What Liberals Did to Detroit

Entitlements, big government, free money — with liberty and justice for all.

Advertisements

24 thoughts on “What Liberals Did to Detroit

  1. If I did not know that was Detroit then I swear it was old footage of Sarajevo during the Balkan war.

    Can someone set fire to it and burn it all down? We can start the fire by using welfare checks and food stamp coupons as kindling. God knowns Detroit is full of those.

  2. A friend of mine told me a story that absolutely amazed me. She’s from Detroit. While still living there, her young daughter heard the ice cream truck, got a dollar from her mom, and ran out to get to the truck. She came back upset and near tears.

    My friend asked her daughter if she got what she wanted, and she nodded yes; “then what’s wrong?” my friend asked.

    Her daughter told her that while she was standing in line, she saw one of her friends with a brown dollar. She said she told her friend she wouldn’t be able to buy anything because it wasn’t real. Her friend made fun of her green dollar and told her SHE wouldn’t be able to buy anything because HER money wasn’t real.

    Needless to say, they both got something, but this girls’ playmate made fun of her all the way home. My friend is, to this day, intensely proud of this story–the brown dollar was a food stamp, and her daughter’s friend thought it was the only way to get food because of the manner in which she was being raised.

    Since leaving Detroit her family has never wanted to return.

  3. Is this what this blog has been reduced to? Sentence long messages and YouTube videos? This PJ guy is such a bad liar.

    Why don’t you tell us which liberal was responsible for NAFTA? Tell us which liberals championed free trade (which saw manufacturing jobs, particularly ones that Detroit was a bastion for, disappear to Mexico)? Whenever you point the finger at liberals, you always fail to realize that three fingers are pointing back at the real problem…

  4. “Is this what this blog has been reduced to? Sentence long messages and YouTube videos?”

    Truth comes in many lengths, Robert. Yet, miraculously you found it in your word-loving little heart to respond anyway.

    “Why don’t you tell us which liberal was responsible for NAFTA? Tell us which liberals championed free trade (which saw manufacturing jobs, particularly ones that Detroit was a bastion for, disappear to Mexico)?”

    Why don’t you tell us what NAFTA was responding to? Or did you not pay attention to the part of the video about the UAW. $74 an hour to build autos when you can get someone in the private sector to do it for $25 an hour. NAFTA was put forth to help the consumers while placing emphasis on underdeveloped countries to encourage folks to stay in where they were born rather than running here, becoming illegals, and taking the jobs away from Americans anyway while tearing the shit out of our infrustructure — virtually leading this entire nation down the Detroit path.

    The idea of unions was nice….but they screwed this entire country from autoworkers to teachers. And which political party do unions contribute to?

  5. In summary (even though I know you like lots of words), auto production got lazy in this country because of unions and we suffered as other countries were doing much better work for a lot less money and when our own people began buying cars purchased somewhere else resulting in much better quality.

    It is a perfect example of those who expect to get more while they deliver less — you know, much like the average liberal.

  6. “when our own people began buying cars purchased somewhere else”

    meant to say “when our own people began buying cars manufactured somewhere else”

  7. “Or did you not pay attention to the part of the video about the UAW. $74 an hour to build autos when you can get someone in the private sector to do it for $25 an hour”

    I did pay attention to that part, hence the PJ guy is a bad liar. This is another case where facts and truth don’t stop the cons from pushing their fabricated talking points. That $74 per hour line that gets tossed around for shock value is the total compensation spent on ALL employees, past and present, including benefits, pensions, and wages. Disingenuous is too generous. Lies fit you like a charm.

    “NAFTA was put forth to help the consumers while placing emphasis on underdeveloped countries to encourage folks to stay in where they were born rather than running here, becoming illegals, and taking the jobs away from Americans anyway while tearing the shit out of our infrustructure — virtually leading this entire nation down the Detroit path.”

    And it backfired, creating what you are now blaming liberals for. Last time I checked, George Bush Sr. was no liberal, and neither was the guy he left the ratification to either…

    “The idea of unions was nice….but they screwed this entire country from autoworkers to teachers. And which political party do unions contribute to?”

    The one that actually believes in democracy, not a serfdom. And for what it’s worth, I don’t think unions should be contributing money to any political party. Campaign finance reform is something that is absolutely crucial to having a system that isn’t broken, as it currently is. If everyone donated that $3 when filing their I-9, we wouldn’t be in constant campaign mode, where fundraisers are held literally every day in D.C.

  8. “That $74 per hour line that gets tossed around for shock value is the total compensation spent on ALL employees, past and present, including benefits, pensions, and wages. Disingenuous is too generous. Lies fit you like a charm.”

