2011 Retirement En Masse

PJ, that was way too easy; you should leave those softballs alone.

Look, you have twice been asked to provide proof of your assertions, and all you do is respond with knee-jerk epithets, attributing thoughts to Mazo and me that you cannot possibly know.

I've posted sources, you obviously aren't paying attention.

First of all, I never quoted a book, or cited a professor, Marxist or not. So, I don't know what hallucination you were viewing when you wrote this.

It's OK, I understand that your ideology or parties' talking points prevent you from understanding or accepting another person's ideology.

Second, I do read several viewpoints, some of them on this board.

What's on this board is typically personal opinion. Some of it is actually sourced. However, attacking opinions or people to promote your ideology only enflames instead of educates.

...

Fourth, my "faith in liberal ideology" is borne of a deep understanding of the US Constitution, an understanding of the history of the US (where it's been, and a belief in where it should go), and a strong belief in the priorities of this nation. If you want to refer to this as "liberal ideology" so be it. I am more interested in our country providing for "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" for all citizens on an equal basis.

I see your "deep understanding" and raise you an oath TO the US Constitution, which means in it's current form to include the Bill of Rights.

Fifth, and as to Keynes: I know only who he is. I have never read him.

I would suggest reading what Keynes and Hayek both said before you inject your liberal ideology into the economic debates.

...

And, since you tout yourself as a Marine, I would expect more of a real Marine than supercilious and hot air arguments.

Once a Marine, Always a Marine.
Marine Corps motto: Semper Fidelis, Always Faithful

Unless you've served, you have no amount of understading what affect the oath has on the understanding of the Constitution. There are enumerated powers within the language of the US Constitution which BOTH parties have usurped. You have, on this board, supported those very un-constitutional ideals. You cannot support the Constitution then pick and choose what your ideology dictates.
Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Oath...

I, DFW5Traveler, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

PJ, that was way too easy; you should leave those softballs alone. Originally Posted by discreetgent

I know, but sometimes a ball just floats over the plate...

Second, I do read several viewpoints, some of them on this board.

. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Developing one's worldview from a Hooker Message Board....

Unless you've served, you have no amount of understading what affect the oath has on the understanding of the Constitution. There are enumerated powers within the language of the US Constitution which BOTH parties have usurped. You have, on this board, supported those very un-constitutional ideals. You cannot support the Constitution then pick and choose what your ideology dictates.

From this, I take your position to be that the only people that REALLY understand the Constitution are people who have served in the armed forces. That's a pretty exclusionary POV, and actually, contrary to the Constitution. The Constitution place the President, a civilian, over the Military for a reason. And of all the Founders, only GW had a place in the military. The Constitution was drafted, primarily, from non-military personnel.

I assume that, as a Constitutional purist, you would still have Black slaves, and limit voting to the male gentry.

I see your "deep understanding" and raise you an oath TO the US Constitution, which means in it's current form to include the Bill of Rights.

I agree, but there are a lot of conservatives that want to do away with the Bill of Rights, or at least the 14th Amend.

What's on this board is typically personal opinion. Some of it is actually sourced. However, attacking opinions or people to promote your ideology only enflames instead of educates.

Mazo posted a sourced, detailed response to your OP, and asked you to support your position. I thought you would, but you failed to do so. And, I was curious how any federal deficit issues could affect State Pension Plans. There's still no response to that issue. But, by now, I don't even expect to see an attempt.

Developing one's worldview from a Hooker Message Board.... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

LOL. Not a worldview. That was developed long ago. A slant maybe, or a laugh for the day.

From this, I take your position to be that the only people that REALLY understand the Constitution are people who have served in the armed forces. That's a pretty exclusionary POV, and actually, contrary to the Constitution. The Constitution place the President, a civilian, over the Military for a reason. And of all the Founders, only GW had a place in the military. The Constitution was drafted, primarily, from non-military personnel.


My opionion is that I am aware of the Constitution because I took an oath to defend it and learned about what I was defending; the Federalist papers, the Anti-federalist papers and the Declaration of Indepedence. Nowhere did I limit that understanding to military personnel only. The founders all fought in one fashion against the tyranny of the crown. The Constitution was written to limit the size and scope of government, which is something you appear to have a problem with. As the govt grows, our freedoms and liberties shrink. e.g., Patriot Act The founders knew that govt growth equaled limited freedom and that is why it dictates things like the enumerated powers of congress.

