net neutrality

Why does race matter so much to you?

 

Because it's always the last card you play when you run out of other cards to pull.

 

Except for liberals; for them it is the first card to pull out, usually.

 

Just telling it like it is. We could pretend otherwise with ol burry, but what's the point?

 

See?? There you go again....you folded.
Just what I said in one my post above.

 

we had a black president? as if. what's next - a black member of the Royal Family?

what's the world coming to?

 

Nope. We had a mulato president; a mutt.
Now, we have an asshole president, but at least he isn't a commie.

 

An asshole plutocrat, not much difference.
We are all mutts Barry. We are the great melting pot, right bud?

 

Melting pot? Not anymore; not in the last 40 years--"The Great Society" (Pres.Johnson) made sure of that.
Everybody to their own corner.

As for your dislike over plutocracy, in this country, plutocracy is EARNED. You have a job because of them. For example, Gates, Jobs, Buffett, Koch, etc. But you have a choice to work or not, to earn wealth and property, etc. The other side of the spectrum, commie land, you are assigned to work somewhere-you are an ant, a gnat, born to serve the state, which is sole owner of everything.
So much for your lesson in "Social Sciences".
Now get dressed and go to church--your pastor is waiting for you.....damn bible thumpers....

 

I would argue Donald Trump "earning" his plutocracy is debatable.

No one is saying do away with big business, the fact that suggest this shows a lack of understanding of what to plutocracy is. No one wants to get rid of big business, we just shouldn't be ruled big business. Our goals in society should not be to bend over for corporations just because, as you believe, "we have a job because of them." Capitalism is a good thing, a plutocracy is not.

Bible thumper? Couldn't be any further from the truth; however, I do find it funny how desperate you are to always put labels on people. You gotta a little Barack in you, Barry!

 

I know exactly what a plutocracy is.
There is no western nation now or in the past that was NOT ruled by wealthy people. None. If they are not wealthy on arrival, they sure are wealthy on departure. I like it that way.
Nobody in this country is "ruled (by) big business". The exception to that is if you work for one. Nobody "bends over" for large corporations; that is leftist chantings. The exception, again, would be if you are employed by one. I worked for an American corporation for 30 years and I was always treated with respect and dignity--I was expected to work, and was well compensated for the work. Those that feel threatened by them (bend over) are those that fear them, usually because they fear "work"!!
Capitalism is a form of economics. Plutocracy is a form of government. Comparing the two is tantamount to comparing apples and oranges.

 

Wasn't a comparison. Capitalism is the pursuit of wealth, Plutocracy is being ruled by it. That is the point I was trying to make. Can't call me a leftist for wanting to pursue wealth but not wanting it to define my life and the laws in this country. Capitalism(good) not kept in check (i.e. the private sector), leads to a Plutocracy (bad). Putting too much power in the government is a bad thing; however, putting too much power in the hands of only the mega wealthy is equally as dangerous. They are two peas in a pod.

I would argue our country in it's earlier years it a perfect example of a western nation not ruled by the wealthy. I would say up until the 1880's and the rise of monopolies, this country was ruled by the people.

Nobody in this country "bends over" for big business? This is just something we will have to disagree on. There isn't enough time in the day to list the instances in which a corporations (and big government) has increased profits at the expenses of the taxpayer or even human lives.

Look I am not saying that all big business is bad; but, I think checks & balances are needed in both big government and big business. We have had any in a long time. Us as Americans need to step up our vigilance on both. If we kept D.C. in check thru the ballot, they in turn, would keep big business in check. Worth a try no? I just don't think peeling back the rules for both are going to make thing much better.

Question a corporation and you "fear work" lol? Oh Barry, you love those conservative buzzwords and catch phrases to try to paint anyone questioning your logic as a commie. Can't teach an old dog new tricks I guess.

