pirana

. . . you'd see investors, real investors, lining up to get in on it. The fact that the only people willingly involved in the financing are the government and the Vikings is your first hint these places do not make money, do not generate wealth, and do not provide a return on investment. I'm still waiting for a single case that shows a city losing a major league team suffered for it - other than no longer having a group of highly paid, whiny, go-on-strike-once-a-decade-because-they-can't-make-ends-meet millionaires through which to live vicariously. People going to ball games are spending discretionary income. They will spend it on something else, and I'm guessing a lot more of the money stays in town. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Almost as annoying as the idiots that want to include fundamentalist literal interpretation of the Bible into a science cirriculum. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Anyone who thinks major sports teams need financial aid, or partnerships with government, or that sports teams "stimulate" the economy ought to read Major League Losers. It's a bit dated (but still valid), and I'm not aware of anything more recent; but it has never been refuted by any hard data; only by pleas to emotion. Basically it is a billionaires club that has duped the rest of the world into subsidizing their immensely profitable businesses. There is no data that shows the loss of a team negatively impacting a region's economy. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Put up a poll that appears you are genuinely interested in hearing people's opinions and I'll vote. Looks like for this round all your options other than the first one are just snide commentary. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Couldn't agree more, and have been saying it my entire adult life - though Mr. Downs is older than dirt so he's probably been saying it longer. I remember as a teenager, and nearing draft age during the Vietnam War, being utterly appalled at how the country was being run, and amazed that so much of the adult population could be so thoroughly duped. Basically, the elite have decided that since they seem to be forced to live within a democracy, they'd solve things by simply buying all candidates from both parties. It's worked out great for them. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I didnt realize that the nomination was voted by journalists. No, no ,no. The nominations to run for office are up for grabs. Then they become candidates by way of the delegates giving them the party nod. Then both candidates are promptly purchased by rich special interest groups - making the general election a meaningless excercise in futility - I mean Democracy. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

He's a better liar. Face it, the debates are basically a 90 minutes arbitrated dual press release. Almost nothing of substance. The candidates, especially Romney, will repeat their same appeals to emotion with all kinds of half-true soundbites. In other words, very much like all the other speeches we've heard so far. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Ok, talking about Mitt's wife.... I read the thread (not the link) and thought you all were writing about Michelle Obama...... Now the partisan comments line up with the posters better Party has nothing to do with it. Barack is a guy too. As you well know, we guys only recognize red, orange, yellow... brown and black. Women, however, recognize "boston brick", "titanic rose", "rainforest dew", "asbury sand", "misty blush", "pecos spice", "persimmon"... and 2000 other so-called "colors" that are listed in the paint catalog. I was shocked to learn recently that a shade that I definitely see as falling in the range of the hundreds of colors known to me as red, is officially labeled lake by the USPS. Would have thought lake would be bluish or greenish; maybe even brown depending on the locale. (Here in Wisconsin, most lakes are blue or green). " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

They actually pay a lot less than that. If you tok their gross income; without all of the credits, and loopholes, and bogus losses - my guess is that there effective tax rate (actual tax paid on actual income) is more like 5 or 10%, and for many of them - even less. I would not be surprised if there are millionaires paying nothing in income tax. That should be no surprise in a social structure that has decided to let rich people buy legislative influence. And the Supreme Court thinks this is a good thing. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Egads man! " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

What is offensive is the loss of 50,000+ young men and women in a conflict that turned out to be nothing more than the manifestation of the ignorance and ego of incompetent leadership. Nothing speaks like results. 50K dead, shitloads of tax dollars flushed away, nothing whatsoever in return. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

So, just a bit stronger than the piss-water they marketed everywhere else? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

IMO, he is correct. Does not take away from the fact he is also not very smart. The best bet for the Republicans would be to get behind Romney, offer him up for sacrifice in what amounts to a throwaway year for them, and start searching for a candidate for the next cycle that doesn't have his/her head up their ass. I really do not think any candidate that works so hard to suck up to the far right has any chance to win the Presidency now or for the foreseeable future. That party is such a fucking mess right now. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Yes, social mores are always in flux. Usually doesn't bother people much - until the road gets bumpy. Then those social mores (which are always in play and constantly undergoing incremental change at the least) become the boogeyman. Kind of a neat dynamic in a way because each generation gets to feel needed and important (for example - every generation thinks they invented the sexual revolution). The downside is that there is always guaranteed to be those that insist yesterday's mores were the "right" ones. There are no right or wrong mores, just the current ones. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Haven't been keeping up on end-of-whatever conspiracies/prophesies lately. What is the new timeline? 2006, 2007, and 2009 have come and gone; and a few extra months is rather vague. Care to put another stake in the ground, or you gonna play it safe like most of the other conspiracy theorists and stop setting dates? " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I disagree. People mature differently. Some clearly do not have the maturity to serve, fight or vote, simply based on the number of years they have been on the Earth. Agreed. Never understood the rationale behind "old enough to fight, old enough to drink." What is the logical equivalency between those 2 that indicates the age should be the same. Makes as much sense as 'old enough to swing a hammer, old enough to vote.' How about 'old enough to control my bowels, old enough to drink alcohol.' " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