I assume that, as a Constitutional purist, you would still have Black slaves, and limit voting to the male gentry.

First of all if you actually knew history blacks and women could vote post-signing. Albeit conditional upon owning land.

I agree, but there are a lot of conservatives that want to do away with the Bill of Rights, or at least the 14th Amend.

I have stated on this board that that is a falsehood. The people fighting against that amendment were democrats and it was JFK who jailed MLK. The only reason Johnson didn't veto it was pressure from the republicans and We The People. MLK was a republican, Lincoln was the first republican president. The progressives are changing our text books to prevent the ideologs from knowing the truth.

Mazo posted a sourced, detailed response to your OP, and asked you to support your position. I thought you would, but you failed to do so. And, I was curious how any federal deficit issues could affect State Pension Plans. There's still no response to that issue. But, by now, I don't even expect to see an attempt.


The sources I quoted are in the posts, pay attention CT...

First Source: http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=897270&postcoun t=22

Second Source: http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=897438&postcoun t=26

Third source: http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=899915&postcoun t=53

LOL. Not a worldview. That was developed long ago. A slant maybe, or a laugh for the day. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Ahem...

Edit: Single source for civil rights

Developing one's worldview from a Hooker Message Board.... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

You gotta admit, it's better than Fox or MSNBC.

You gotta admit, it's better than Fox or MSNBC. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

More balanced than either.

Ahem...

Edit: Single source for civil rights Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

And now I'm left wondering what civil rights has to do with the funding of state pension plans.

Or are you trying to say that you've become a Jedi and now believe that all things in the universe are inherently connected by The Force?

Cheers,
Mazo.

Isn't Japan still in a recession? Originally Posted by pjorourke

I too didn’t realize it was over, because Japan quickly slid into another recession.

Japan's Recession - What Caused Recession in Japan, and How It Affects the U.S.
By Kimberly Amadeo, 16 Nov 2010

Japan's recession became official in Q4 2008 when GDP growth plummeted 12.9% from a year earlier, the worst decline since the 1974 recession. Japan's economic collapse was a shock, since Q3 growth was only down .1%, following a decline of 2.4% in Q2 2008. The severe downturn was a result of slumping exports in consumer electronics and auto sales, 16% of Japan's economy and a driving force behinds the country's economic revival from 2002-2008.

Japan's economy had only recently recovered from the deflation that hobbled it in the 1990's. Japan's economy was up 2.1% in 2007, and 3.2% in Q1 2008, leading many to believe it had finally grown out of its decade-long recession.

Japan's Importance to the Global Economy
Japan is the world's fourth largest economy (after the EU, U.S. and China), so its decline would drag down the global economy, as well. Japan also hires temporary workers from nearby South Asian countries, who are now being laid off in droves.

To combat recession in the 1990's, the Bank of Japan had lowered interest rates to 0% and bought U.S. Treasuries, keeping the yen low which made exports competitively priced.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/grossd..._Recession.htm

Most states in the US have billions of dollars in state debt. The worst three offenders: California, Illinois, and New York. There are two possibilities, which would be either bankruptcy in the form of muni bond default and mass layoffs, or a federal bailout that created some zombie states to go with our lovely zombie banks.

And now I'm left wondering what civil rights has to do with the funding of state pension plans.

Or are you trying to say that you've become a Jedi and now believe that all things in the universe are inherently connected by The Force?

Cheers,
Mazo. Originally Posted by Mazomaniac

That was for CT who stated that I as a conservative wants the 14th amendment repealed. Of course he is wrong. It may help to pay attention to the context of the response.

Most states in the US have billions of dollars in state debt. The worst three offenders: California, Illinois, and New York. Originally Posted by Can I Play Too???

In terms of budget shortfalls Texas is now projected to be worse than NY and close to California. Couldn't be, not after Governor Perry talked about the fine shape Texas was in in the last campaign.

In terms of budget shortfalls Texas is now projected to be worse than NY and close to California. Couldn't be, not after Governor Perry talked about the fine shape Texas was in in the last campaign. Originally Posted by discreetgent

No incumbent would stretch the truth. Never. On top of which he is refusing federal funds. Brilliant.