    Robert, I have a degree and have 18 years experience at the same job. If you combine my benefits AND my salary, I STILL DO NOT MAKE THAT MUCH. If you combined every accountant in my area and added it all up for each one and averaged it out, it would not come close to that amount!

    “And it backfired, creating what you are now blaming liberals for.”

    Robert, because of the unions and their lobbyists and the attached pieces of legislation which prevented manufacturers from fully employing folks in the private sector, many of them reacted by employing illegal aliens and paying them cash while giving credit to the few union workers they had to have on. So much suffered. The quality of our products. After realizing it was hopeless to make a profit on one automobile, the focus from quality was shifted to quantity and attempting to shovel out cars by the load by cutting corners.

    The results? People buying Pontiacs and Fords in the 80’s and 90’s and having their engines blow just months after purchasing them. The warranty business began to boom but added more expense to the manufacturers.

    So Americans said “screw this shit! I am buying a Toyota/Honda/Volvo.”

    Yes the three cost and average of 5K to 10K more but by the time the average of those finally dies — it well surpasses the life of 2-3 of these domestic cars.

    Sorry to admit, I bought a Lexus.

    If you are a liberal, you cannot complain about NAFTA after the UAW.

    If you are a liberal, you cannot complain about No Child Left Behind after the Teacher’s unions.

    Just like complaining about Intelligent Design after Darwinism.

    It’s all quite hilarious.

    You cannot protect unions under the guise of “helping the worker” when true hard workers who have to play the role of “consumers” on the other end of that relationship wind up getting screwed.

  9. I saw this on a bumper sticker today. It’s classic. I can’t wait to get one for my car.

    Obama stands for:

    One
    Big
    Ass
    Mistake
    America

    I love it. It totally fits.

  10. “Robert, I have a degree and have 18 years experience at the same job. If you combine my benefits AND my salary, I STILL DO NOT MAKE THAT MUCH. If you combined every accountant in my area and added it all up for each one and averaged it out, it would not come close to that amount!”

    So, what part of ‘past and present’ do you not understand? Do you have some idea how many retirees worked for the big three auto companies? Lots. And if some husbands pass away, the pension goes to the wife, although I’m sure you hate that, it being honorable and all…

    “Robert, because of the unions and their lobbyists and the attached pieces of legislation which prevented manufacturers from fully employing folks in the private sector, many of them reacted by employing illegal aliens and paying them cash while giving credit to the few union workers they had to have on. ”

    That is absolutely ridiculous. Car manufacturers employed union labor for over fifty years, but only when CEOs began being compensated with stock did companies start going in the toilet, and it’s because they weren’t acting like owners, but trying to inflate the stock for personal gain. Unions have absolutely nothing to do with the fall of the US car companies, and everything to do with outsourcing labor for the sake of the bottom line. I know you cons love to blame downward, but the unions weren’t the ones in charge.

    “If you are a liberal, you cannot complain about NAFTA after the UAW.”

    That makes no sense whatsoever.

    You’re a conservative, so you can’t complain about “socialism” after Bush handed nearly a trillion dollars to the banks to fix their fuck ups…

  11. “I saw this on a bumper sticker today. It’s classic. I can’t wait to get one for my car.”

    Yeah, I saw that too; on some piece of shit redneck’s lifted truck. Enjoy the company you join…

  12. “So, what part of ‘past and present’ do you not understand? Do you have some idea how many retirees worked for the big three auto companies? Lots. And if some husbands pass away, the pension goes to the wife, although I’m sure you hate that, it being honorable and all…”

    Nobody lives that long. But you do raise an interesting point. Why would auto manufacturers have these benefits when other industries do not? Being “honorable” requires being “sensible.” If there isn’t money there and the quality is lacking, where does it come from?

    “That is absolutely ridiculous. Car manufacturers employed union labor for over fifty years, but only when CEOs began being compensated with stock did companies start going in the toilet”

    And in that fifty years, how long were the unions in bed with Democrats? When did the largest campaign checks get cut from the UAW to Presidential campaigns? The fact is, the UAW forced auto manufacturing out of the nation on its own by remaining unreasonable. The CEOs are stuck with the brain work, the head of the UAW’s salaries and benefits didn’t help either and NAFTA was part of an inevitable evolution. If you truly believed it was the CEO’s fault, you would have mentioned that back long ago. Detroit was run by liberals, Robert. Everything had unions in Detroit, Robert. Now it’s a piece of shit, Robert.