ALL the time? That must be your hyperbolic way of saying sometimes, or occasionally, or rarely-but-when-it-does-it-gets-a-lot-of-press. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I think having a preconceived notion about someone, based on their skin color, is practically the definition of racist. Just because they were instilled as a normal way of being during childhood does not make the actions, or holding of notions any less racist. It's like saying "It's not my fault, it's how I was raised." I was quite racist thru the end of my teen years. It's what I learned from my dad and uncles. My environment was highly charged with racism, and it all seemed normal - but it was still racist and so was I. It was learned, and then it was unlearned - or more accurately - something else was learned over the top of it. For purposes of discussing what is racist and who exhibits such behavior, racist is as racist does. How it got there and whether the person perceives themselves or others as racist is a different topic. IOW - the definition of racist and racist behavior does not change because of how the person came to be that way. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

He is amazing. Kind of like a Teflon Don. He says the stupidest shit, then even faster than people can point out how ridiculous it is, he's off on another topic. He speaks from his feelings, not from facts. It is OK for people to let their feelings be known; it's just in his case they are often stated as fact, are completely wrong, and are rooted in a loony fundamentalist agenda. His election to the Presidency would be ultimate proof that for the U.S. electorate soundbites and feelings are more important than substance and knowledge. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I don't think commenting or asking questions about racism makes a person a racist. There are differences in groups of people that we have lumped into a category we've tagged as race. No amount of political correctness will make that go away. Racism to me is when a person treats someone unfairly based on those differences. Sure, "fairly" is a very subjective term, but it is far more accurate than "differently" because there are differences. Put it this way; if a person is an asshole to everybody, they probably are not racist. If they exhibit a pattern of being nasty and saying nasty things to or about certain specific groups, then they probably are racist, or sexist, or homophobic, or some other -ist or -ic. Unfortunately, jn tough times, those groups least able to defend themselves become the boogeymen. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

I suspect our leaders (at least the elected ones) are either incompetent or lying. Such a state of denial is typical, especially from elected officials, who will invent all kinds of ways to not face up to unpleasant facts. A perfect example was the rationalizations in the runup to Japan's crash and 20 year recession, which they are just barely recovering from. The critics warning of the dire consequences of building a house of cards eventually give up and go rather quiet. The general public, not even wanting to really understand the economy, eventually migrate to the soundbites of their chosen side. When the house collapses, the unbiased and unelected experts, initally ridiculed for their warnings, then take a beating for making the correct call, as if their recognition of the impending and eventually unfolding problem was caused by them. History keeps repeating, mostly because people simply refuse to heed it's warnings. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

It's not an Obama experiment any more than personal computing is a Bill Gates experiment. Just as we would have arrived at the same point in computing with or without Gates; we have arrived at this point regardless of Obama. We are a part of a first run 200+ year old test of Democracy and capitalism. It's had it's ups and downs; and though the ups have been great, the downs really suck. You'd like to think we would find an equilibrium between capital relentlessly pursuing profit and Democracy seeking a fair distribution of that profit. Isn't working. Does not appear the experiment will last even as long as several other of the great social/economic experiments that eventually proved unsustainable. The flaws are sytemic, we need a new model - not more boogeymen. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

It all depends on what they were studying. Were they studying to be "Makers" in society (things like engineering) or were they studying to be "Takers" (things like Liberal Arts Majors, Political and Social Science Majors). "Makers" go on to contribute to society, "Takers" are taught only one thing. To protest when someone threatens to take away their entitlements. There is nothing wrong with those who are studying to be the next generation of "Makers". We need more people studying to be "Makers". Unfortunately society (well at least on this north side of the border) only seems to know how to produce the next generation of "Takers". Oh that's the most fucked up thing I read all day and I just got finished reading a first year college student's screenplay. BILLIONS upon BILLIONS of dollars circulate in this country every year because of things made by liberal arts, poli and social science majors. You have a warped view of the world my friend. Well, when things start to go south (ha), people look for a boogey man in anybody not like them. It isn't our fellow middle class folks south of the Mason-Dixon line that are fucking over northeners; and it isn't honkies or kikes or wops or spics or niggers. Those are all distractions welcomed by the people responsible for the screwing over of the middle class - 80% of whom have actually lost ground financially - regardless of skin color, religion, or ethnic background. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Can you say $25B auto bailout? How much does any car 'cost' with the same analysis? Exactly. If subsidies, grants, credits, deductions, etc are taken into effect the cost of just about everything can be made to look absurd. Obscure example - there are subsidies for mohair production. All a person or company needs to do is make enough noise, bullshit enough of the right people, and buy enough influence (known as campaign contributions); to get their own subsidy, credit, grant, etc. What's the old saying? The first million is the toughest to make. After that, you can buy your way into the rest by purchasing and influencing laws in your favor. Well, maybe more than a million to get started, but at some point you no longer have to actually be productive, just influential - and that is just a matter of having money, not actually doing work. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

This thrread proves there are aliens (at least one) among us. " . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley