Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   I must be getting old, my left leg works better than the right one. I keep making left turns and I don't know why   (politico.com) divider line 106
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

2021 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Jul 2014 at 3:48 PM (26 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



106 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-07-24 09:35:41 AM  
You didn't move left.

The country lurched right and where you were standing is now left.

As has been noted every couple of minutes or so on Fark for the last few years the right moving right after Clinton moved to the center in the 90 shifted the Overton window to such a degree that positions were once held by mainstream Republicans are now held by Dems. The onslaught of the Tea Partiers in 2010 moved the GOP even further right a trend that continues to this day.

That all noted, what specific reasons would a former WSJ reporter and writer of books about the military have for identifying with the left?

*clicks link*

The Iraq war fiasco? The torture scandal? The use of lawless mercenaries? Intelligence officials run amok? Growing income equality?

Yeah, those are some pretty good reasons.
 
2014-07-24 09:54:38 AM  
But... if your left leg worked "better" than the right one, you'd be making right turns.
 
2014-07-24 10:36:43 AM  

the_rev: But... if your left leg worked "better" than the right one, you'd be making right turns.


I was thinking of more power to the left leg, not necessarily a stopped tank track analogy. but thanks for ruining my headline, jerk :D
 
2014-07-24 10:42:18 AM  
I wasn't a liberal until the Fark Independents™ convinced me I was one
 
2014-07-24 10:46:39 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: I wasn't a liberal until the Fark Independents™ convinced me I was one


I wasn't a liberal until the Fark Independents convinced me to take a look at their policy suggestions :D
 
2014-07-24 10:47:57 AM  
Nascar drivers. smh.
 
2014-07-24 11:04:00 AM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: I wasn't a liberal until the Fark Independents™ convinced me I was one


#yesallleftists
 
2014-07-24 11:23:58 AM  
I didn't move left or right. The left and right went authoritarian.

It doesn't help that I live in New York where choosing between left and right is like choosing between Mos Eisley and Detroit.
 
2014-07-24 12:34:06 PM  
The guy spent 25 years covering the military and politics, and he never figured out that it's just one party pretending to be two parties, or that its goal is total control? He doesn't know that torture has been official US policy (at least) since the creation of the OSS (later the CIA), which smuggled some of the most vile Nazis (see: Klaus Barbie) out of Germany after WW2 so that we could learn the science of torture from them, or that we even continued some of their most evil research (mkultra, mkdelta, artichoke, etc.) and applied it (phoenix, etc.)? And, yet, the guy made enough money in journalism to afford a summer house in Maine.

America... what a country!
 
2014-07-24 02:35:18 PM  

quatchi: You didn't move left.

The country lurched right and where you were standing is now left.


I wouldn't even say that the country moved as much as the voice of the country moved. It really isn't a big crowd over on what used to be the extreme right. They just got really loud.
 
2014-07-24 03:54:09 PM  
My grandparents were upset that Social Security and Medicare were now being considered 'entitlements'. They would defend the programs all while denouncing Obama and the liberal media and the evil liberals in Congress. With a straight face.
 
2014-07-24 03:54:09 PM  

quatchi: You didn't move left.

The country lurched right and where you were standing is now left.


i guess you could say he...

...got left behind

yeaaaaaaa
 
2014-07-24 03:56:13 PM  
Maybe you're not an ambi-turner?
 
2014-07-24 03:57:40 PM  

Gulper Eel: I didn't move left or right. The left and right went authoritarian.

It doesn't help that I live in New York where choosing between left and right is like choosing between Mos Eisley and Detroit.


Where we on the left have NYC and Chicago as examples of the left gone stupid.  The right have places like Louisiana and Oklahoma.

Difference is we on the left realize the stupid being done by our brethren and point it out.  The right are seemingly afraid to do so, lest they be ostracized.
 
2014-07-24 03:58:42 PM  

somedude210: I was thinking of more power to the left leg, not necessarily a stopped tank track analogy


if your left leg was more powerful than your right leg you would still turn to the right

i hope this helps
 
2014-07-24 03:59:17 PM  
the fact that these are seen as Right-vs-Left issues depresses me profoundly.

they're Right-Wrong issues, as in "torture is wrong.  full stop."
 
2014-07-24 03:59:30 PM  

Gulper Eel: The left and right went authoritarian.


Seriously, what is it about the need to make "both sides" judgments in lieu of attacking the real problem--social conservatism?

No, "the left" did not go "authoritarian." "The left" have little if any power in this country.

Dishonesty is a key component with this fallacy. It deflects any criticism of the ideology you embrace and points fingers and lays blame to people who aren't part of the problem.
 
2014-07-24 03:59:45 PM  
Uh huh. That's what happened. Last I checked, if you don't whip out your John Birch Society membership card as soon as somebody yells, "SEGGERGAYSHUN NAH-OWWWW SEGGERGAYSHUN FOH-EVUH!!!!', you're "THE LEFT."
 
2014-07-24 04:01:39 PM  

skyotter: the fact that these are seen as Right-vs-Left issues depresses me profoundly.

they're Right-Wrong issues, as in "torture is wrong.  full stop."


Well, blame the right for that.  Whenever you're against something they support, they see you as being on the left and therefore "wrong".

Granted, some of the left do that as well; hell, I've done it on occasion and had to check myself realizing that the person opposing the viewpoint I support wasn't someone on the right, but on the left as well.
 
2014-07-24 04:01:40 PM  
"I support the existence of the free market, so weird and wacky that I am also becoming more liberal!"
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2014-07-24 04:02:36 PM  
Wait, this isn't a NASCAR thread?
 
2014-07-24 04:03:02 PM  
the sad part is, we see all these mistakes being made but nothing being done to correct them and roughly half our population is fighting to keep the status quo.

were screwed until something unforeseen and out of the ordinary occurs.

/alien invasion?
//not those aliens either.
 