    Do you see the pattern? NO CONSERVATIVES IN DETROIT TO BLAME.

    “That makes no sense whatsoever.”

    Yes it did. NAFTA prevented illegals from coming here and taking our jobs away anyway. It also promoted the improvement of domestic automobile quality by lowering the costs of the crazy union wages.

    In fact, the union demands are much like the liberals’ proposal from healthcare. This whimsical dream that we can spend spend spend, and somehow, we’re going to come out ahead!

    “You’re a conservative, so you can’t complain about “socialism” after Bush handed nearly a trillion dollars to the banks to fix their fuck ups”

    That’s because a.) liberal stupidity caused the banks to screw up and Chris Dodd still hasn’t apologized and b.) none of us ever supported the bailout and it is precisely why liberals won a national election — aside from John McCain being our nominee, liberals win when Republicans stop being conservative.

  13. “Why would auto manufacturers have these benefits when other industries do not?”

    Are you trying to tell me that no other industry offers a pension to retirees? A pension that they pay into during their working lives? What are you, high? Tell me why you have a problem with that.

    “And in that fifty years, how long were the unions in bed with Democrats? ”

    Probably all fifty years. What’s really ironic is that you don’t even realize the implication in that question. Logic dictates that the republican party is conversely in bed with big business…

    “The fact is, the UAW forced auto manufacturing out of the nation on its own by remaining unreasonable.”

    It’s flattering how much power you think unions have. It’s also ignorant to think that the unions that desire a better work environment would work to ensure their jobs would disappear. Management, on the other hand, has only benefitted by outsourcing labor. So, let’s have a return to common sense, and admit who’s really responsible for these jobs leaving the country.

    “If you truly believed it was the CEO’s fault, you would have mentioned that back long ago”

    I have mentioned it, plenty of times. Plenty.

    “Do you see the pattern? NO CONSERVATIVES IN DETROIT TO BLAME”

    Yeah, all those greedy CEOs must have been liberals…

    “Yes it did. NAFTA prevented illegals from coming here and taking our jobs away anyway”

    That worked out great didn’t it?

    “It also promoted the improvement of domestic automobile quality by lowering the costs of the crazy union wages.”

    Making a mere dollar more per hour than non unionized workers is crazy? When will you realize that crazy CEO wages are what killed those jobs?

    “liberal stupidity caused the banks to screw up”

    Oh man, I laughed out loud at that one. Like I said, blame downward. I’m fine with you not taking my word for it. I don’t want you to. But ignoring economists from Bush’s Treasury Dept. and the FDIC is just stupid.

    http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/kroszner20081203a.htm

    http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/speeches/archives/2008/chairman/spdec1708.html

    They came to the conclusion that “empirical research has not validated any relationship between the CRA and the 2008 financial crisis”. Let that sink in before you come back with the same bullshit lies…

    “liberals win when Republicans stop being conservative.”

    Actually liberals win when people show up to vote, hence:

  14. “Are you trying to tell me that no other industry offers a pension to retirees? A pension that they pay into during their working lives? What are you, high? Tell me why you have a problem with that.”

    Robert, the UAW is responsible for over-the-top nonsense like members of Ford who began retirement at 55; a whole decade less than the average worker.

    When members of Ford bring in W2’s that greatly surpass the amounts on a W2 of someone with a Masters Degree, we have a problem. We are talking six figures here.

    They are given; on average, up to four weeks paid vacation a year. I have been working here for 18 years, I get TWO!

    Just like any other program touted by liberals as a success (like Social Security or Medicare), when you are paying out more than you are taking in, sooner or later the insolvency eats you up.

    Again, you cannot blame NAFTA for trying to address this. The damage from the unions had already been done, members accepted buyouts and went on to work for other companies earning – on average – $30K less per year, which placed them right along with the rest of Americans.

    The biggest problem is liberal’s definition of wealth. Much like the case with the UAW, many folks define it as how much they are getting as opposed to how much they are saving.

    I knew a woman whose husband was a carpenter and she herself worked in a school cafeteria all her life. Their savings accounts and CD’s are so huge, the amount of interest they earn greatly surpasses the amount of money many of us make in our primes. They wear hand-me-downs, they drive old vehicles, they shop at discount outlets, and eat a lot of leftovers.

    I delivered their tax return to her last year (he passed away) and her house was pretty nippy. It was lovely as she has a knack for making the best out of things. She explains that she hates waste…she keeps the thermostat at 61 in the middle of February. People who know me think I am cheap for keeping it at 64. Her motto: grab a blanket, put on some socks, save energy and money.

