PDA

View Full Version : New Lies for Old


Vincent
08-18-2009, 04:07 PM
As you ponder your position on “obamacare”, “nationalized health care”, “the public option” or whatever the donkeys call it to foist this “health care” or “health insurance” bull@#$% on us, consider all that the donkeys have done to us through “social programs” in the past.

“Soshacurity”, as it were, is but one litany of examples of how the donkeys strap us with a massive socialist program and its “promises”, then “administration” after “administration” warp, distort, and rescind the promises, then outright rob the coffers of the funds they confiscated from us.

FDR (the embodiment of evil) “introduced” the Social Security (FICA) Program. He Promised:

1. That participation in the program would be completely voluntary,
2. That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the program,
3. That the money the participants elected to put Into the program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,
4. That the money the participants put into the “independent Trust Fund” rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement program, and no other gubmint program, and
5. That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

As it happened, the part about “never be taxed as income” never made into law. What a surprise.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for decades and are now receiving a Social Security check every month, and then find that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the gubmint to “put away”, you may be interested in the following:

In 1958 the donkey congress voted to remove some funds from Social Security and put it into the general fund for congress to spend. Their “logic” was that there was so much money in Social Security fund that it would never run out or be “used up” for the purpose it was intended.

Then along came LBJ, the ideological “son” of ol’ evil incarnate himself; the “architect” of the “great society” and the “war on poverty” that set new spending standards for the donkeys by pissing $ Trillions down rat holes. “Why, we jis wanna hep y’all”. And as donkeys do when they control the White House and both houses of congress, they took Social Security from the “independent Trust Fund” and put it into the general fund so that congress could spend it. The “deal” ol’ evil incarnate made with the electorate to put their money in a “safe place” so it’d be there for them in their old age was broken.

Not to be outdone by LBJ, the ideological “grandson” of ol’ evil incarnate himself, the great peanut farmer from Georgia, began giving immigrants who moved into this country social security payments at age 65, even though they never paid a dime into it! Again we see what the donkeys do when they control the White House and both houses of congress. As this is just about the donkey’s “Soshacurity” sham, I won’t comment of the fiasco the rest of the Carter “administration” was and the sad condition he left our country in after only one term.

In 1983 the donkey congress “introduced” us to “Soshacurity” taxation. Initially retirees were taxed on 50% of their benefits. Yes, Dutch signed it into law because he didn’t have the votes to sustain a veto.

Then along came Boy Clinton, the ideological “great grandson” of ol’ evil incarnate himself. You may recall that his charming wife made a run at nationalizing “health care” that turned into a train wreck for the donkeys, but I digress. But the Clintons, the good socialists that they were, took a run on “Soshacurity” and raised the tax threshold to 85%, and eliminated the tax deduction for “Soshacurity” (FICA) withholding. Talk about getting screwed and not getting kissed. Yet another shining example of what the donkeys do when they control the White House and both houses of congress.

So after all these socialist bastards have done to us with “Soshacurity”, they and their “media” stooges have a significant portion of the electorate believing that it is the elephants that “want to take away your ‘Soshacurity’.”. That is just rich. And to boot, congress gives themselves 100% retirement for only serving one term!!! You can’t make this @#$% up.

So, here we are with the donkeys once again controlling the White House and both houses of congress. And once again we are being presented with another “Why, we jis wanna hep y’all”. We’re being told that we need to trash the best health care system on the planet because there are 10 million “chronically uninsured” among us.

We’re being asked to ignore history, and to believe and trust the current socialist bastards to give us a “good deal” and then honor it. How’s that “Soshacurity” working out folks? Yeah, folks that trusted their gubmint and live on “Soshacurity” are living on cat food. How’s that “Great Society” doing? Now instead of bussing, we have forced “poverty” thresholds that “must” be met in suburban public “schools”. Hey Black America, how’s the “war on poverty” treating you? The statistics don’t lie. Medicare has been a hit too, hasn’t it?

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have". Thomas Jefferson

revefsreleets
08-18-2009, 04:16 PM
FDR is "the embodiment of evil"?

Errrrrr....oooooookayyyyy....

FDR's policies were largely supposed to be temporary. Kind of hard to blame him for the ensuing mess, isn't it?

steelreserve
08-18-2009, 04:39 PM
Well, a ton of government programs go awry because ensuing generations of politicians start spending the money on other things instead.

Here, we've got another great example of that with the San Francisco Bay Bridge ... after they built it in the 1930s, they put a 30-cent toll in place for 10 years to pay for the construction, and after that the toll was supposed to go away.

Of course, by the time the 10 years were up, they were spending the toll money for maintenance, because they figured that way they could spend all the money in the state highway fund on other things. Then they decided to jack up the toll to a dollar to pay for road construction. Now it also pays for trains, city buses, and other things. My favorite being a huge project to overhaul every single road bridge in the state (3,000+ in all) in case they fall over in a massive earthquake, which has happened exactly twice in the last 100 years. During that project, they messed up on one of the first bridges and it collapsed and killed a few people. Good job increasing safety, guys. The toll is $4 and they're talking about raising it again.

fansince'76
08-18-2009, 04:56 PM
FDR is "the embodiment of evil"?

Errrrrr....oooooookayyyyy....

FDR's policies were largely supposed to be temporary. Kind of hard to blame him for the ensuing mess, isn't it?

"This country was rooo-ined by Franklin Delano Roooooo-se-velt!" (Archie Bunker, 1971)

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

revefsreleets
08-18-2009, 05:00 PM
To be fair, this kind of stuff is just as bad as the super liberal ultra-biased one-sided stuff that the other side publishes.

That's why they need each other...too balance the World out.

7SteelGal43
08-18-2009, 05:06 PM
FDR is "the embodiment of evil"?

Errrrrr....oooooookayyyyy....

FDR's policies were largely supposed to be temporary. Kind of hard to blame him for the ensuing mess, isn't it?

They were HIS "temporary" policies that were in place to BECOME permament in the first place. So yeah, I guess I, for one, CAN blame him for the ensuing mess.

7SteelGal43
08-18-2009, 05:11 PM
To be fair, this kind of stuff is just as bad as the super liberal ultra-biased one-sided stuff that the other side publishes.

That's why they need each other...too balance the World out.

Not sure I can buy into that "to balance the World out" mentality when it's the "socialist" programs that have been implimented that have so screwed things up in this country. Thus proving the old adage, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". Every one of these "oh so sweet" sounding programs that had the BEST of intentions have F'd things up royal and put too damn much power in the hands of the federal government.

Vincent
08-18-2009, 05:29 PM
To be fair, this kind of stuff is just as bad as the super liberal ultra-biased one-sided stuff that the other side publishes.

So making reference to the donkey's sordid record of public trust is just as bad as donkey behavior? Their history betrays them to be the liars and thieves that they are. None are isolated instances. To the contrary, they reveal the same cynical regard they have held those that elected throughout their history.

I refer to FDR as the "embodiment of evil" because of what he did, and what he allowed to happen. That isn't rhetoric.

Every one of these "oh so sweet" sounding programs that had the BEST of intentions have F'd things up royal and put too damn much power in the hands of the federal government.

Their intentions are to increase their own power and make the citizens beholden to the gubmint.

Seriously people, do you think there is a politician or bureaucrat in any gubmint that gives a @#$% if you die in festers and boils?

MasterOfPuppets
08-18-2009, 05:32 PM
where would social security be now had the privatization proposal been enacted ?

Social Security: Bush's Lies vs. Reality
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/social_security_lies.htm

Note To Retirees: If Bush Social Security plan had passed, you’d really be screwed
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/01/hbc-90004178

A recent Center for American Progress Action Fund report found that if a worker had retired on October 1, 2008 after 35 years of contributions to private retirement accounts, that retiree would have lost nearly $30,000 in retirement funds because of the downturn in the stock market over the last two years.

Part of the reason Bush’s push failed was that very few people actually believed he was trying to reform Social Security and instead thought he was trying to dismantle it. Even back in 2005, despite a lack of support for privatization, the Bush administration was insisting that their efforts were a “great success.”
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/05/bush-social-security-accomplishment/

7SteelGal43
08-18-2009, 05:50 PM
where would social security be now had the privatization proposal been enacted ?

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/social_security_lies.htm


http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/01/hbc-90004178


http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/05/bush-social-security-accomplishment/

So if you take Vincints information - social security enacted and ultimately abused and turned into a failure - and MOPs informatoin - Bush's ideas to privatize it could not have improved the social security program and may have in fact financially strapped retirees - what can we learn from this ?