2014-07-24 04:03:44 PM  
<<<<In my late 50s, at a time of life when most people are supposed to be drifting into a cautious conservatism >>>>>

Urban Legend. People actually become more liberal as they age.
http://news.discovery.com/human/psychology/voter-conservative-aging- li beral-120119.htm
 
2014-07-24 04:04:28 PM  

Jackson Herring: "I support the existence of the free market, so weird and wacky that I am also becoming more liberal!"


But all it would take is a discussion on govt regulation of big business and the old talking points would come back, to great lulz. Also, progressive taxation. Always a hoot.
 
2014-07-24 04:05:29 PM  
Sounds like my wife.  One leg is just a hair longer than the other so she invariably walks in an arc.  Cannot for the life of her walk a straight line.

/dont ask her about he lazy left eye.
 
2014-07-24 04:06:26 PM  

Isitoveryet: the sad part is, we see all these mistakes being made but nothing being done to correct them and roughly half our population is fighting to keep the status quo.

were screwed until something unforeseen and out of the ordinary occurs.

/alien invasion?
//not those aliens either.


We are the aliens. And we've invaded ourselves.
 
2014-07-24 04:06:45 PM  
i don't support murdering all white christians, yet I found myself drifting leftwards
 
2014-07-24 04:06:47 PM  

EyeballKid: SEGGERGAYSHUN NAH-OWWWW SEGGERGAYSHUN FOH-EVUH!!!!


Y'all forgot SEGGERGAYSHUN TUHMORRUH!!!

i2.cdn.turner.com

 
2014-07-24 04:07:08 PM  
I didn't realize Rip Van Winkle was still writing.
 
2014-07-24 04:07:22 PM  
The older I become the more liberal I get as I realize much of the conservative fearmongering is just so much BS.
 
2014-07-24 04:11:53 PM  
Not really moving Left or Right here. Its more moving away.
 
2014-07-24 04:12:07 PM  
I don't know much about politics, that's why I got this song
One of my legs is shorter than the other and both of my feet's too long.

/got nuthin
 
2014-07-24 04:15:39 PM  

whidbey: Gulper Eel: The left and right went authoritarian.

Seriously, what is it about the need to make "both sides" judgments in lieu of attacking the real problem--social conservatism?

No, "the left" did not go "authoritarian." "The left" have little if any power in this country.

Dishonesty is a key component with this fallacy. It deflects any criticism of the ideology you embrace and points fingers and lays blame to people who aren't part of the problem.


That way, they can feel better that they voted Republican...because, you know, limosine liberals and such.
 
2014-07-24 04:18:24 PM  

Nadie_AZ: My grandparents were upset that Social Security and Medicare were now being considered 'entitlements'. They would defend the programs all while denouncing Obama and the liberal media and the evil liberals in Congress. With a straight face.


But that's what entitlements always have been.  You've paid into them and you're entitled to the benefit...*scratchy head*  I've never understood why people consider 'entitlements' a bad thing.
 
2014-07-24 04:20:02 PM  

phlegmmo: EyeballKid: SEGGERGAYSHUN NAH-OWWWW SEGGERGAYSHUN FOH-EVUH!!!!

Y'all forgot SEGGERGAYSHUN TUHMORRUH!!![i2.cdn.turner.com image 640x360]


Well, what did you expect? I  am with "THE LEFT."
 
2014-07-24 04:21:00 PM  
Let's not sit here and pretend the democratic party is a leftist party.  More left than republicans, sure, but by no means a leftist party.
 
2014-07-24 04:21:02 PM  

quatchi: The Iraq war fiasco? The torture scandal? The use of lawless mercenaries? Intelligence officials run amok? Growing income equality?

Yeah, those are some pretty good reasons.


Too bad he wasn't more vocal about them when they happened.

Better late than never, I guess. Even if the horse is long gone, it's kinda silly to keep the barn door swinging in the wind.
 
2014-07-24 04:21:16 PM  

Combustion: whidbey: Gulper Eel: The left and right went authoritarian.

Seriously, what is it about the need to make "both sides" judgments in lieu of attacking the real problem--social conservatism?

No, "the left" did not go "authoritarian." "The left" have little if any power in this country.

Dishonesty is a key component with this fallacy. It deflects any criticism of the ideology you embrace and points fingers and lays blame to people who aren't part of the problem.

That way, they can feel better that they voted Republican...because, you know, limosine liberals and such.


Al Gore. I hear he has Chilean sea bass quite regularly.
 
2014-07-24 04:21:53 PM  

gadian: But that's what entitlements always have been. You've paid into them and you're entitled to the benefit...*scratchy head* I've never understood why people consider 'entitlements' a bad thing.


Because Uppity People might think they're entitled to things. Society will just fall apart then.
 
2014-07-24 04:22:29 PM  

FarkedOver: Let's not sit here and pretend the democratic party is a leftist party.  More left than republicans, sure, but by no means a leftist party.


Well no, not like it was in the late 70s/early 80s.  It's more moderate than left.
 
2014-07-24 04:23:48 PM  

Gulper Eel: I didn't move left or right. The left and right went authoritarian.

It doesn't help that I live in New York where choosing between left and right is like choosing between Mos Eisley and Detroit.


I know you're disillusioned and all, but New York is doing a little better than Detroit. Visit sometime; you probably won't get mugged :)

That said, with New York being the biggest center of finance in the Western Hemisphere, it's not really that liberal on a lot of things, especially with Bloomberg's crypto-neo-liberal legacy.
 
2014-07-24 04:24:41 PM  

quatchi: That all noted, what specific reasons would a former WSJ reporter and writer of books about the military have for identifying with the left?

*clicks link*

The Iraq war fiasco? The torture scandal? The use of lawless mercenaries? Intelligence officials run amok? Growing income equality?

Yeah, those are some pretty good reasons.



Rupert Murdoch buying out the WSJ and turning it into Fox News for the rich?  Also a good reason.
 
2014-07-24 04:24:49 PM  

FarkedOver: Let's not sit here and pretend the democratic party is a leftist party.  More left than republicans, sure, but by no means a leftist party.


You would deny this dichotomy to the 24 hour televised news stations?  You, sir, are a radical.
 
2014-07-24 04:26:00 PM  

whidbey: No, "the left" did not go "authoritarian." "The left" have little if any power in this country.


While the whole "both parties are the same" and "we only really have one party" talk is BS, there is a little validity to what he said in that many of Democrats at the top of the food chain are authoritarians and/or are more than happy to sell out the interests of the people in favor of corporate interests.

On average Democrats are demonstrably better for this country, but it doesn't help to pretend that we don't have any house cleaning to do.
 
2014-07-24 04:27:09 PM  

quatchi: You didn't move left.

The country lurched right and where you were standing is now left.

As has been noted every couple of minutes or so on Fark for the last few years the right moving right after Clinton moved to the center in the 90 shifted the Overton window to such a degree that positions were once held by mainstream Republicans are now held by Dems. The onslaught of the Tea Partiers in 2010 moved the GOP even further right a trend that continues to this day.

That all noted, what specific reasons would a former WSJ reporter and writer of books about the military have for identifying with the left?

*clicks link*

The Iraq war fiasco? The torture scandal? The use of lawless mercenaries? Intelligence officials run amok? Growing income equality?

Yeah, those are some pretty good reasons.


This. For the last 30-40 years, Republicans have defined the political center as wherever they're standing at any particular time. And for at least the last 20 years, they've been moving further to the right, always demanding that the Democrats meet them in the middle, except that's no longer the middle.

By pandering to the radical right, the Republicans normalized the radicals and radicalized the normals. Thus, the simplest, most sensible solutions like universal healthcare and alternative energy become "too extreme" for the nation.

In the 60s and 70s, protecting and preserving the environment was something everybody agreed on. Now, it's a "far left" idea. The slogan "Don't mess with Texas" referred to this environmental movement.
 
2014-07-24 04:27:29 PM  
In 1976, disgusted with The Movement, and the New Left, I joined the seminal Libertarian Party. I stopped donating to the party in 88, when they nominated RON PAUL!!, and left the party and registered unaffiliated in 2006.
Now, I find myself voting almost entirely for Democrats, with an occasional exception.
I don't think I've changed my views that much. The aging of the boomers, and their predominance at the polls has moved this country far, far to the right. We are into bad, dangerous, Weimar Republic territory.
So, people are starting to push back, and the pendulum will swing - that's how political history is written.
 
2014-07-24 04:28:15 PM  

FarkedOver: Let's not sit here and pretend the democratic party is a leftist party.  More left than republicans, sure, but by no means a leftist party.


No person with an ounce of perspective could argue against that statement.
 
2014-07-24 04:28:20 PM  

Rwa2play: FarkedOver: Let's not sit here and pretend the democratic party is a leftist party.  More left than republicans, sure, but by no means a leftist party.

Well no, not like it was in the late 70s/early 80s.  It's more moderate than left.


The Democratic Party had the same problems they have now: sucking up to the military industrial complex and big business.

I don't know if I'd call that "moderate."
 
2014-07-24 04:31:22 PM  

gadian: Nadie_AZ: My grandparents were upset that Social Security and Medicare were now being considered 'entitlements'. They would defend the programs all while denouncing Obama and the liberal media and the evil liberals in Congress. With a straight face.

But that's what entitlements always have been.  You've paid into them and you're entitled to the benefit...*scratchy head*  I've never understood why people consider 'entitlements' a bad thing.


Because they're scared that someone else might get the big piece of chicken or two scoops of ice cream to their one.
 
2014-07-24 04:31:46 PM  

Arkanaut: Gulper Eel: I didn't move left or right. The left and right went authoritarian.

It doesn't help that I live in New York where choosing between left and right is like choosing between Mos Eisley and Detroit.

I know you're disillusioned and all, but New York is doing a little better than Detroit. Visit sometime; you probably won't get mugged :)

That said, with New York being the biggest center of finance in the Western Hemisphere, it's not really that liberal on a lot of things, especially with Bloomberg's crypto-neo-liberal legacy.


That much is true.
 
2014-07-24 04:39:37 PM  

bk3k: While the whole "both parties are the same" and "we only really have one party" talk is BS, there is a little validity to what he said in that many of Democrats at the top of the food chain are authoritarians and/or are more than happy to sell out the interests of the people in favor of corporate interests.


IMO this is because both parties agree on increased security spending (the Dems like the patronage opportunities and the GOP likes to look strong and also the patronage opportunities), and because corporate lobbyists know how to play both sides of the aisle and have the money to do so. On any other social or economic issues, generally only interest groups talking to the legislators, and they tend to be more ideological / partisan.

The good news is, there seem to be some anti-authoritarian legislators too on both sides of the aisle, like Ron Wyden of Oregon and RAND PAUL (on privacy at least), and certainly there is an increasing number of Snowden sympathizers who have some very strong views on the matter, and even some rich libertarians out there who are trying to shake things up. So there's reason to be optimistic, although you'll have to be patient.
 
2014-07-24 04:42:05 PM  
"I left the Beltway Bubble and got some actual perspective on the things I'd been willfully ignorant about for the last 20 years."

Amazing what a little oxygen can do for the brain.
 
2014-07-24 04:46:02 PM  
It's just so stupid. It took about 5-10 minutes to grasp the concept of collectivism, and why an altruistic mindset is the best. I can understand why someone entrenched in the 1% might reject either concept, but what about the rest of the 99%? I really don't get why people fight against their own interests.
 
2014-07-24 04:50:32 PM  

DeaH: quatchi: You didn't move left.

The country lurched right and where you were standing is now left.

I wouldn't even say that the country moved as much as the voice of the country moved. It really isn't a big crowd over on what used to be the extreme right. They just got really loud.


That's what happens when there are multiple 24-hour cable channels amplifying their opinions.
 
2014-07-24 04:52:22 PM  

clkeagle: DeaH: quatchi: You didn't move left.

The country lurched right and where you were standing is now left.

I wouldn't even say that the country moved as much as the voice of the country moved. It really isn't a big crowd over on what used to be the extreme right. They just got really loud.

