Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
The "victim?" in his own words:
This is ludicrous. The Right keeps screaming about fake protesters that Move On gets out torallies. This guy was probably not a faker, To bite someone's finger off you'd have to be fairly sincere. And Check out how the "victim" admitshe hit the guy in the mouth twice and never claims to have been hit or hindered by the "attacker." Explain please how shouting idiot at an anti-rallyer is much different from the hordes of folks from the right that have attended town halls and called backers hitler and communists.
Now, look at how the debate should go:
Thursday, August 13, 2009
When a right is granted and ignored, our laws provide for remedy. At the time of the Atlantic slave trade countries were just beginning to consider that slavery was inhumane, to the point of making it illegal, and the US trailed this awakening. The call for reparations seems unperturbed by the revisionist thinking required in the light of legal enactments of the time. It would be more reasonable to argue that freed slaves were damaged by the subsequent denial of full rights provided for at the time of the emancipation proclamation, up to the time when Jim Crow statutes were enacted. And then there is the statute of limitations with which to contend.
Do not expect this wrenching to go away any time soon.
James C. Collier
Thursday, August 06, 2009
The “Water Protection and Reinvestment Act,” H.R.3202, introduced last week by Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore), will be “financed broadly by small fees on such things as bottled beverages, products disposed of in wastewater, corporate profits, and the pharmaceutical industry,” according to Blumenauer’s fact sheet...No thanks.
The “Water Protection and Reinvestment Act,” H.R.3202, introduced last week by Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore), will be “financed broadly by small fees on such things as bottled beverages, products disposed of in wastewater, corporate profits, and the pharmaceutical industry,” according to Blumenauer’s fact sheet.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Friday, July 17, 2009
Notice the shadows of the ship and the astronaut and then look at the flag's shadow. That one has always baffled me.
I don't know what it means, it's just peculiar.
In an embarrassing acknowledgment, the space agency said Thursday that it must have erased the Apollo 11 moon footage years ago so that it could reuse the videotape...
"It's surprising to me that NASA didn't have the common sense to save perhaps the most important historical footage of the 20th century," said Rice University historian and author Douglas Brinkley. He noted that NASA saved all sorts of data and artifacts from Apollo 11, and it is "mind-boggling that the tapes just disappeared."...
Both Nafzger and Inchalik acknowledged that digitally remastering the video could further encourage conspiracy theorists who believe NASA faked the entire moon landing on a Hollywood set. But they said they enhanced the video as conservatively as possible.
Besides, Inchalik said that if there had been a conspiracy to fake a moon landing, NASA surely would have created higher-quality film.
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
...The addition of a domestic, left-wing terrorist follows criticism of the Obama administration for an internal Homeland Security report last week suggesting some military veterans could be susceptible to right-wing extremist recruiters or commit lone acts of violence, the AP says.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Thank you for pointing out that the Black people in this country have a very admirable position in this country presently. Both in reference to that of other communities in the world and the Black community historically. I have made that point in many discussions throughout the years.
Most recently in the discussions about morality and violence against women.
On to the paper:
there is a large segment of the Black community that is lower class and
as a result of the strong likelihood that respondents no belong to classes higher and more powerful, politically and economically, than the lower class largely because they have graduated from Princeton University, it is interesting to
see what their attitudes are towards a large majority of Blacks unlike themselves. Feelings of obligation to improve the life of the Black lower class, feelings of guilt for betraying the Black lower class, as well as feelings of shame or envy toward the Black lower class are investigated in this study.
No charge against whitey here.
Let me try to get back on track as best I can. The discussion should be about the actual thesis and the question of is it racist or not. Let's try to steer away from personal attacks. Now..
You seem to be playing the victim here. I didn't "tell you you were wrong." I asked you to justify your statement and you couldn't do so at that point. You said you couldn't remember the exact words when I asked you to give me examples. This is fair enough as the topic came up extemporaneously and you hadn't read it in a few months. Here on this site, you've stated that I am making excuses for and acknowledging racism because I pointed out that a sociology thesis would by definition be extremely focused an a very thin slice of society. I am neither acknowledging nor excusing Michelle Obama's "racism". Please support that statement by showing me where you get the idea that I am excusing or acknowledging racism.
I don't think it's racist to notice and discuss/ask about something you observe. For example, why do Black people eat chitterlings (chitlins)? This is a fair question and can be explored. In 42 years, I've never met 1 White person that ate them, tried them yes, ate them as product of their raising no. I've met countless Blacks from all parts of the country and all strata, half million dollar homes down to tenements that love them. I've never tried them and never intend to personally. Now the question can be explored: it was the part of the hog that White slave owners didn't use and as such gave to their slaves. The Black slaves grew accustomed to and liked them. they carried this liking with them all throughout the country during the great migrations from the South in the late 19th century and the industrial migrations of the 20s and 30s.