I don't know, maybe THE GOVERNMENT NEVER SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN INVOLVED IN PEOPLES RETIREMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE ?!!

Let's take a good hard look at this lesson before deciding if you want government to take over health care. Thank you for listening. :chuckle:

Vincent
08-18-2009, 05:58 PM
where would social security be now had the privatization proposal been enacted ?

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/social_security_lies.htm

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/01/hbc-90004178

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/05/bush-social-security-accomplishment/

We have a different view of the world. I prefer freedom to do as I please. I earn. That is my money. I don't believe it should be confiscated into a socialist Ponzi scheme on a vague and disingenuous promise that "itt'll be there for ya" someday. I am absolutely certain I would have seen a greater return had I used those stolen dollars as I would have chosen.

I take no issue with those that choose to give their money to the gubmint. I would like have the choice to not participate. You people are for "choice", aren't you?

MasterOfPuppets
08-18-2009, 06:14 PM
We have a different view of the world. I prefer freedom to do as I please. I earn. That is my money. I don't believe it should be confiscated into a socialist Ponzi scheme on a vague and disingenuous promise that "itt'll be there for ya" someday. I am absolutely certain I would have seen a greater return had I used those stolen dollars as I would have chosen.

I take no issue with those that choose to give their money to the gubmint. I would like have the choice to not participate. You people are for "choice", aren't you?
oh i agree considering by the time some of reach retirement age ,the only thing in that social security box will be nothing but IOU's. we won't see a penny of the money they've been taking from us thanks to the idiots we elect. ... isn't it ironic how the government makes laws to govern the citizens, but yet its the citizens who should be making laws to govern the government. we steal from them we pay a penalty...they steal from us and they're not held accountable....:doh:
but here's the thing...if every citizen was givin a million dollars say at age 21 ,and STRONGLY advised to make arrangements with a portion of the money for thier retirement years, be it by saving or investing. i bet a large percentage of the people would be flat ass broke without a penny of that million before they hit 50, and the taxpayers would end up supporting them anyway in thier golden years.

steelreserve
08-18-2009, 07:10 PM
oh i agree considering by the time some of reach retirement age ,the only thing in that social security box will be nothing but IOU's. we won't see a penny of the money they've been taking from us thanks to the idiots we elect. ... isn't it ironic how the government makes laws to govern the citizens, but yet its the citizens who should be making laws to govern the government. we steal from them we pay a penalty...they steal from us and they're not held accountable....:doh:
but here's the thing...if every citizen was givin a million dollars say at age 21 ,and STRONGLY advised to make arrangements with a portion of the money for thier retirement years, be it by saving or investing. i bet a large percentage of the people would be flat ass broke without a penny of that million before they hit 50, and the taxpayers would end up supporting them anyway in thier golden years.

They tried to do something like this in the Baltic states after the breakup of the Soviet Union -- once communism ended, instead of just giving everyone the deed to the state-owned house they lived in, they gave them the equivalent amount of cash. Some people just said OK, we'll use it to buy the house. Others spent the money on all kinds of other things, and as you can guess, it didn't work out so well for them. So they had protests demanding help, and wouldn't you know it, most of them ended up in housing paid for by the government (although they didn't actually own them).

heh ... I once knew some girl in this country who came from a pretty poor family, but inherited about a quarter-million dollars when she was about 22 or 23 years old. Quit her job, bought one brand-new SUV, then bought another brand-new SUV. Rented a house by herself for a couple grand a month, and threw big house parties every couple days with hella coke and hella weed.

After about six months, she had to sell the first SUV to pay the rent; after about eight months the second one got repossessed and she was getting evicted, so of course she used the last of the money to throw a "we're getting evicted" party and trash the place. I don't know what she's doing now, but it probably involves selling weed.

Seems like about par for the course if you handed out that kind of cash and left people to their own devices. Although if you gave it to everybody at once, it'd be pretty fun to watch.

MasterOfPuppets
08-18-2009, 07:41 PM
They tried to do something like this in the Baltic states after the breakup of the Soviet Union -- once communism ended, instead of just giving everyone the deed to the state-owned house they lived in, they gave them the equivalent amount of cash. Some people just said OK, we'll use it to buy the house. Others spent the money on all kinds of other things, and as you can guess, it didn't work out so well for them. So they had protests demanding help, and wouldn't you know it, most of them ended up in housing paid for by the government (although they didn't actually own them).

heh ... I once knew some girl in this country who came from a pretty poor family, but inherited about a quarter-million dollars when she was about 22 or 23 years old. Quit her job, bought one brand-new SUV, then bought another brand-new SUV. Rented a house by herself for a couple grand a month, and threw big house parties every couple days with hella coke and hella weed.

After about six months, she had to sell the first SUV to pay the rent; after about eight months the second one got repossessed and she was getting evicted, so of course she used the last of the money to throw a "we're getting evicted" party and trash the place. I don't know what she's doing now, but it probably involves selling weed.

Seems like about par for the course if you handed out that kind of cash and left people to their own devices. Although if you gave it to everybody at once, it'd be pretty fun to watch.well thats just my point. lets just say they stopped taking it out of everyones check. do you seriously think people are responcible enough to plan that far ahead ??? hell no... most people don't even know what budget means. i guarantee if most people who have insurance through companies, if they were offered the cash equivalent on thier checks instead of the insurance.. they'd roll the dice and take the cash instead of the security... most people are all about today, not the future. ultimately in the end you'll ALWAYS end up supporting others, its just a matter of the name they assign to it on your deductions.so call it fica or fed tax, social security or welfare.....it'll always be coming out of your check. they can take 40 million off of the social security and add 40 million to welfare..is it going to make a difference?

hindes204
08-18-2009, 07:56 PM
well thats just my point. lets just say they stopped taking it out of everyones check. do you seriously think people are responcible enough to plan that far ahead ??? hell no... most people don't even know what budget means. i guarantee if most people who have insurance through companies, if they were offered the cash equivalent on thier checks instead of the insurance.. they'd roll the dice and take the cash instead of the security... most people are all about today, not the future. ultimately in the end you'll ALWAYS end up supporting others, its just a matter of the name they assign to it on your deductions.so call it fica or fed tax, social security or welfare.....it'll always be coming out of your check.



and that right there is the difference between me and you....its MY money, i should be able to do whatever the hell i want with it.

You say people arent responsible enough to manage the money they make, so what solution to you propose...to let the uber-resposible government tell me how and on what i should be spending my hard earned money on....im sorry...but F THAT

MasterOfPuppets
08-18-2009, 08:06 PM
and that right there is the difference between me and you....its MY money, i should be able to do whatever the hell i want with it.

You say people arent responsible enough to manage the money they make, so what solution to you propose...to let the uber-resposible government tell me how and on what i should be spending my hard earned money on....im sorry...but F THAT hey i'm with ya... i'm just pointing out that what would happen if they stopped taking the percenting for social security out of your check, would just end up in federal tax, because of the people who DIDN'T plan ahead, would just end up on other government aid programs that still are funded through your tax dollars...only now there's gonna be a HUGE increase in people getting that aid. so ultimately its still going to come out of your check, just under a different name. did you read the example steelreserve posted ? is there a solution for lazy irresponcible people ? is there a solution for crooked politicians ? do you got a say in the government handing your tax dollars to other countries ? that pisses me off far more than my money going to aid american citizens.

Godfather
08-18-2009, 08:08 PM
So making reference to the donkey's sordid record of public trust is just as bad as donkey behavior?


I think his issue was posting things that aren't true, which applies to some of the items in your chain e-mail.

And you can't legitimately claim to be making reference to the donkeys' record if you accuse them of things that didn't happen or that had to be bipartisan (like the 1983 change which happened when the elephants had the Senate).

Vincent
08-18-2009, 08:38 PM
I think his issue was posting things that aren't true, which applies to some of the items in your chain e-mail.

And you can't legitimately claim to be making reference to the donkeys' record if you accuse them of things that didn't happen or that had to be bipartisan (like the 1983 change which happened when the elephants had the Senate).

What he wrote was taking issue with me calling FDR the embodiment of evil. I stand by that statement.

You're right on 83. "In 1983 the donkey congress “introduced” us to “Soshacurity” taxation. Initially retirees were taxed on 50% of their benefits. Yes, Dutch signed it into law because he didn’t have the votes to sustain a veto." That was the only one I didn't look up.