    Ironically she’s also a devout Christian and an old Polish woman. A hardworking ethnicity combined with a humble heart who gives over $10K a year to the church.

    “It’s flattering how much power you think unions have. It’s also ignorant to think that the unions that desire a better work environment would work to ensure their jobs would disappear.”

    I have said already I realize the noble intentions of the founders. Sadly, I also recognize the noble intentions of organizations like GLADD and NOW; especially when they were founded. The sad thing is the art of lobbying came to full fruition within the last thirty years which has turned these groups into rabid watchdogs of normal everyday Americans while contributing large sums of money to one party. So these groups are now dominated by special interests and greed.

    I don’t know if you noticed it or not. But Hillary Clinton edged out Sarah Palin by only one point yesterday in a USAToday poll for our most admirable woman in the world. Sarah Palin was ahead of Michelle Obama, Oprah, etc. I was astounded by this and frankly expected Sarah to be way at the bottom.

    I bring this up because I wanted to point out what happens when the grassroots start noticing what happens to our nation’s fabric when organizations start dominating political landscape. SarahPAC is not getting union donations, nor is it getting Hollywood celebrities. But, it’s the biggest money maker of all the PACs right now.

    That is evidence right there that the majority – grassroots America — are screaming back.

    On the flipside, I have seen folks from Ford come in with W2’s up to $170K. For some reason; on their “interest and dividends” line, there is NOTHING. Which indicates no savings. But their cars are nice! Their clothes are top of the line. They vacation whenever they can (they have four weeks to do it). Now, all of those who have lost those jobs are now suffering from shock. They have to learn to save their own monies and have already spent through their buyouts because they never learned the most valuable lesson ever — how to save and budget!

    It’s why many had to suffer and it’s why Detroit is what it is today. The unions ran hog wild and suddenly now, the union protests are no longer effective.

    As I said, liberal Democrats who accepted union donations from the UAW cannot complain about NAFTA afterwards.

    I actually work with two unions. USW and IBEW (steel and electricians). I prepare financial work for them and we’ve been with them for years. They are merely locals but they stay out of politics and are merely in the business of protecting their employees.

    So, I am not an extremist on this. I can see the irresponsibility of the UAW or the Teacher’s unions and acknowledge that their intentions were once noble. I can then view the USW and IBEW and realize that some branches of the AFL-CIO are on track and protecting the jobs and rights of American workers.

    So where is your middle-of-the-road here? Is it because you don’t want to admit how entrenched the UAW was with liberal Democrats? Or is it that you simply want everything to be the fault of CEO’s?

    “Yeah, all those greedy CEOs must have been liberals…”

    I was driving to work this morning chuckling to myself in predicting you would say that. Especially after Obama and Chris Dodd….knowing the true history of Wall Street and the campaign contributions going to liberal Democrats. First, I have explained to you why the UAW is responsible for the Detroit meltdown and second, the CEO’s are not conservatives. From this point on, you’re no longer going to stick me with defending Wall Street. So to your candidates who accept their contributions, I say: “hahaha!”

    “That worked out great didn’t it?”

    Well, twelve million illegals is better than twenty million illegals.

    “Oh man, I laughed out loud at that one. Like I said, blame downward. I’m fine with you not taking my word for it. I don’t want you to. But ignoring economists from Bush’s Treasury Dept. and the FDIC is just stupid.”

    Yes I remember, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank held a press conference confirming this.

    “Actually liberals win when people show up to vote, hence”

    Actually liberals-in-moderates-clothing win (and then still needed the crackheads from ACORN to pull it off) when we have John McCain as a candidate and the last sitting Republican president gives a bailout.

    But as I have said, when the liberals’ true colors are shown, they get the fastest drop in approval ratings for any American president since 1953 (according to GALLUP).

    Moreover; more Americans are conservatives as also proven by USAToday/Gallup.

    Now, Obama might have a chance. I will conclude on a positive note.

    If conservatives come sweeping back — which I believe they will — in 2010, and he merely signs everything sent up to him like Clinton did with Newt’s bills, you’ll see his approval ratings fly back up and you’ll even see a second term.

    Which makes me sad because you know I love me some Sarah.

  15. “When members of Ford bring in W2’s that greatly surpass the amounts on a W2 of someone with a Masters Degree, we have a problem. We are talking six figures here.”

    I agree. One of my friends is in the tax business. He often prepares tax returns for people who work for a nearby city. Not one single full time employee of that city earns less than $40,000 per year. From paper shuffling administrative clerks to telephone answering clerks who do that all day an nothing else, it is $40,000 per year minimum or more.