That's what happens when there are multiple 24-hour cable channels amplifying their opinions.


Which is really just advertising for really nice things people seem to think they can afford, like trucks. jewelry, 2-car garages...
 
2014-07-24 04:54:49 PM  

somedude210: MaudlinMutantMollusk: I wasn't a liberal until the Fark Independents™ convinced me I was one

I wasn't a liberal until the Fark Independents convinced me to take a look at their policy suggestions :D


I was a Fark Independent ™ until I actually looked objectively at the policy suggestions I was parroting and realized I was being an arsehat.

/staunchly liberal now
//staunchly
 
2014-07-24 04:55:38 PM  
www.atlnightspots.com
 
2014-07-24 04:57:58 PM  

Arkanaut: I know you're disillusioned and all, but New York is doing a little better than Detroit.


And without that gigantic evil financial industry, New York would be a far larger Detroit.
 
2014-07-24 04:58:05 PM  

whidbey: It's just so stupid. It took about 5-10 minutes to grasp the concept of collectivism, and why an altruistic mindset is the best. I can understand why someone entrenched in the 1% might reject either concept, but what about the rest of the 99%? I really don't get why people fight against their own interests.


Lack of understanding.

It's an animal instinct to fear that which is not understood. Whether it's by a genetic gift of intelligence or simply living in the right conditions, some of us have been able to overcome those fears, or at least minimize those fears by attempting to understand as much of the world as possible. But to many Americans, "the unknown" really is a hole with no bottom. Through any combination of living in the wrong conditions or being born without any sense of curiosity, many live with constant fear, anxiety, or anger toward something that they don't understand.

And through generations of wielding power over others, some people have developed the ability to exploit those feelings in order to achieve their own ends.
 
2014-07-24 05:00:41 PM  

Pubby: somedude210: MaudlinMutantMollusk: I wasn't a liberal until the Fark Independents™ convinced me I was one

I wasn't a liberal until the Fark Independents convinced me to take a look at their policy suggestions :D

I was a Fark Independent ™ until I actually looked objectively at the policy suggestions I was parroting and realized I was being an arsehat.

/staunchly liberal now
//staunchly


I underwent adolescence and reached adulthood under Bush.  Prior to that, I would say I was conservative, inasmuch as a young teenager can have a political opinion.  But even as a teenager and young adult, I could understand all the harm Bush was doing to my country.  I started to reexamine what I thought I believed, and decided the more scientific party would be the best one to support, which is not to say I like them so much as I dislike them less than the alternative.  Now that the Tea Party is apparently a thing, I can't help but sigh and punch the D column, regardless of who's running.  Hopefully in the next decade or so I'll need to carefully consider candidates and their stances, but right now my choices are bad, and HA HA HA OH WOW.
 
2014-07-24 05:02:01 PM  
Because, with today's republicans, if you're old and conservative you have no heart and no brain.
 
2014-07-24 05:02:18 PM  
I find that typically once someone realizes that other people are in fact people, even the brown ones and poor ones, instead of just other, they start leaning liberal.  Empathy and caring for you fellow man, tends to be a liberal idea.
 
2014-07-24 05:10:46 PM  

Gulper Eel: Arkanaut: I know you're disillusioned and all, but New York is doing a little better than Detroit.

And without that gigantic evil financial industry, New York would be a far larger Detroit.


You know, you're right and all, but isn't it weird how it's harder to move an industry that's almost entirely electronic these days (finance) out of a high-tax, high-living-expense area, than an industry that relies on massive amounts of fixed capital (manufacturing)? Almost makes you think there's something else there.
 
2014-07-24 05:15:30 PM  

Gulper Eel: And without that gigantic evil financial industry, New York would be a far larger Detroit.


And if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.
 
2014-07-24 05:18:11 PM  

Gyrfalcon: "I left the Beltway Bubble and got some actual perspective on the things I'd been willfully ignorant about for the last 20 years."

Amazing what a little oxygen can do for the brain.


Not really a "Beltway Bubble" so much as a "privilege bubble" - there are LOTS of liberals inside the Capital Beltway.

Though this guy was a reporter, so even if he was filthy rich the whole time, his work took him face-to-face with Those People (minorities, poors, foreigners) pretty regularly. I think it's more that he was willfully disengaged, focusing more on defining the parameters of the problems rather than working on the solutions.

Now that he's free (so to speak) to think of the causes and consequences of those problems, and to come up with possible solutions, he's finding himself more aligned with the left than he previously did 20 years ago.

// 20 years ago, the center was mushier - Reagan Democrats meeting Clintonian triangulation
// now, it's disaffected Republicans who don't want to vote straight-ticket Democrat (but end up doing so because Santorum)
 
2014-07-24 05:19:42 PM  

theorellior: Gulper Eel: And without that gigantic evil financial industry, New York would be a far larger Detroit.

And if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.


Not to mention the old "Detroit was run by liberals" dog whistle. That's a good one. Who started that? O'Really?
 
2014-07-24 05:24:22 PM  
What happened to the US was the industrialization of fund raising. The right wing discovered that not only does Fear Sell, but also (and more depressingly) agreeing doesn't sell. There's no money in cooperation. You can talk all you want about the Tea Partiers and the Move to the Right but what moved them to the right (and continues to move them) is the fact there's a core pool of people who live to feel aggrieved and another pool of people intent on milking them. As long as the dumbos love feeling put upon, this dynamic will shape our politics.
 
2014-07-24 05:30:59 PM  
I've got one leg that's quite a bit shorter than the other two.
 
2014-07-24 05:32:57 PM  

gadian: Nadie_AZ: My grandparents were upset that Social Security and Medicare were now being considered 'entitlements'. They would defend the programs all while denouncing Obama and the liberal media and the evil liberals in Congress. With a straight face.

But that's what entitlements always have been.  You've paid into them and you're entitled to the benefit...*scratchy head*  I've never understood why people consider 'entitlements' a bad thing.


