Here Comes The Left

[Arctish]

Zero evidence he'll do that, but OK.

There is evidence that he is contemplating that, and his motivation is his religion-based hatred of Israel.
Note that his wife is also a Hamas supporter.
Zohran Mamdani’s wife liked social media posts celebrating Oct. 7 attacks

That's a hit piece and the headline is a lie. The posts she liked made no mention of the 10/7 attack.

Do I understand someone jumped to a conclusion again?

More like assumed his conclusion.

 

[Derec]

Yep. Everyone not part of Project 2025 is driving us towards being like Venezuela. Elizabeth Warren was just Hugo Chavez in drag. Fuck consumer protections, environmental laws, and anti-trust law. That stuff is the rot of society.

Sigh. One can be against Project 2025 and in favor of "consumer protections, environmental laws, and anti-trust law" but still reject DSA and their platform which I wrote about in post #474.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Yep. Everyone not part of Project 2025 is driving us towards being like Venezuela. Elizabeth Warren was just Hugo Chavez in drag. Fuck consumer protections, environmental laws, and anti-trust law. That stuff is the rot of society.

Sigh. One can be against Project 2025 and in favor of "consumer protections, environmental laws, and anti-trust law" but still reject DSA and their platform which I wrote about in post #474.

Guy who accuses everyone who disagrees with Israel of being antisemitic says what? Guy who accuses people of being Marxist if they don't spend every waking moment in fear of Mamdani says what?

 

[scombrid]

I suppose the unconditional support for ICE that I see from you people

I do not know anybody here who has an "unconditional support for ICE". Just because I reject open borders and pro-illegal policies of the fauxgressives and the DSA does not mean that I have to agree with the Trump administration with their approach either.

sure jan

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I suppose the unconditional support for ICE that I see from you people

I do not know anybody here who has an "unconditional support for ICE". Just because I reject open borders and pro-illegal policies of the fauxgressives and the DSA does not mean that I have to agree with the Trump administration with their approach either.

Oh look, another thing you baselessly accuse other people of being. Being generally OK with immigration doesn't make someone "open borders".

 

[scombrid]

Yep. Everyone not part of Project 2025 is driving us towards being like Venezuela. Elizabeth Warren was just Hugo Chavez in drag. Fuck consumer protections, environmental laws, and anti-trust law. That stuff is the rot of society.

Sigh. One can be against Project 2025 and in favor of "consumer protections, environmental laws, and anti-trust law" but still reject DSA and their platform which I wrote about in post #474.

Why then the constant misinformation, disinformation, and mischaracterization of moderates then?

 

[laughing dog]

I suppose the unconditional support for ICE that I see from you people

I do not know anybody here who has an "unconditional support for ICE". Just because I reject open borders and pro-illegal policies of the fauxgressives and the DSA does not mean that I have to agree with the Trump administration with their approach either.

So what part of the Trump administration approach to border control and immigration do you agree with? Disagree with?

 

[Toni]

They have an affordability problem and problems with rising costs for national health care.

If you had been paying attention you would know that US Americans are having an affordability problem and problems with rising costs of heath care. And Trump says affordability is a fake word.

Well, he does now.

 

[Toni]

I suppose the unconditional support for ICE that I see from you people

I do not know anybody here who has an "unconditional support for ICE". Just because I reject open borders and pro-illegal policies of the fauxgressives and the DSA does not mean that I have to agree with the Trump administration with their approach either.

So what part of the Trump administration approach to border control and immigration do you agree with? Disagree with?

Answering even though not directed at me:

I object to the mass deployment of ICE agents to cities and states where agents seem to be targeting anybody with brown or black skin, including US citizens and even Native Americans. Instead of their stated purpose of rounding up the worst of the worst, they are geared towards grabbing people who are most easily found—not criminals, who, btw, are turned over to ICE after their sentence is completed. ICE holds people in what could only be termed concentration camps, brag about inhumane conditions, fail to provide clean water and food or necessary medical care in violation of US and international laws. ICE has murdered US citizens, kidnapped US citizens, Green Card holders and those here with valid work permits, visas, etc. they are incarcerating children in deplorable conditions. They violate state law, do not identify themselves, and take people without valid warrants or any warrants at all.