Now that's no thesis, but it shows how one can take a narrow focus and delve into it a little and have to acknowledge the institution of slavery, the treatment of slaves and so forth.
To discuss the feeling of obligation to the Black community that one would have had growing up in an era of legal and traditional segregation is NOT racist. Furthermore, the quote you have selected is a mere personal reference to support the actual thesis statement:
This study tries to examine the following attitudes of alumni:
the extent to which they are comfortable interacting with
Black and with White individuals in various activities; the
extent to which they are motivated to benefit the Black com-
munity in comparison to other entities such as themselves,
their families, God, etc.; the ideologies they hold with re-
spects to race relations between the Black and White commu-
nities; and feelings they have toward the Black lower class
such as a feeling of obligation that they should help im-
prove the lives of this particular group of Blacks.
Regarding your chosen excerpt: Her observation that her path would "likely lead to...assimilation" is hardly equated to force. As you state in one of your posts you are not a slave to white guilt or PC, but perhaps you are locked into a mode of thinking where any reference to the history that exists is invalid if it isn't pretty. And ultimately her prediction was wrong. She is hardly on the periphery of society. After all, she is First Lady.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
I’m assuming at this point you have taken the time to kind of read over Michelle Obama’s thesis. If not, here are just some pieces to look over.
Earlier in my college career, there was no doubt in my mind that as a member of the Black community I was somehow obligated to this community and would utilize all of my present and future resources to benefit this community first and foremost. My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my "Blackness" than ever before.
These experiences have made it apparent to me that the path I have chosen to follow by attending Princeton will likely lead to my further integration and/or assimilation in a white cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society
She spends most of her time making claims with no citations. So my perception of her thesis is that she felt that she was being forced to assimilate and integrate with white folks and that this clearly caused her problems. So much that she based her entire thesis on the subject. Maybe she was playing a more intelligent game of chess, who knows. The point is she played the race card and she did it in a very distasteful manner. If a white person had written this then attempted to run for any political office within the land, they would be labeled a racist or that they harbored some animosity towards black America. It is quite clear Michelle Obama did in fact harbor issues with her white professors and peers. I realize in your eyes that if Ms. Obama showed some gratitude as well as some class that would be considered another form of submission by “Black America” as you clearly stated with the “Yesssum massa, thank ya thank ya”. My question is, why didn’t she just attend a predominantly black college if she wanted to avoid integrating with “white” America? If I wanted to attend an all black college, wouldn’t I have to integrate with the social structure of that school if it was predominantly black? Wouldn’t it be some what hypocritical of me if I complained about it? I do know that I would be viewed as an arrogant snob and obviously a racist if I ever did attend a black college and shared her same view points. I highly doubt that I would be able to play the race card in those conditions but maybe I’m wrong. Maybe my black professors would feel sympathy for me once they read my thesis and they would pass me.
Now, for Sunday morning. I appreciate you taking the time to break down the differences between those who came in to the country and those who were forced and those who were all around treated poorly. How the Irish at least had a chance to make their way through the hard times and were able to integrate with the rest of “white” America. I understood your point and again I appreciated you taking the time to lay it out in such a format. However, the end of that discussion was again how blacks have had it harder.
The whole reason we had that discussion was because two of your callers were referring to myself as being a “sleazy car salesman” and a “slave owner”. Once I rebutted, I was stifled by “calm down, what’s wrong with you, why are you so angry”. Again, liberals playing the victim in order to get their point across. Which I still do not see. Michelle Obama was in fact and may very well still be harboring a lot of animosity towards white people. Which in my eyes is racist. You may or may not agree but that is exactly how it looks and to be cut down by some assholes who clearly did not even look at her thesis, well it is disappointing.
We didn’t even touch on her militant “fight the white power structure” church which her and her husband attended for nearly twenty years. We become products of our environment do we not? Yes, she just overlooked everything her preacher was rattling on about and her husband, when he quotes the Reverend Wright within his books, someone else just put that there. It was evil whitey.
You see, this is where Eric Holder appears to be a moron. These are the reasons that discussions of race can not carry on. They are always one sided and they are fueled primarily by ignorance or white guilt. When actual facts are discussed, they are dismissed and the person who brings them to the table are referred to as being racist or in this case “slave owner”. I personally believe Michael, while you have great intentions, you too harbor some animosity towards white people. Lastly, I want to say thank you for letting me come down to the show. Obviously I offended you and some how, your callers. Either way I apologize for that and I hope things turn around down there. Good luck.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Saturday, February 07, 2009
Speaking of "my tax money," I don't think much can be said in favor of this so called stimulus package. It is entirely deficit spending and will only delay the inevitable. There is no way around it, we are going to have to down grade our lifestyles. This is not some hate America tirade, it is simply the facts. We, as a people, have lived beyond our means for many years. Certainly all of my adult life, 20 years, credit has been readily available. And more than available: it has been shoved down our throats. By this I mean the constant "buy! buy! buy!" mantra. From the time we we're toddlers we are taught to consume more than we we are taught to create.