Because the people who say things like that think it's a zero sum game and have not thought anything through. They think "I worked all my life for my entitlements, YOU didn't work for my entitlements! Get a job you lazy bum!"

It never occurs to them that being on board with people getting their entitlements does NOT deprive them of theirs.
 
2014-07-24 05:33:00 PM  

Gulper Eel: I didn't move left or right. The left and right went authoritarian.

It doesn't help that I live in New York where choosing between left and right is like choosing between Mos Eisley and Detroit.


NY is generally an expensive place to live because people want to live here. You have any specific grievance? Bloomberg's soda ban was pretty dumb, but everything else has generally made the city a nicer place to live. No smoking in restaurants, etc.
 
2014-07-24 05:44:49 PM  

colon_pow: I've got one leg that's quite a bit shorter than the other two.


you're probably the first person i've ever know to collect legs.
 
2014-07-24 05:44:53 PM  

Gulper Eel: Arkanaut: I know you're disillusioned and all, but New York is doing a little better than Detroit.

And without that gigantic evil financial industry, New York would be a far larger Detroit.


That gigantic evil financial industry used to serve the needs of the productive segment of the economy by assembling capital from the rest of the economy and distributing it to others who actually produced agricultural products,manufactured goods and services or extracted raw materials, while earning their profits from providing that service.  It was necessarily smaller than the rest of the economy as it was an adjunct of the larger economy.  Now the financial sector has grown all out of proportion to its historic average and its profits are driven by speculation,  siphoning off profits rightfully belonging to stockholders through manipulation of market trading, offloading their losses from speculation onto the taxpayer while retaining their profits and by extracting "management fees" from corporations they've loaded with unsustainable debt and left without the necessary investments in capital improvements and personnel necessary for normal profitable operation in order to extract value from the corporation in the short term with the knowledge that they will have moved on when the drained husk collapses.
 
2014-07-24 05:58:14 PM  

stan unusual: Gulper Eel: Arkanaut: I know you're disillusioned and all, but New York is doing a little better than Detroit.

And without that gigantic evil financial industry, New York would be a far larger Detroit.

That gigantic evil financial industry used to serve the needs of the productive segment of the economy by assembling capital from the rest of the economy and distributing it to others who actually produced agricultural products,manufactured goods and services or extracted raw materials, while earning their profits from providing that service.  It was necessarily smaller than the rest of the economy as it was an adjunct of the larger economy.  Now the financial sector has grown all out of proportion to its historic average and its profits are driven by speculation,  siphoning off profits rightfully belonging to stockholders through manipulation of market trading, offloading their losses from speculation onto the taxpayer while retaining their profits and by extracting "management fees" from corporations they've loaded with unsustainable debt and left without the necessary investments in capital improvements and personnel necessary for normal profitable operation in order to extract value from the corporation in the short term with the knowledge that they will have moved on when the drained husk collapses.


Why do you hate capitalism?


Oh wait, you just pointed it out... Because our current definition of free market capitalism doesn't encourage pragmatic moralizing about the appropriateness of those activities.
 
2014-07-24 06:02:38 PM  
IAfter reading the issues important to him, I doubt this guy was ever anything but a liberal.  And if he truly shifted left, he is unusual as in the past 6 years, there has been a massive shift right among whites.  In 2008, most identified as democrat.  Now, they are pretty much across the board Republican, even those making under 30k.

The not too surprising shift I think you will see is among blacks.  As all these "refugees" will be placed in black neighborhoods and competing with blacks for scant unskilled jobs, Black Americans will feel ignored by the dems in favor of the newer and cooler minority group.  They will not be the reliable voting bloc the dems have taken for granted over the years, and as a result,  Republicans will do better with blacks this year than anytime previously.
 
2014-07-24 06:04:20 PM  

Gyrfalcon: "I left the Beltway Bubble and got some actual perspective on the things I'd been willfully ignorant about for the last 20 years."

Amazing what a little oxygen can do for the brain.


When I worked in DC I was branded a "flaming liberal" for suggesting that torturing someone and then using that evidence against them in a court of law was unconstitutional.

I no longer work in DC.
 
2014-07-24 06:21:48 PM  

PanicMan: Gyrfalcon: "I left the Beltway Bubble and got some actual perspective on the things I'd been willfully ignorant about for the last 20 years."

Amazing what a little oxygen can do for the brain.

When I worked in DC I was branded a "flaming liberal" for suggesting that torturing someone and then using that evidence against them in a court of law was unconstitutional.

I no longer work in DC.


But are you still a flaming liberal?
 
2014-07-24 06:47:40 PM  
The words "Democrat", "Democrats", and "Democratic Party" properly do not appear in this article.
 
2014-07-24 07:03:57 PM  

NateAsbestos: PanicMan: Gyrfalcon: "I left the Beltway Bubble and got some actual perspective on the things I'd been willfully ignorant about for the last 20 years."

Amazing what a little oxygen can do for the brain.

When I worked in DC I was branded a "flaming liberal" for suggesting that torturing someone and then using that evidence against them in a court of law was unconstitutional.

I no longer work in DC.

But are you still a flaming liberal?


If anything I'm worse.
 
2014-07-24 07:21:21 PM  

whidbey: clkeagle: DeaH: quatchi: You didn't move left.

The country lurched right and where you were standing is now left.

I wouldn't even say that the country moved as much as the voice of the country moved. It really isn't a big crowd over on what used to be the extreme right. They just got really loud.

That's what happens when there are multiple 24-hour cable channels amplifying their opinions.

Which is really just advertising for really nice things people seem to think they can afford, like trucks. jewelry, 2-car garages...


You're right about that. It amazes me how many people who do not need trucks and cannot really afford a truck want one. I know more than a handful of people who think that a truck is the only kind of transportation really authentic Americans drive. Of course, they complain about not being able to go anywhere because it costs a fortune to fill their truck. But, for some reason, cars are for wimps and tree-huggers, instead of for people who cannot afford to put hundreds in their gas tanks every week. I'm not talking about musicians who haul a lot of equipment or the guy who has a yard business. This are just idiots who want a truck because  TRUCK = US of A!
 
2014-07-24 07:40:58 PM  

PanicMan: NateAsbestos: PanicMan: Gyrfalcon: "I left the Beltway Bubble and got some actual perspective on the things I'd been willfully ignorant about for the last 20 years."

Amazing what a little oxygen can do for the brain.

When I worked in DC I was branded a "flaming liberal" for suggesting that torturing someone and then using that evidence against them in a court of law was unconstitutional.

I no longer work in DC.

But are you still a flaming liberal?

If anything I'm worse.


...a woman?

/I keed
 
2014-07-24 07:42:59 PM  

Gulper Eel: Arkanaut: I know you're disillusioned and all, but New York is doing a little better than Detroit.

And without that gigantic evil financial industry, New York would be a far larger Detroit.


Whatever it takes to make you feel comfortable as a hip, cool, BSRB guy.  Don't actually compare the 2 sides objectively or you might have to lower yourself to admitting that they are nowhere near equal.
 
2014-07-24 07:58:15 PM  

Pumpernickel bread: IAfter reading the issues important to him, I doubt this guy was ever anything but a liberal.  And if he truly shifted left, he is unusual as in the past 6 years, there has been a massive shift right among whites.  In 2008, most identified as democrat.  Now, they are pretty much across the board Republican, even those making under 30k.

The not too surprising shift I think you will see is among blacks.  As all these "refugees" will be placed in black neighborhoods and competing with blacks for scant unskilled jobs, Black Americans will feel ignored by the dems in favor of the newer and cooler minority group.  They will not be the reliable voting bloc the dems have taken for granted over the years, and as a result,  Republicans will do better with blacks this year than anytime previously.


what the fark am i reading.jpg
 
2014-07-24 08:27:26 PM  

whidbey: It's just so stupid. It took about 5-10 minutes to grasp the concept of collectivism, and why an altruistic mindset is the best. I can understand why someone entrenched in the 1% might reject either concept, but what about the rest of the 99%? I really don't get why people fight against their own interests.


Dickinson: Hm, that may be true; but don't forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor. AND THAT IS WHY THEY WILL FOLLOW US!

All [singing]: TO THE RIGHT! EVER TO THE RIGHT! NEVER TO THE LEFT! FOREVER TO THE RIGHT!
 
2014-07-24 08:39:04 PM  

Gyrfalcon: whidbey: It's just so stupid. It took about 5-10 minutes to grasp the concept of collectivism, and why an altruistic mindset is the best. I can understand why someone entrenched in the 1% might reject either concept, but what about the rest of the 99%? I really don't get why people fight against their own interests.

Dickinson: Hm, that may be true; but don't forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor. AND THAT IS WHY THEY WILL FOLLOW US!

All [singing]: TO THE RIGHT! EVER TO THE RIGHT! NEVER TO THE LEFT! FOREVER TO THE RIGHT!


We sing hosanna, hosanna!
Enblazoned on our banner.


I didn't know of that song for most of my life till I saw a complete staging of it and then they released the dvd with the scene restored.
 
2014-07-24 08:43:16 PM  
From West Wing, we got a similar notion:


"Bartlet : "It doesn't matter if most voters don't benefit, they all believe that someday they will. That's the problem with the American Dream, it makes everyone concerned for the day they're gonna be rich."Season 3 'Ways and Means'
 
2014-07-24 08:59:47 PM  

Isitoveryet: colon_pow: I've got one leg that's quite a bit shorter than the other two.

you're probably the first person i've ever know to collect legs.


bizzarrobazar.com
 
2014-07-25 01:35:21 AM  
Isitoveryet:  you're probably the first person i've ever know to collect legs.


Fra-GEE-leh
 ! It must be Italian!

www.achristmasstoryhouse.com
 
2014-07-25 02:50:17 AM  

InterruptingQuirk: Gyrfalcon: whidbey: It's just so stupid. It took about 5-10 minutes to grasp the concept of collectivism, and why an altruistic mindset is the best. I can understand why someone entrenched in the 1% might reject either concept, but what about the rest of the 99%? I really don't get why people fight against their own interests.

Dickinson: Hm, that may be true; but don't forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor. AND THAT IS WHY THEY WILL FOLLOW US!

All [singing]: TO THE RIGHT! EVER TO THE RIGHT! NEVER TO THE LEFT! FOREVER TO THE RIGHT!

We sing hosanna, hosanna!
Enblazoned on our banner.

I didn't know of that song for most of my life till I saw a complete staging of it and then they released the dvd with the scene restored.


It has to be the best nutshell description of the conservative party in the US, bar none.

And we'll hold
To our gold!
Tradition that is old!
Reluctant to be bold!

We say this game's not of our choosing--
Why should we risk losing?
We are cool--conservative--MEN!
 
2014-07-25 03:54:12 AM  

Gyrfalcon: whidbey: It's just so stupid. It took about 5-10 minutes to grasp the concept of collectivism, and why an altruistic mindset is the best. I can understand why someone entrenched in the 1% might reject either concept, but what about the rest of the 99%? I really don't get why people fight against their own interests.

Dickinson: Hm, that may be true; but don't forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor. AND THAT IS WHY THEY WILL FOLLOW US!

All [singing]: TO THE RIGHT! EVER TO THE RIGHT! NEVER TO THE LEFT! FOREVER TO THE RIGHT!


Yeah I saw that musical when I was about 9 years old. Dude was scary. I'm still impressed by all the negative waves that guy was channeling with that song and the other.
 
2014-07-25 04:37:04 AM  

UncomfortableSilence: I find that typically once someone realizes that other people are in fact people, even the brown ones and poor ones, instead of just other, they start leaning liberal.  Empathy and caring for you fellow man, tends to be a liberal idea.


Personally, I think that it's brains as much as heart that leads to Liberalism.

I am very Liberal, AND I score very high on a test of psychopathy. Basically, I don't (and can't) give a shiat about other people.

Fiscal Liberalism is based on basic math and economic theory. The Government "taxing and spending" increases the "velocity of money"...... AND it helps the nation stay cutting edge on the things that businesses need, such as useful infrastructure, and education. This is why places such as Washington state (very, very Liberal) has more companies based there than Georgia. Washington based companies would LOVE to move to Georgia and pay less in taxes...... But, Georgia doesn't have the same educated workforce, or the ports and highways to move the same amount of goods that WA does.

Social Liberalism is for some people a matter of having heart...... But, it also makes sense to have a Government that is more concerned with protecting it's citizens than it's concerned with dictating morals to them. The Government's role in drug policy, for example, does far more harm to it's citizens that legalization does. Being Pro-Choice is about protecting people, being pro-gay marriage is about the Government not having the right to decide how people live, etc.
 
2014-07-25 08:12:07 AM  

Shvetz: NY is generally an expensive place to live because people want to live here. You have any specific grievance?


Don't get me started.

Without bothering you with too many numbers, it boils down to high taxes paid, shiatty services received. High, as in a whole lot higher than can be accounted for by New York's higher cost of living.

As for "people want to live here", that's only true for NYC and some of the suburbs. North of that the mantra among those people who haven't left already is "soon as we retire, we are outta here."

It's great if you're rich - the insanely high property taxes means rents are also sky high, so that takes care of preventing any swarthy dark people living near you without you having to go out and get your hands dirty being a bigoted snob yourself. The rich of New York can put on the trappings of being a sophisticated progressive, the way previous generations of New York country-club Republicans put on the trappings of being sophisticated philanthropists, but in neither case did they actually have to allow plebeians to be in their presence, or provide any poor people with a usable leg up. Being conspicuous in showing off one's good intentions is what matters in the bullshiat capital of the world. Schmoozing with Yoko Ono at an anti-fracking rally before jetting off to the Hamptons is the New York progressive version of the southern Republican posing on the church steps with the family Bible before heading out for a quickie with his press secretary.

And New York's okay if you're young and single with no mouths to feed other than your own, but once you settle down with a family you get an unfiltered look at the state leaning on you for money at every turn and it's "holy fark, my property taxes are HOW much?" (Mine are around $5000 a year on a decidedly average 30-year-old three-bedroom ranch house on a quarter acre lot.)

Also, paying 50 cents a gallon in gas taxes for spleen-rupturing highways gets old REAL fast.
 
2014-07-25 08:52:08 AM  
The reason has left politics.   I see more outright falsehoods than ever before and almost Russian style propaganda.   All that coming from conservatives.  It seems their audience has 2 parts, super selfish super wealthy and moronic racist anti-intellectuals.   The last several years has shown how primitive the people of this country really are.  We are only lying to ourselves if we say we are the best most educated and enlightened, because we as a country are barely past the tribal stage of social development.
 
2014-07-25 11:19:11 AM  

Combustion: whidbey: Seriously, what is it about the need to make "both sides" judgments in lieu of attacking the real problem--social conservatism?

That way, they can feel better that they voted Republican...because, you know, limosine liberals and such.


I'm surprised that this needs to be said. Look at the people making the false equivalence:

Gulper Eel: The left and right went authoritarian.


DrPainMD: he never figured out that it's just one party pretending to be two parties


Anyone who isn't brand new to Fark knows exactly why these two want to play the "both sides" card.
 
2014-07-25 11:43:04 AM  

Jon Snow: Anyone who isn't brand new to Fark knows exactly why these two want to play the "both sides" card


Then what  am I supposed to think of living in a state that's a punchline for corruption and incompetence, where 30 state legislators have been sent to prison for corruption over the past ten years, where several other legislators and a governor have been forced from office by scandal, where the current governor is demonstrably screw-his-pants-on crooked?

Am I supposed to split hairs over which side is marginally less sleazy? Fark that.

And now I see DC has turned into Albany-on-the-Potomac in the past 15 years or so - just as crooked, but vastly more powerful. I'm sick of these two parties having power. The only use the parties have now is to cripple each other, because they have both demonstrated that when given unblocked power they will repeatedly abuse it.

Both sides ARE bad, so vote for whatever outcome is most likely to see them chained to each other and drowning.
 
2014-07-25 12:15:25 PM  

Gulper Eel: Am I supposed to split hairs over which side is marginally less sleazy? Fark that.


Grown ups frequently have to make choices that involve picking the better of two options when neither are what they ideally want. In fact, I imagine that this is what you have done in the past few Presidential elections, even if you didn't vote for one of the two establishment candidates.

Unless you're saying that there is a politician who is significantly less "sleazy" than those of, and would have affected outcomes significantly different from, the major parties that you actually voted for?

Gulper Eel: I'm sick of these two parties having power. The only use the parties have now is to cripple each other, because they have both demonstrated that when given unblocked power they will repeatedly abuse it.


Do you actually believe that this has been symmetrical? Is there any evidence that could persuade you otherwise?
 
2014-07-25 12:41:40 PM  
I think I'll love long enough to see a day that Democrats sweeps both Congress and the Presidency with little drama...and Republicans wigging out about how they lost everything but not blaming themselves for the defeats.
 
2014-07-25 01:32:16 PM  

Jon Snow: Do you actually believe that this has been symmetrical? Is there any evidence that could persuade you otherwise?


Nothing says they have to be symmetrical. One party bends the rules, the other pretends to be horrified but can't wait to pull the same shiat once the levers are theirs to control.

If the choice is between pants-on-head and pants-on-head and farking-a-chicken, but the status quo is better than either, then gridlock is the logical choice because compromise amounts to pants-on-head and putting on a lava lamp while playing the chicken some Al Green records in hopes the chicken will put out.

Yes, that's an extremely silly analogy but we live in extremely silly times.
 
2014-07-25 02:08:13 PM  

Gulper Eel: Nothing says they have to be symmetrical.


If one side is demonstrably worse than the other, then it's silly to play the BSABSVR card.

Gulper Eel: but the status quo is better than either, then gridlock is the logical choice


Which is just another way of saying that despite your claim of both sides being bad, and despite acknowledging that they aren't even equally bad, you will continue to put the worse group in power?
 
2014-07-25 03:19:33 PM  

Gulper Eel: I didn't move left or right. The left and right went authoritarian.

It doesn't help that I live in New York where choosing between left and right is like choosing between Mos Eisley and Detroit.


Still waiting for evidence of "the left" going authoritarian.
 
2014-07-25 03:59:30 PM  

Jon Snow: If one side is demonstrably worse than the other, then it's silly to play the BSABSVR card


Not when the choice is between "worse than the status quo" and "much worse than the status quo" - in a case like that, the much-worse side is useful if only to bring both breeds of foolishness to a halt. Yay for checks and balances. It's not putting the worse group in power, it's a first-do-no-harm principle.

whidbey: Still waiting for evidence of "the left" going authoritarian.


Do the letters NSA still mean "No Such Agency" to you or something?

We can disagree on the degree to which Obama has expanded on Bush's executive overreach and by which congressional Republicans have overdone it with the melodrama on the subject - but your blanket denial  that any such overreach has happened  does not comport with the facts. It doesn't even line up with Obama's own pre-election rhetoric.

It's not difficult to grasp.

The delays nonetheless set a troubling precedent. They are unlikely to be challenged in court - no one has standing to sue over the employer-mandate delays, and no insurer has thought it worthwhile to challenge the "like it, keep it" fix. But a future administration that is less sympathetic to the ACA could invoke the delays as precedent for declining to enforce other provisions that it dislikes, including provisions that are essential to the proper functioning of the law. The delays could therefore undermine the very statute they were meant to protect - and perhaps imperil the ACA's effort to extend coverage to tens of millions of people.

More generally, the Obama administration's claim of enforcement discretion, if accepted, would limit Congress's ability to specify when and under what circumstances its laws should take effect. That circumscription of legislative authority would mark a major shift of constitutional power away from Congress, which makes the laws, and toward the President, who is supposed to enforce them.
 
2014-07-25 04:12:21 PM  

Gulper Eel: Not when the choice is between "worse than the status quo" and "much worse than the status quo" - in a case like that, the much-worse side is useful if only to bring both breeds of foolishness to a halt. Yay for checks and balances. It's not putting the worse group in power, it's a first-do-no-harm principle.


You're trying to rationalize voting for the objectively worse group, but you don't have to.

It's okay to just admit that it is tribalism on your part, and that you are voting for them because they may be destructive, regressive, antiscience cretins, but they're *your* destructive, regressive, antiscience cretins, and you don't like the other guys.

As soon as you try to make yourself feel better by offering explanations like "gridlock" you run into pesky little issues like a lack of consistency, or that empowering the worse side only sets them up to succeed with their plans that you acknowledge are worse when they ultimately regain power as the political pendulum swings back. Unless there are threads from 2004-2006 in which you were strongly supporting the Democrats in order to achieve gridlock that you want to link to?

If I have you confused with someone else, and you're not the incredibly partisan right winger I'm thinking of, please pardon my mistake.
 
2014-07-25 04:26:42 PM  

Jon Snow: Unless there are threads from 2004-2006 in which you were strongly supporting the Democrats in order to achieve gridlock that you want to link to?


Hey, if the president can evolve on same-sex marriage to the point I was at 15 years ago, then I can evolve on the issues too. I didn't go left, but I did move strongly libertarian on national politics.

I got sick of the Republican overreach in '06. You know how all politics is local? My local Republican congressman was being a drunken spousal-abusing jackass - and unlike certain deluded partisan supporters of a legendarily negligent senatorial spousal-abusing drunkard (a belated happy 45th anniversary, btw), I wasn't keen on my congressman being re-elected even once, let alone for the next four decades, if that's how he was going to be. So I voted for the Democrat (Gillibrand) because she seemed reasonable and not as obviously thick-skulled and corrupt as others of her ilk in my state. I voted for her again in '08 because the Republicans nominated an empty suit.
 
2014-07-25 04:45:58 PM  

Gulper Eel: I didn't go left, but I did move strongly libertarian on national politics.


So what does that mean? You voted for Badnarik, Barr, and Johnson? That you wrote in a name? Or did you vote for Bush (or Kerry)? McCain (or Obama)? Or Romney (or Obama)?
 
2014-07-25 05:14:16 PM  

Jon Snow: So what does that mean? You voted for Badnarik, Barr, and Johnson? That you wrote in a name? Or did you vote for Bush (or Kerry)? McCain (or Obama)? Or Romney (or Obama)?


I voted for Johnson in '12, left '08 blank. Wrote in McCain in '00 and '04. 

I've been pretty well disgusted with every major party presidential candidate since Clinton, and the last time I enthusiastically voted  for anybody was Perot in '92 but that's because I had seen an address by his running mate Adm. Stockdale many years earlier and was tremendously impressed - even without having to compare him to those two insufferable silver-spoon asshats Gore and Quayle.
 
2014-07-25 06:31:59 PM  

Gulper Eel: Jon Snow: So what does that mean? You voted for Badnarik, Barr, and Johnson? That you wrote in a name? Or did you vote for Bush (or Kerry)? McCain (or Obama)? Or Romney (or Obama)?

I voted for Johnson in '12, left '08 blank. Wrote in McCain in '00 and '04. 

I've been pretty well disgusted with every major party presidential candidate since Clinton, and the last time I enthusiastically voted  for anybody was Perot in '92 but that's because I had seen an address by his running mate Adm. Stockdale many years earlier and was tremendously impressed - even without having to compare him to those two insufferable silver-spoon asshats Gore and Quayle.


Fair enough. If you're not empowering the GOP I withdraw my criticisms made on the assumption you were. Apologies.
 
2014-07-25 07:23:31 PM  

Gulper Eel: Both sides ARE bad, so vote for whatever outcome is most likely to see them chained to each other and drowning.

That dream will not be fulfilled through voting alone.
 
Displayed 106 of 106 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report