Chain email? Yes, I received an email that seemed to be a lot of hype. So I thought back on what I remembered and looked up the stuff that preceded my time. In doing so I noted the patterns in the selling of SS, the Great Society and the war on poverty (both of which I lived through), and the several runs on national health care. And that was the point of the post. Aside from an error on my part on 83, I think the donkey's record is intact.

tony hipchest
08-18-2009, 09:03 PM
we really need a political right wing extremist propoganda forum. :coffee:

i once wondered what it would be like if 5 or 6 ravenfans constantly went to the "nfl forum" and posted hundereds of "pro ravens/steelers suck" articles.

then i went to the "locker room" and found out.

:yawn:

"fdr is da debil...." :chuckle:

MasterOfPuppets
08-18-2009, 09:22 PM
we really need a political right wing extremist propoganda forum. :coffee:

i once wondered what it would be like if 5 or 6 ravenfans constantly went to the "nfl forum" and posted hundereds of "pro ravens/steelers suck" articles.

then i went to the "locker room" and found out.

:yawn:

"fdr is da debil...." :chuckle: or better yet, seahawk and cardinal fans whining about the refs ....the standard rebuttle would be...you lost ,get over it whiners... ...but..but his birth certificate...:crying01:

7SteelGal43
08-18-2009, 10:21 PM
oh i agree considering by the time some of reach retirement age ,the only thing in that social security box will be nothing but IOU's. we won't see a penny of the money they've been taking from us thanks to the idiots we elect. ... isn't it ironic how the government makes laws to govern the citizens, but yet its the citizens who should be making laws to govern the government. we steal from them we pay a penalty...they steal from us and they're not held accountable....:doh:
but here's the thing...if every citizen was givin a million dollars say at age 21 ,and STRONGLY advised to make arrangements with a portion of the money for thier retirement years, be it by saving or investing. i bet a large percentage of the people would be flat ass broke without a penny of that million before they hit 50, and the taxpayers would end up supporting them anyway in thier golden years.

So in other words, to quote myself from a previous post "THE GOVERNMENT NEVER SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN INVOLVED IN PEOPLES RETIREMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE ?!!"

I don't claim to be the greatest source of knowledge on the human mind, but perhaps if we weren't sittin back thinking that social security is our retirment plan, and if instead of making that social security payment to the federal govt we had a bigger paycheck, more people would take on the responsibility of planning for their own future. Would everyone ? No, probably not. But is it the governments job ? HELL NO !

SteelTalons
08-18-2009, 10:32 PM
we really need a political right wing extremist propoganda forum. :coffee:

i once wondered what it would be like if 5 or 6 ravenfans constantly went to the "nfl forum" and posted hundereds of "pro ravens/steelers suck" articles.

then i went to the "locker room" and found out.

:yawn:

"fdr is da debil...." :chuckle:

I know right. :laughing:

tony hipchest
08-18-2009, 11:48 PM
"bu..bu...bu... eff... dee... aaarrrrrrrr....." :drooling:

i blame the pilgrims for even bringing us to this godforsaken place.

in fact, i blame columbus, not only for discovering the evil america but the bengals suck.

fansince'76
08-19-2009, 07:34 AM
or better yet, seahawk and cardinal fans whining about the refs ....the standard rebuttle would be...you lost ,get over it whiners... ...but..but his birth certificate...:crying01:

You mean kinda like 8 solid years of bitching, pissing and moaning about "stolen" elections?

What's good for the goose....

HometownGal
08-19-2009, 07:59 AM
You mean kinda like 8 solid years of bitching, pissing and moaning about "stolen" elections?

What's good for the goose....

Darned tootin'. :applaudit::thumbsup:

bu...bu...bu....hypocrisy. :laughing:

revefsreleets
08-19-2009, 08:56 AM
FDR did some things that ultimately caused harm. But the situation in this country in the 30's was BAD, way worse than anyone here will ever comprehend. Calling him evil is just WAY over the top...I also take umbrage with ANY article which resorts to name calling and lacing a few facts in amongst flat out hate filled rhetoric. I don't like it when the likes of Maureen Dowd do it, and I don't care for it here.

Now back to "Evil doer" FDR...here are some facts and figures for the more moderate:

He literally helped save the US economy through reform and agricultural and business recovery packages, some of which led the US to the greatest economic expansion (arguably) in the history of the World post WWII. Did he use the government to do so? Absolutely...but it was also absolutely necessary...Things like the CCC and the WPA were essential to economic recovery, and actually are examples of the very BEST that can happen when the government steps in to help ailing private business.