and now a quote from Alan Greenspan:
When banks loan money to finance profitable endeavors, the loans are paid off rapidly and bank credit continues to be generally available. But when the business ventures financed by bank credit are less profitable and slow to pay, bankers find their loans outstanding are excessive relative to their gold reserves, and they begin to curtail new lending, usually through higher interest rates... Thus, under the gold standard, a free banking system stands as the protector of an economy's stability and balanced growth.
...prior to WWI, the banking system in the US was based on gold, and even though governments intervened occasionally, banking was more free than controlled. Periodically banks became loaned up to the limit of their gold reserves, interest rates rose sharply, new credit was cut off, and the economy went in to sharp, but short-lived recession. It was limited gold reserves that stopped the unbalanced expansions of business activity, before they could develop into the post- WWI type of disaster...
But the process of cure was misdiagnosed as the disease: if shortage of bank reserves was causing a business decline- argued economic interventionists- why not find a way of supplying increased reserves to the banks so they never need be short! If banks can continue to loan money indefinitely- it was claimed- there need never be any slumps in business. And so the Federal Reserve System was organized in 1913. It consisted of 12 regional Federal Reserve banks nominally owned by private bankers, but in fact government sponsored, controlled, and supported...Now, in addition to gold, credit extended by the Federal Reserve banks( "paper" reserves) could serve as legal tender to pay depositors...
With a logic reminiscent of a generation earlier, statists argued that the gold standard was largely to blame for the credit debacle which led to the Great Depression. If the gold standard had not existed, they argued, Britain's abandonment of gold payments in 1931 would not have caused the failure of banks all over the world. (The irony was that since 1913, we had been, not on a gold standard, but on what may be termed "a mixed gold standard"; yet it is gold that took the blame.) But the opposition to the gold standard in any form -- from a growing number of welfare-state advocates -- was prompted by a much subtler insight: the realization that the gold standard is incompatible with chronic deficit spending (the hallmark of the welfare state). Stripped of its academic jargon, the welfare state is nothing more than a mechanism by which governments confiscate the wealth of the productive members of a society to support a wide variety of welfare schemes. A substantial part of the confiscation is effected by taxation. But the welfare statists were quick to recognize that if they wished to retain political power, the amount of taxation had to be limited and they had to resort to programs of massive deficit spending, i.e., they had to borrow money, by issuing government bonds, to finance welfare expenditures on a large scale...
Under a gold standard, the amount of credit that an economy can support is determined by the economy's tangible assets, since every credit instrument is ultimately a claim on some tangible asset. But government bonds are not backed by tangible wealth, only by the government's promise to pay out of future tax revenues, and cannot easily be absorbed by the financial markets. A large volume of new government bonds can be sold to the public only at progressively higher interest rates. Thus, government deficit spending under a gold standard is severely limited. The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare statists to use the banking system as a means to an unlimited expansion of credit. They have created paper reserves in the form of government bonds which -- through a complex series of steps -- the banks accept in place of tangible assets and treat as if they were an actual deposit, i.e., as the equivalent of what was formerly a deposit of gold. The holder of a government bond or of a bank deposit created by paper reserves believes that he has a valid claim on a real asset. But the fact is that there are now more claims outstanding than real assets.
And Ayn Rand:
A system in which the government does not nationalize the means of production, but assumes total control over the economy is fascism.
I found both of these quotes in the book Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal
Thanks to Rich Brilliant for the copy. although I'm not sire if I just never gave it back or it was a gift.
Friday, February 06, 2009
"During the lending boom, most mortgages were flipped and sold to another lender or servicer or sliced up and sold to investors as securitized packages on Wall Street," explains the Consumer Warning Network. "In the rush to turn these over as fast as possible to make the most money, many of the new lenders did not get the proper paperwork to show they own the note and mortgage. This is the key to the produce the note strategy."
And another stratergy...
Congress is currently considering the size and scope of a second stimulus plan to help bailout the American economy. The first stimulus plan essentially focused on bailing out Wall Street and the banks. It is vital that the second stimulus plan provide direct economic relief to Americans. There are many ways to provide relief. The Mortgage Deferred Payment Plan is the initiative we are advocating.
How will the Mortgage Deferred Payment Plan work?
The plan will allow qualified homeowners who have Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac backed mortgages to apply for a mortgage payment “deferment” for a specified period of time. We are proposing 6 months to 3 years...
At the end of the “deferment” period we are proposing that the homeowner have 15 years to repay the “deferment” interest free.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009