For starters.

 

[Elixir]

With a Mamdani in the WH and majority of his supporters in congress we would likely go the route of Venezuela.

The Venezuelan radicals destroyed the economy and the middle class by arbitrary ideological actions. Nationalized oil which fell into disrepair.

They bankrupted the government with unsustainable social programs sending.

That sounds precisely like what the Republitards said would happen if we elected Obama. Endless economic and social disaster.
As it turned out Obama gave us the longest string of consecutive growth quarters in modern history, didn't start any wars, ended Bushbaby's Iraq debacle and made no attempt to overthrow the results of elections, not even when The People decided they'd prefer a wannabe dictator, known career fraudster, sexual assaulter and and self dealing asshole.

 

[steve_bank]

@steve_bank you are just a cranky old guy who, if you had a lawn (I don’t know if you do or not) would yell at the kids, “Get off my lawn!”

Hardly. I look at the financial reality in the prophetess state of Washington and the evergreen city of Seattle.

Our 'millionaire tax' to make up a state shortfall in the billions of dollars. Cutting osendg is not an op0tionn for progressives.

In King County millions of dollars given for the homeless has been spent and noddy knows where or how.

A small example of the left tinkering wit economics. Independent drivers complained they were not making enough. The city added a surcharge on food deliveries. Cost of food delivery went up. demand went down. Drivers complained they were making less than before the surcharge.

There has been talk of taxing business to support small business that can not make it. The welfare state.

I suggest getting out of that wacky weed cloud and get some fresh air.

Progressive motto 'Tax and spend'.

No concept of a sustainable budget. Ideology over reality. Clinton supported welfare reform ad had a balanced budget. Centrist pragmatic democrats are long gone. Democrats have shifted to the ideological left. As republicans have gone o the right.

Center left and center right are gone. People like Mamdani are creeping into the democrats, anti American activists. And of course the MAGA crazies on the right. Flip sides of the same coin.

AI Overview
Yes, President Bill Clinton balanced the federal budget and actually achieved budget surpluses for four consecutive fiscal years, from 1998 to 2001. This marked the first time the United States government recorded a budget surplus in nearly 30 years.

AI Overview
Yes, President Bill Clinton strongly supported welfare reform. During his 1992 presidential campaign, he famously pledged to "end welfare as we know it". On August 22, 1996, he fulfilled that promise by signing the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) into law.

Personnel responsibility, the opposite of the nanny state.

I look at both the left and right the same way. The left tends tot get a pass here, and in mainstream. media.

Freethought, lookng at issues on their own merits without looking through an ideology. The opposite of the polarized politicsa that is killing us.

AI Overview
Thomas Jefferson theoretically disliked the idea of political parties as dangerous factions, but he paradoxically helped create and lead America's first opposition party, the Democratic-Republicans, to fight the financial policies of Alexander Hamilton.

 

[pood]

@steve_bank you are just a cranky old guy who, if you had a lawn (I don’t know if you do or not) would yell at the kids, “Get off my lawn!”

Hardly. I look at the financial reality in the prophetess state of Washington and the evergreen city of Seattle.

Our 'millionaire tax' to make up a state shortfall in the billions of dollars. Cutting osendg is not an op0tionn for progressives.

In King County millions of dollars given for the homeless has been spent and noddy knows where or how.

A small example of the left tinkering wit economics. Independent drivers complained they were not making enough. The city added a surcharge on food deliveries. Cost of food delivery went up. demand went down. Drivers complained they were making less than before the surcharge.

There has been talk of taxing business to support small business that can not make it. The welfare state.

I suggest getting out of that wacky weed cloud and get some fresh air.

Progressive motto 'Tax and spend'.

No concept of a sustainable budget. Ideology over reality. Clinton supported welfare reform ad had a balanced budget. Centrist pragmatic democrats are long gone. Democrats have shifted to the ideological left. As republicans have gone o the right.

Center left and center right are gone. People like Mamdani are creeping into the democrats, anti American activists. And of course the MAGA crazies on the right. Flip sides of the same coin.

AI Overview
Yes, President Bill Clinton balanced the federal budget and actually achieved budget surpluses for four consecutive fiscal years, from 1998 to 2001. This marked the first time the United States government recorded a budget surplus in nearly 30 years.

AI Overview
Yes, President Bill Clinton strongly supported welfare reform. During his 1992 presidential campaign, he famously pledged to "end welfare as we know it". On August 22, 1996, he fulfilled that promise by signing the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) into law.

Personnel responsibility, the opposite of the nanny state.

I look at both the left and right the same way. The left tends tot get a pass here, and in mainstream. media.

Freethought, lookng at issues on their own merits without looking through an ideology. The opposite of the polarized politicsa that is killing us.

AI Overview
Thomas Jefferson theoretically disliked the idea of political parties as dangerous factions, but he paradoxically helped create and lead America's first opposition party, the Democratic-Republicans, to fight the financial policies of Alexander Hamilton.

Do you receive Social Security payments every month?

Are your bank deposits protected by the FDIC?

Were any members of your family helped by the GI bill?

Have you or any members of your family been helped by the SEC, by Medicare, Medicaid, or food stamps?

Have you ever belonged to a labor union, and been protected by the National Labor Relations Board, or if not, do you object to it?

Do you think you benefit, if only indirectly, from the National Resources Conservation Service?

What about the Food and Drug Administration? Good? Bad? Or would you prefer poisoned food?

The EPA? The Clean Air Act? The Clean Water Act? Title IX?

All of the above — this is just a sampling — are a result of what today we call democratic socialism. They come (not precisely in this order) from T. Roosevelt (Square Deal), FDR (New Deal), LBJ (Great Society) and Richard Nixon (New American Revolution).

Democratic socialism all. And we have all immensely benefited.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

@steve_bank you are just a cranky old guy who, if you had a lawn (I don’t know if you do or not) would yell at the kids, “Get off my lawn!”

Hardly. I look at the financial reality in the prophetess state of Washington and the evergreen city of Seattle.

Our 'millionaire tax' to make up a state shortfall in the billions of dollars. Cutting osendg is not an op0tionn for progressives.

In King County millions of dollars given for the homeless has been spent and noddy knows where or how.

A small example of the left tinkering wit economics. Independent drivers complained they were not making enough. The city added a surcharge on food deliveries. Cost of food delivery went up. demand went down. Drivers complained they were making less than before the surcharge.

There has been talk of taxing business to support small business that can not make it. The welfare state.

I suggest getting out of that wacky weed cloud and get some fresh air.

Progressive motto 'Tax and spend'.

No concept of a sustainable budget. Ideology over reality. Clinton supported welfare reform ad had a balanced budget. Centrist pragmatic democrats are long gone. Democrats have shifted to the ideological left. As republicans have gone o the right.

Center left and center right are gone. People like Mamdani are creeping into the democrats, anti American activists. And of course the MAGA crazies on the right. Flip sides of the same coin.

AI Overview
Yes, President Bill Clinton balanced the federal budget and actually achieved budget surpluses for four consecutive fiscal years, from 1998 to 2001. This marked the first time the United States government recorded a budget surplus in nearly 30 years.

AI Overview
Yes, President Bill Clinton strongly supported welfare reform. During his 1992 presidential campaign, he famously pledged to "end welfare as we know it". On August 22, 1996, he fulfilled that promise by signing the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) into law.

Personnel responsibility, the opposite of the nanny state.

I look at both the left and right the same way. The left tends tot get a pass here, and in mainstream. media.

Freethought, lookng at issues on their own merits without looking through an ideology. The opposite of the polarized politicsa that is killing us.

AI Overview
Thomas Jefferson theoretically disliked the idea of political parties as dangerous factions, but he paradoxically helped create and lead America's first opposition party, the Democratic-Republicans, to fight the financial policies of Alexander Hamilton.

Do you receive Social Security payments every month?

Are your bank deposits protected by the FDIC?

Were any members of your family helped by the GI bill?

Have you or any members of your family been helped by the SEC, by Medicare, Medicaid, or food stamps?