He was also instrumental in encouraging private business to establish pensions for workers, a near extinct act now, but a good one that I wish would be resurrected.

Also, something the extreme right windgers usually ignore is that by 1937 there were a lot of signs of recovery and FDR set out to CUT Federal spending, something his latter day fellow Democrats would never be willing to do. That never came about because of another economic downturn, but it shows a clear flexibility i thinking on his part.

I'm not even going to mention WWII. Some mistakes were made, but obviously the outcome was favorable...hardly the work of "the embodiment of evil".

The problem with blaming the initiator of acts that become permanent or entrenched is that the initial acts were usually necessary. Look at Welfare. Clinton reformed it and made it look much more like what it was supposed to be (temporary relief), something like relief plans that date back to the Roman Empire. Obama rolled that reform back, though. ANY government plan can be abused and misused...

One last word on FDR. He issued his "Four F's" (freedoms) in 1941 for what he envisioned a post-war US to be like. I think any John Bircher would be satisfied and pleased: freedom of speech and expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear.

Godfather
08-19-2009, 01:10 PM
The problem with blaming the initiator of acts that become permanent or entrenched is that the initial acts were usually necessary. Look at Welfare. Clinton reformed it and made it look much more like what it was supposed to be (temporary relief), something like relief plans that date back to the Roman Empire. Obama rolled that reform back, though. ANY government plan can be abused and misused...


Well stated. The War on Poverty could fall into the same category. Poor people today are far better off than they were 40-50 years ago, but those programs should have had an expiration date. You have to change your playbook from time to time.

Vincent
08-19-2009, 03:47 PM
FDR did some things that ultimately caused harm.

Rev, you make your points well, and I respect your point of view.

FDR was revered by many as the man that ended the depression and substantially led us through arguably our greatest test as a nation, WWII. That is one perspective and I understand why folks see it that way. As I said in another post, I am from a family and married into one that are quite polarized on FDR.

My perspective descends from personal experience and a lot of research that resulted from that experience.

I had occasion to work at facility that shall remain nameless outside of Frankfurt West Germany during the first Nixon administration. That facility was formerly one of IG Farben's largest chemical plants, and to this day remains one of the largest chemical development and production facilities in the world. My recollection is that it is several miles by several miles in dimension and the River Main flows through it.

I lived in the village to the West of the complex, a completely rebuilt little burg because it was totally destroyed in the war. The town of Hoechst is to the East. It too was destroyed and rebuilt. The complex wasn't touched, except that a bridge that crossed the Main was hit by a lone fighter returning from a mission and he hit a "target of opportunity". I'm certain he got reamed out for that.

IG Farben in and of itself is a fascinating story that I'm not going to go into here. Suffice to say, it was absolutely pivotal to the nazi war effort and munitions manufacturing. In fact, IGF were the folks that gave us Zyklon B, the stuff they gassed people with in the "camps" (another story). I worked in this complex and saw what I saw.

So while the Eighth Air Force was reducing the rest of Germany to rubble, IGF was happily producing all manner of stuff that was killing our folks and the rest of Europe. ONE STINKING BOMB touched the complex in the entirety of the war. And it isn't like you'd miss it as you flew over it, it is freekin enormous. One might ask "why?".

I'll leave you to your own research and conclusions. I've done mine over the last 30+ years. I will point out that Wall Street financed hitler, as they had done the bolsheviks. There are numerous tomes "out there", but I'll make it easy here. These are on line - http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-bolshevik-rev.html http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-hitler.html http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-fdr.html In these you will see that Wall Street are a bunch of socialists that financed emerging socialist regimes. You will also see that FDR was in the center of it.

If your interests are piqued by IGF, you might stray into the relationships between other US firms and "the bad guys", like that between IBM and the SS. Yeah, you know those Germans and their fanaticism for accuracy.. If you're going to exterminate a lot of folks, you need to keep accurate records, and who better to retain than IBM. Oh, and back to IGF, I walked past the barracks that "housed" the human test subjects on the way to my office every day. They now "house" beagles for similar purposes.

