by conservatives as providing a consistent philosophical basis for shitty policy. Her name is Ayn Rand, and people like Paul Ryan just love, love, love her ... until they remember that she hates their religion and thinks it's silly. Then the walk back begins.

Hilarious video at the link, too.

And for sheer hilarity...

"Romney is no longer claiming he created 100,000 jobs [in his time at Bai Capital], and has seemingly dropped jobs and moved on to debt. Debt is something he might actually understand, due to his experience loading up companies with debt while at Bain."

Balloon Juice

Which is kinda what I figured they'd do. Romney and Republicans whined and bitched and moaned when Obama talked about Osama bin Laden and marriage equality between gays and straights, but now that Obama's campaign is talking about the economy and "How good a businessman was Mitt Romney?" they want to change the subject again!