Have you ever belonged to a labor union, and been protected by the National Labor Relations Board, or if not, do you object to it?

Do you think you benefit, if only indirectly, from the National Resources Conservation Service?

What about the Food and Drug Administration? Good? Bad? Or would you prefer poisoned food?

The EPA? The Clean Air Act? The Clean Water Act? Title IX?

All of the above — this is just a sampling — are a result of what today we call democratic socialism. They come (not precisely in this order) from T. Roosevelt (Square Deal), FDR (New Deal), LBJ (Great Society) and Richard Nixon (New American Revolution).

Democratic socialism all. And we have all immensely benefited.

Yes, but you see, you always have to assume there's an equal amount of bad stuff from both sides for some reason, even though that's not the case.

 

[laughing dog]

.

Progressive motto 'Tax and spend'.

Something tells me that you would object more to borrow and spend.

 

[Derec]

Guy who accuses everyone who disagrees with Israel of being antisemitic says what?

I'll ignore the kindergarten-level framing of the question for a second.
No, it's not "everyone who disagrees with Israel". But those who think that Israel should not have the right to defend itself from aggression by Hamas, Hezbollah and other islamofascist terrorists are usually motivated by antisemitism. Those who don't even think Israel should exist (i.e. "antizionists") are usually motivated by antisemitism.

Guy who accuses people of being Marxist if they don't spend every waking moment in fear of Mamdani says what?

No, I accuse people of being Marxist when they espouse Marxist ideas. For example, the idea of "seizing the means of production" is present both in the DSA constitution (albeit worded a bit differently) and it was also expressed verbatim by Mamdani at a DSA event while he was NY state legislator.
Without again resorting to childish games, tell me what is wrong with using people's and organizations' words to judge what they believe?

 

[Derec]

Something tells me that you would object more to borrow and spend.

Worst of all is "print money to spend". AOC envisioned to pay for her Green New Deal by using the tenets of MMT (ostensibly "Modern Monetary Theory" but really "Magic Money Tree") which state that governments like the US can substantially increase money supply with no ill effects.
This Economic Theory Could Be Used To Pay For The Green New Deal

 

[Derec]

Oh look, another thing you baselessly accuse other people of being. Being generally OK with immigration doesn't make someone "open borders".

DSA is explicitly advocating for open borders.

 

[TomC]

Oh look, another thing you baselessly accuse other people of being. Being generally OK with immigration doesn't make someone "open borders".

DSA is explicitly advocating for open borders.

OMG!
They're advocating for both basic Christian ethics and traditional American values? In the US, today?
What is the matter with those people?
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

Without again resorting to childish games, tell me what is wrong with using people's and organizations' words to judge what they believe?

Nothing in theory. But judgment requires including context, behavior and realistic projections of action. Something that is many times lacking in your analysis. Pointing that out does not make one a "leftist" or a "Marxist" or "pro-Hamas".

 

[bilby]

Something tells me that you would object more to borrow and spend.

Worst of all is "print money to spend". AOC envisioned to pay for her Green New Deal by using the tenets of MMT (ostensibly "Modern Monetary Theory" but really "Magic Money Tree") which state that governments like the US can substantially increase money supply with no ill effects.
This Economic Theory Could Be Used To Pay For The Green New Deal

The US has substantially increased money supply since the collapse of Bretton Woods, and any ill effects have been massively outweighed by beneficial ones.

Defecit spending to build infrastructure* is one of the most significant macroeconomic differences between the most successful and least successful economies, both over time and over geography.

Your simpletonistic sneering about magic money trees is not, in fact, a strong counterargument to these facts.

Balanced budgets, austerity, and "fiscal responsibility" have, since the demise of commodity money, been universally disastrous.

A national economy is nothing like a household economy, and the belief that an understanding of the latter qualifies someone to set policy for the former has led to vast and pointless suffering.






* Infrastructure in a very broad sense. Perhaps the most valuable infrastructure in economic history is the land registry - a definitive and accurate survey of what real estate exists in a nation, the precise boundaries of, and ownership of, each parcel of it. Such detailed information costs a lot to establish, and even more to maintain; And yet the return on that expenditure is phenomenal.