Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » tasteblind » Archives Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
My Blue Heaven - Archives
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Thu Mar 23rd 2006, 10:48 AM
For God's sakes, Bolton is going to be answering questions about Human Rights. How could anyone pass that up?
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Wed Mar 22nd 2006, 11:45 AM
who have independent viewpoints of falling for GOP talking points.

I'm still not sure who the real Kerry is. I haven't seen any pictures of him on a snowboard, a motorcycle, or windsurfing since the election.

The fact that the GOP are manipulative assholes and point out the most contradictory things about our candidates does not change the fact that they are contradictory.

Is Gore the guy who made Current, the guy who spoke up for the Constitution for MoveOn, or the guy who tried to subvert it with a music-labeling crusade?

Is he the guy who said count every vote, or the guy who said count every vote in heavily Democratic counties?

Gore did all of these things, and it matters to people.

I like him. But I don't like him unconditionally, or unquestioningly.

And anyone who does is not supporting a candidate so much as they are participating in hero worship; idolatry.
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Wed Mar 22nd 2006, 08:36 AM
to call these informal press gatherings.

President Bush, You're a Coward.

Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Tue Mar 21st 2006, 04:34 PM
The one Al Gore is a thoughtful left-minded individual who meditates on issues of vital importance, such as the environment and the Internet.

The other Al Gore is a conservative Democrat whose wife founded the PMRC in the 80's.

Another Al Gore allowed himself to be stage managed into absurdity in the 2000 election to the point where he had to kiss his wife, nominate Joe Lieberman to be his VP, and declare himself "his own man" (whose else would he be?).

That and I've heard personal stories around the area that he is a dick to the help. It may be utter bullshit, but I've heard it.

All that said, I like the Al Gore that has surfaced since the 2000 campaign. But I'm not sure I can trust him with another shot at the White House.
Read entry | Discuss (3 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Tue Mar 21st 2006, 02:58 PM
there is a great article about it here: http://libertyunbound.com/archive/2004_10/...

Be warned, it is written by a libertarian, but it is pretty accurate and informative.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Tue Mar 21st 2006, 02:27 PM
From wikipedia's Fed page:


The first institution with responsibilities of a central bank in the U.S. was the First Bank of the United States, chartered in 1791. Later, in 1816, the Second Bank of the United States was chartered. From 1837 to 1862, in the Free Banking Era there was no formal central bank, while from 1862 to 1913, a system of national banks was instituted by the 1863 National Banking Act. A series of bank runs later provided the impetus for the creation of a more centralized banking system.


The Federal Reserve Board was created by the U.S. Congress through the passing of the Federal Reserve Act (or Owen-Glass Act), signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson on December 23, 1913.


In Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir. 1982), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stated that the "Federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of a Federal Torts Claims Act, but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations." The opinion also stated that "the Reserve Banks have properly been held to be federal instrumentalities for some purposes."

Another criticism of the Federal Reserve is that it is shrouded in secrecy. Meetings are held behind closed doors, and the transcripts are released with a lag of five years. Even expert policy analysts are unsure as to the logic behind Fed decisions. Critics argue that such opacity leads to greater market volatility, as the markets must guess, often with only limited information, about how the Fed is likely to change policy in the future. The jargon-laden fence-sitting opaque style of Fed communication is often called "Fed speak."

Furthermore, the lag in the release of FOMC transcripts, as well as the extremely limited and carefully worded minutes and statement, leads to the public being unaware of the issues of major concern to the Fed, and leaves it with an inadequate understanding of the logic and rationale behind the decisions. Some argue that this is a concerted attempt to keep Congress and the public at arm’s length, but this criticism has not gained much widespread acceptance.

Some advocate that the Fed should not exist, and that interest rates and money supply should be left to the free market. Advocates of free banking argue that there is no better judge of the proper interest rate and money supply than the market.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Tue Mar 21st 2006, 08:12 AM
"I was very careful never to accuse Saddam of ordering the attacks on America."

I think that is the soundbite of the week. It shows that he was deliberately trying to give that impression without actually saying it.
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Fri Mar 17th 2006, 03:45 PM
For the same reasons that shopping at Costco is more expensive than shopping at Wal-Mart, shopping at Whole Foods is more expensive than shopping at your normal grocery chain.

It costs money to raise grass fed/free range livestock, to pay employees living wages, to avoid using pesticides and still raise a viable crop, to avoid using antibiotics/growth hormone to maximize livestock yield.

Quality costs money.

For the same reasons it costs more to buy a shirt made by American Apparel than it does to buy a shirt from Wal-mart, it is more expensive to buy eggs at Whole Foods than it is at Safeway, Price Chopper, Shop-rite, or Albertsons.

That's the price of fair labor.

That's the price of healthy food.

That's the price of humane treatment of animals.

I pay it gladly, and work extra hard to be able to do so.
Read entry | Discuss (2 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Fri Mar 17th 2006, 12:27 PM
What does it take to get some people to pull apart the language that our people use?

In talking about the Feingold censure, Schumer said he thought Dems would be best served to think about what "average," Americans want.

Most people don't consider themselves "average."

I'm willing to bet most Americans consider themselves well above average in one way or another.

And yet these people who are supposedly career politicians continue to call us "average," "regular," or "ordinary."

It's infuriating.

How about using words like, "hard-working," or "middle-class," or hell, even just, "voting," or just plain old "Americans?"

Do they have any idea how condescending they sound?

You'd never catch a Republican calling Americans "average," "ordinary," or "regular," because they actually have people who think about language and make sure they don't say things like that.

It's totally infuriating.

If you call people average or ordinary, they won't care if you address their concerns.

They will be too busy feeling insulted and voting Republican.

Read entry | Discuss (23 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Fri Mar 17th 2006, 10:53 AM
It's like a note saying:

Hello.

I heard that Saddam has had a meeting with Osama.

Gotta go,

(Afghan Informant Guy)

Fucking hilarious.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Fri Mar 17th 2006, 09:07 AM
is to accuse them of being trolls.

I have found this out the hard way too many times. Hopefully I've learned my lesson by now.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Thu Mar 16th 2006, 03:18 PM
It must be tough to be stuck with a basic text message board in 2006.

Read entry | Discuss (56 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Thu Mar 16th 2006, 12:58 PM
It is the role of Government to use its resources to attain maximum benefit to the maximum number of its citizens.

It is the role of Government to use its influence internationally to help the greatest number of people worldwide.

It is the role of Government to moderate between the needs of corporate interests and the needs of its citizens when and where they differ.

Those are the simplest ways I can think of to explain what the Democratic Party's philosophy is (or should be).
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by tasteblind in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Thu Mar 16th 2006, 09:18 AM
A poll conducted in January by Zogby International found 52% of Americans agreed that Congress should consider impeachment "if President Bush wiretapped American citizens without the approval of a judge." About 43% of respondents said they disagreed with exploring impeachment.

http://www.nysun.com/article/28983?page_no...


The Republicans are taunting us right now on this. They seem to want that fight.

The numbers aren't on their side, though.

Zogby indicates that this is a fight we can win.

That is, if our Senators are willing to fight it.

People seem to be scared of making this election a referendum on Impeachment.

But I'm starting to think maybe that's the best way to show that Democrats are willing to offer real change.

And it would certainly implode the media storyline that says Dems have no backbone.

I say Bring. It. On.
Read entry | Discuss (64 comments)
Profile Information
mattclearing
Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your ignore list
9459 posts
Member since Wed Nov 10th 2004
Blogroll
DU Journals
Other Blogs
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.