As to why IBM would supply kraut death camps with the means to account, or why ITT would equip U-boats with their sites, or why the massive SS weapons research and development facility that surrounded Auschwitz wasn't touched is never touched by "the media" is consistent with the rest of their "reportage". Morrow and Cronkite were probably distracted by all the carnage on German cities.

I could go on about all the other accomplishments of the FDR "administration", but I'll leave it there. The buck stops at the desk of FDR. I stand by my statement.

revefsreleets
08-20-2009, 09:06 AM
I am well aware of the links between Farben and the US. The World was not AS controlled by international conglomerates then as it is now, but there was still a lot of "conflict of interest". Ford and Sears and a bunch of other US companies were entangled with the Nazi's and vice versa. HOWEVER, much of this is apocryphal at best, conspiratorial at worst. Too much to get into here, but I do have some mitigating facts.

The Farben factory was "largely left intact" but was also inhabited by countless Frankfurt residents left homeless due to the bombing. There are rumors that Eisenhower wanted it left intact because he intended to use it as his HQ post-war, and, in fact, there was a LOT of US activity in that building after the war, including the CIA using it. However it's much more likely that the allies didn't bomb it because of it's relative proximity to the Gruneburgpark refugee camp.

I've heard and read a lot of wild conspiracy theories about FDR over the years, and I mostly attribute that to his high stature amongst US presidents..."the nail that sticks up gets pounded" kind of thing. He was recently voted by historians the third best president in US history behind Washington and Lincoln, and that kind of notoriety is Certain to attract the wrong kind of attention. The (D) behind his name paints a target on his chest, and we've all seen what "historians" with an agenda can do with a revisionist brush (see: Trying to say the holocaust never occurred).

For the most part, after researching this myself with NO personal agenda, I see a little smoke and no fire at all. FDR was no satanic cabalistic demagogue, just a US President with a difficult job who made some mistakes but mostly got it right during one of the most dangerous periods in US history.

7SteelGal43
08-20-2009, 05:20 PM
The problem with blaming the initiator of acts that become permanent or entrenched is that the initial acts were usually necessary. Look at Welfare. Clinton reformed it and made it look much more like what it was supposed to be (temporary relief), something like relief plans that date back to the Roman Empire. Obama rolled that reform back, though. ANY government plan can be abused and misused...


Clinton did not reform welfare.....he merely signed the reform that a Republican congress sent him. BOO-YA

revefsreleets
08-20-2009, 06:36 PM
Clinton did not reform welfare.....he merely signed the reform that a Republican congress sent him. BOO-YA


Hmmmm...I'm not sure where to go with this one. On one hand, yes, there was a Republican congress behind the bill that Clinton signed. However, he vetoed two earlier bills and it WAS his initiative. He also broke HARD with the liberal wing of the Democrats to sign this bill.

I really dislike uber-partisanship where extremists refuse to give ANY credit to the other guy simply because of the party letter behind his name.

And Clinton was NOT as evil as the right tries to portray him. He was a "New Democrat" part of the DLC, a group that the liberals HATED because they were too conservative.

7SteelGal43
08-20-2009, 11:35 PM
Hmmmm...I'm not sure where to go with this one. On one hand, yes, there was a Republican congress behind the bill that Clinton signed. However, he vetoed two earlier bills and it WAS his initiative. He also broke HARD with the liberal wing of the Democrats to sign this bill.

I really dislike uber-partisanship where extremists refuse to give ANY credit to the other guy simply because of the party letter behind his name.

And Clinton was NOT as evil as the right tries to portray him. He was a "New Democrat" part of the DLC, a group that the liberals HATED because they were too conservative.

rev, I never said Clinton was evil, he was just a horn dog. My point was you lauded praise on him for "welfare reform" , I just wanted to point out that it was the Republicans in the senate that made it possible. Never would've happened if it'd been a Democratic congress. PS: I'm becoming less and less partisan cause I'm smelling shit on both sides of the aisle, but I will call 'em like I see 'em.

tony hipchest
08-20-2009, 11:38 PM
. PS: I'm becoming less and less partisan.... .

:poop:

*sniff sniff*

sorry, i still smell a whole bunch of horse shit.

:hunch:

7SteelGal43
08-20-2009, 11:45 PM
:poop:

*sniff sniff*

sorry, i still smell a whole bunch of horse shit.

:hunch:

Well go change your britches. :wave: