Group items tagged

This is the viral video of MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan just absolutely kicking ass and taking names.  Dylan goes after the Banksters, shouting that our politicians are bought and paid for by the financial industry.  He shouts that the Bankster are "extracting" our wealth through taxes, export/import and financial rules that favor the Banksters.  His solution is to take the money out of politics.  He claims tha tonly the President can do this by taking the argument to the people and explaining how their congress is bought and paid for.  Incredible rant!

Right-on-the-money rant. The cure for Islamic terrorism is not to be found in the force of arms. It is to end our own western nations' terrorism of Muslim people and to end our deployment of Islamic terrorists to fight our proxy wars. "Terrorism is the price of empire. If you do not wish to pay the price, you must give up the empire." Pat Buchanan, Where the Right Went Wrong: How Neoconservatives Subverted the Reagan Revolution and Hijacked the Bush Presidency (2005). 

Oliver Stone has a nice rant about mainstream media and its current Russophobe reporting.

Naked Capitalism continues their rant on the fraudulent and inexcusable Obama Foreclosure gift to the Banksters.  This article details the crimes being committed under the provisions of pooling and servicing agreements relating to a single payment default.  Incredible stuff. excerpt: Now do you see why servicers consistently report than when homeowners miss a payment or two, they proceed pretty much in a straight line to default? Once they miss a payment or start racking up extra charges that you are unaware of, borrowers descend into a designed-by-the-servicer escalating fee black hole, never to emerge.

A classic rant from Libertarian, Wayne Allen Root "At Columbia University (class of '83), my fellow classmates admitted they hated America, hated "the rich" and despised Judeo-Christian values. We spent our days discussing and debating their plan to destroy capitalism and radically change America from within by electing one of their own to the Presidency. Once elected, the plan was to overwhelm the system with spending, taxes, entitlements and debt. Capitalism would topple, business owners would lose everything and Americans would be brought to their knees, begging for government to save them. In that way America would become a socialist Nation. Obama was one of my Columbia classmates, and it is clear now this is the very plan he's implementing. With economic and moral carnage from coast to coast and now throughout the Mideast, it is clear the White House is down and Olympus has fallen - from within. Just look at the facts:"

A well-written rant from a progressive about Obama's failure as a President, supported by lots of poll results and statistics. But I find it amusing that Obama's harshest progressive critics mostly choose to view him as a failure rather than recognizing that his campaign promises and claims to be a progressive were lies. Obama has been an incredibly successful president for his real constituency, the banksters, the giant multinational corporations, the military industry, etc. Apparently it's more difficult for progressives to recognize the man for what he really stands for than to accept that they were suckered into voting for another political shyster whose real constituency are corporatist/globalist interests. They'd rather view him as a failed progressive with a still pure heart than believe that his campaign promises were lies.  But to me, Obama's behavior speaks far more loudly about his real goals than his words. 

Righteous rant on Obama's makeover for Auction 2014. 

The true history of the tea party movement: The very first tea party  was held by Congressman Ron Paul (R - Texas) supporters December 16, 2007 for calling attention to a "money bomb." People dumped boxes labeled "taxes, war, big government" into the Boston harbor. Similar events took place around the country. A more organized protest happened on July 12, 2008 when 10,000 Ron Paul supporters descended upon DC at the West Side of Capitol Hill for a "Revolution March". The main theme of the March and Rally was Dr. Ron Paul's message of Peace, Prosperity, and Freedom through adherence to the Constitution. The Keynote Speaker and Guest of Honor was Dr. Paul himself. Later both of these were known as the resurgence of the American "tea party" or the "re-teaparty". In February of 2009, a CNBC financial talking head named Rick Santelli burst forth with his famous rant in reaction to the mortgage crash. The traders on the floor of the CME Group joined him in expressing their outrage over the notion they may have to pay their neighbor's mortgage, particularly if they bought far more house than they could actually afford. "President Obama, are you listening?" he shouted into the camera to the amused interviewers. He then said he would even start organizing a tea party to happen in July at Lake Michigan because what we are doing now was making our founding fathers "roll over in their graves". Later, many "912″ groups formed after an idea proposed by Glenn Beck. And thus, we are a happy conglomeration of all of these elements. Because by now, Americans were beginning to realize that neither party was serving their interests and our country was going down the tubes fast. And thus, the movement was born. Conservatives, some who'd never been politically active before, took to the streets. Progressives and leftists at first thought it was just a tiny minority, but then the numbers grew. It became apparent that this was no small phenomenon a

Outrageous rant from rapster Felonious Monk.  Very vulgar ghetto speak, but right on target.  Who would have guessed that Felonious is a Tea Party Patriot?  Balance the Budget!  Stop Spending money you don't have.  Stop spending money we have to borrow from the Chicomms!  Great stuff if you can handle the colorful expression.  This is one angry American, and i'm right with him.

Harvey is CEO of American Express:  This is his rant and it's awesome!   ......... Over the years, I have paid a significant portion of my income to the various federal, state and local jurisdictions in which I have lived, and I deeply resent that President Obama has decided that I don't need all the money I've not paid in taxes over the years, or that I should leave less for my children and grandchildren and give more to him to spend as he thinks fit. I also resent that Warren Buffett and others who have created massive wealth for themselves think I'm "coddled" because they believe they should pay more in taxes. I certainly don't feel "coddled" because these various governments have not imposed a higher income tax. After all, I did earn it. Others could pay higher taxes if they choose. They could voluntarily write a check or they could advocate that their gifts to foundations should be made with after-tax dollars and not be deductible. They could also pay higher taxes if they were not allowed to set up foundations to avoid capital gains and estate taxes. What gets me most upset is two other things about this argument: the unfair way taxes are collected, and the violation of the implicit social contract between me and my government that my taxes will be spent-effectively and efficiently-on purposes that support the general needs of the country. Before you call me greedy, make sure you operate fairly on both fronts.

A righteous rant by Clark on the American judicial system.

Ken White, former federal prosecutor and my favorite blawger, has a righteous rant about the injustice of DoJ's sweet deal for former CIA head David Patraeus

"Doug Casey on American Socialism"  .  Awesome interview, especially the discussion on Liberalism and how the socialist Norman Thomas decided to co-opt the term as an effective replacement for the disreputable socialism.  Links to the Thomas 1932 socialist platform that Casey points out has pretty much been put into place.   Good discussion.  Focus on an article published by socialist apologist and idiot, Allan Colmes.

I agree that Colmes is far from the sharpest knife in the drawer. In my opinion, he was largely a Fox News invention to give Shawn Hannity a far weaker opponent to argue against that Hannity's idiocy could still overcome. There are in reality liberals that Hannity could never have gone toe-to-toe with. (That's not an endorsement of liberalism; it's commentary on the quality of Hannity's arguments.) The show was mostly a variant of the straw man logical fallacy; the fact that Colmes lacked the ability to think critically or communicate effectively made Hannity "win" the pseudo-debate in the eyes of those unable to think critically themselves. I have some criticism of Casey's remarks that apply more generally to my experience of strict Libertarians and perhaps even farther to strict adherents to any "ism." My criticism boils down to a couple of examples of hard issues usually avoided by strict Libertarians. -- The Disabled: When discussing Social Security disability benefits, Casey changes the subject from the genuinely disabled to a short rant about those whose disability claims are bogus and the "ambulance chasing" lawyers who pursue their claims. But if pressed to the wall and forced to answer, I strongly suspect that Casey would admit that there are people, likely the majority of Social Security disability benefits, whose claims are genuine. The net effect of his relevant argument: an impression that he has a Darwinian view that he would leave the disabled dying in the streets without sustenance or medical care. That kind of society is unacceptable to me. Perhaps it is to Casey too, but if so I think it was incumbent on him to offer a solution for the genuinely disabled. (In fairness, I'll note that at one point Casey hinted but did not forthrightly say that he would favor financial assistance for single mothers in Harlem.) -- Medical Care: I agree that our health care system is badly broken. But again Casey is long on criticism but short on realistic idea

Not mentioned in the article: the Knesset's Regulation Bill formally annexed territory inside the West Bank and holds that Israeli law, rather than military law, will now govern the annexed portions. That is the fact that establishes a clean break with the 2-state solution and flies in the face of international law including the Fourth Geneva Convention, which strictly prohibits annexation and requires the immediate withdrawal of invading military forces from occupied territories immediately upon cessation of hostilities, which occurred in 1967. The two-state solution is dead, although the Regulation Bill will likely be overturned by the Israeli Supreme Court. Trump gave Israel's ultra-right wing leaders way too much encouragement.

America, it's time we pulled our heads out of the sand.  Specifically, it's time the people we pay to run this country develop a long-term plan to balance the budget.  Tell your politician you can handle the truth. Tell him or her that you're sick of pretending.

Andrew Napolitano, in what I view as his best essay I have read, explains the significance of "jurisdictionally based judicial ruling on the cellphone aspect of the domestic spying that former NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed last spring" as compared to the non-jurisdictional rulings of the FISA court.

Godwin's Law comes to mind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Another of the greatest U.S. exports: corruption.

Corporate oligarchs leading private but well armed armies in raids against the Ukrainian government holdings - controlled by other corporate oligarchs? This article dives into the mess that the USA and European NATO allies have stirred in the Ukraine, and through this lens we get to see what the world will look like when corporate oligarchs and their Bankster masters rule the world. The article is revealing, but it fails to connect the corporatist to the Banks that are sending in billions of dollars. The connection instead is made to the democratic governments intent on pushing the world into world war 3. Nor is there much mention of the oil and natural gas pipeline and supply geographics that dominate battlefields from the Ukraine, to Syria, Iraq and Lybia. The New World Order needs a third World War if it's to truly overturn the fragile post World War II economic order loosely based on free market capitalism, individual liberty and democratic governance. The end of national sovereignty, religious and cultural identities has one more hurdle. And there is no doubt in my mind that the elites are ready to jump that hurdle. World War III has spread from the middle east to middle Europe. Best we all hold on. .................. "Exclusive: Ukraine's post-coup regime is facing what looks like a falling-out among thieves as oligarch-warlord Igor Kolomoisky, who was given his own province to rule, brought his armed men to Kiev to fight for control of the state-owned energy company, further complicating the State Department's propaganda efforts, reports Robert Parry. In the never-never land of how the mainstream U.S. press covers the Ukraine crisis, the appointment last year of thuggish oligarch Igor Kolomoisky to govern one of the country's eastern provinces was pitched as a democratic "reform" because he was supposedly too rich to bribe, without noting that his wealth had come from plundering the country's economy. In other words, the new U.S.-b