 

So how do you "step up vigilance" from your point of view?? By installing a pure traitor like Obama?? That man preached treason against the USA from day one. That is hardly vigilance--that is hatred and revenge, his legacy.
If you want to control corporations, electing someone who wants to destroy them is not the way to proceed.
As for the wealthy running our country--Washington, Adams, Jefferson--ALL early rulers were wealthy landed gentry, successful people that used their wealth to rule. This country always has been a plutocracy; always will be. Same with European nations. It will NEVER change, unless it is done by force of arms (France). The wealth of the USA is what has made it great; let wealth and the pursuit of it rule.
To those that don't like it?? They know where the door is.
I have never said that you "question A corporation". But pasts posts certainly attack ALL corporations or any support of them. If you want to be a "socialist Country" as so many of you do, you would be better off to move to Europe. I spent 2 weeks in France in October--for them, socialism has worked unbelievable well (although it IS run by the wealthy as well). But the character of their population is a far different seed than what Americans are; they LIKE wealth; they do not whine about it. Personally, I would have no qualms living in France.
Wealth is good. Period.
Lastly, as a wealthy man, Trump is both an asshole and idiot. He is the result of, the payback for, the prior traitor. You earned him!! lol However, at least he now has 2 success (tax reform, one conservative judge); Obama had zero, after 8 years.

 

You step up vigilance thru the public becoming more involved and educated on the people/system the governs them. Something along the lines of an 85%+ voter turnout would be a step in the right direction, no? Washington, Jefferson, Adams all advocated for the people to have the power. All of them were for a decentralized government free of any rule from the church or a few royal(wealthy) families.

Again, you're back to blaming every problem this country has on Obama, didn't take you long to go back to that well huh. You really are a one trick pony Barry.

Can't call Trump's tax reform a success until you see what effect it has, just like you wouldn't call Obamacare a success day one. Just because you agree with his tax cuts doesn't make it an automatic success, you wouldn't give something you disagree with the same courtesy. Also, the score is 2-1 Obama on Supreme Court Justices. Again, they are the same accomplishment for both Obama and Trump, you for some reason only call it a success for Trump. If two people win a nobel prize, and one happens to be a liberal, does the liberal still not win in your eyes? Idk if it's your age or what, but you have become totally unable to look at anything objectively.

No one is saying wealth is bad, that's you trying to water down the argument to make it easier for your rebuttal. You are advocating a plutocratic government, I simply don't agree with that.

 

Regardless of your liberal views, the single appointment of Gorsuch trumped two appointments of Sotomayor and Kagan b/c of the balance of power on the Supreme Court. Granted congress had more to do with it than Trump,it was one major episode in our political history. There is no argument here. If Obama was able to get his third pick in it would have changed our country for generations. But he didn't.

 

Barry have you ever worked with the French? Lazy as ##% and non stop whine. We have a saying for them at work , euro grumps.

 

I married one (although from Quebec). She is singularly the hardest worker I have known. And so are all her french family members, her province, etc. French-Quebeckers are very hard working, and they are stoically non-complainers.
You whine more that they do. <grin>

 

You have never lived in a non-plutocratic government. All you have, hopefully a nice life, hopefully a fine family, hopefully material possessions and wealth, all derive from your existing in this plutocracy.
And yes--I dislike Obama for all he stands for. I wish him the very worst. No man has ever strived harder to destroy that what you have, to steal it from you to give it to others. You just do not recognize that one important salient fact. Again, it is Obama trying to destroy, not build, not improve. That will be his legacy, a divider, a destroyer (in which he failed as well).

As for the Supreme Court, both Sotomayor and Kagan are disasters for the USA law. At the death of Scalia, Sotomayor even went as far as stating"If he didn't die, I was going to kill him with a baseball bat", expressing hate, dislike ,and contempt for a judge far superior in intellect than what she will ever achieve. She should have been disrobed after that comment. She is hardly a success. Kagan was appointed, not for judicial intellect, but because she is gay; so her appointment is questionable at best.

 

Kyle, Barry is right.

 

We don't need 85% voter turnout. Most people are stupid. We don't even need female voters.

Obama really was the worst president of my lifetime.