    That’s totally absurd. We hire high school students to intern with us and pay them minimum wage to answer phones because that is all a job like that is worth. Nobody makes a career out of answering the telephone, but at $40K a year or more some people do. Such wages reward people who have a horrible lack of ambition.

  16. Actually, I would really appreciate seeing the worst of Obama this year. I want the hurt that he is trying to hide from his base to hit home earlier than he wants them to see it.

    Obama hopes that his base will not feel the pain until they elect him back in.

    We have one really great thing working for this country. Obama has borrowed and printed so much money, that he planned to use to buy off his union backers, to keep them from noticing the big taxes from the HC bill…but I think he miscalculated…

    I suspect a lot of those new cars for clunkers will be turned in this spring when people cannot afford them.

    More housing crashes, plus no one wants to or can borrow Obama money because of the stringent restrictions…the opposite of what he fought for as a community organizer, Illinois and US Senator. People are wary of Obama’s financial dealings from banks to citizens, and governors to Reps.

    When the fall comes, it just might be in 2010 rather than 2013 or 2014.

    The Obama Administration thought they could walk a balance beam to their end agenda but I’m thinking, maybe it won’t even hold through this next year.

    Unfortunately, liberals are not so smart. They never look into the details unless it has to do with Sarah Palin, and then they get that all wrong.

  17. “Unfortunately, liberals are not so smart. They never look into the details unless it has to do with Sarah Palin, and then they get that all wrong.”

    There is a ton of truth in that statement.

    My brother in law runs a business. He doesn’t own it. The state he lives in has a tax the rich ballot measure up for vote.

    If this ballot measure passes, then the owner of that business will pay higher taxes out of his profit.

    He in turn will wish to maintain his standard of living. So he can raise the prices his business charges. But, economic conditions may not allow that.

    So, what is the other choice? Lay people off. My brother in-law told me up to 20 people will lose their jobs if this ballot measure passes. The owner who worked very hard to get where he is won’t sacrafice his lifestyle to pay higher taxes.

    What is this tax increase for? Part of it goes to the bottomless pit known as public education. No matter how much money a school district gets, it is never enough. Why? Every union employee wants to live like a King or Queen and that is expensive.

    The other part goes for medical care assistance to the poor. Perhaps the poor need to be cut off so they will get an incentive to better themselves and get jobs that pay better?

  18. You know, I hear all the liberal Democrats screaming about entitlements and rich people needing to pay more taxes, and I wonder…how do the Kennedys feel about that? The Kennedy family fortune grew exponentially during the Great Depression. What about John Kerry, who married into the Heinz family fortune? Is he willing to go along with this?

    I have to wonder if all of these well-to-do liberals (mark my words, many a wealthy American is VERY liberal) will be so willing to give up their money when it comes down to actually doing the deed. I don’t think they will be. And when cap-and-tax comes knocking on their doors to take away their mansions and Astin-Martins, they’ll be doubly angry.

  19. “When members of Ford bring in W2’s that greatly surpass the amounts on a W2 of someone with a Masters Degree, we have a problem. We are talking six figures here.”

    And how convenient that you have this handy excuse of confidentiality that will no doubt prevent you from proving this assertion…

    “Just like any other program touted by liberals as a success (like Social Security or Medicare), when you are paying out more than you are taking in, sooner or later the insolvency eats you up.”

    That argument makes no sense, because the employees paid into the pension, and assuming funds are matched dollar for dollar (which many pensions are not) and current employees are paying into their pensions, there should be no problem. There is no paying out more than taking in…

    “Again, you cannot blame NAFTA for trying to address this.”

    NAFTA did not earnestly attempt to address any problem. NAFTA was a corporatist measure to capitalize on cheap labor in a legal manner. NAFTA was an affront to long standing trade policy in this country.

    “The damage from the unions had already been done, members accepted buyouts and went on to work for other companies earning – on average – $30K less per year, which placed them right along with the rest of Americans.”

    Again, you’re trying to argue that unions somehow operated against their own stated interests. and when those jobs were gone, who was left to benefit from that situation? Not the unions, man.

    “The sad thing is the art of lobbying came to full fruition within the last thirty years which has turned these groups into rabid watchdogs of normal everyday Americans while contributing large sums of money to one party. So these groups are now dominated by special interests and greed.”

    And yet your party (and presumably you) have done nothing to curb the influence of lobbyists or to seek campaign finance reform. This case before the Supreme Court (Citizens United Vs. FEC) is literally going to make or break our political process. I can already guarantee you that all the right wingers on the court will vote to give free speech to corporations in the form of contributions; that’s a foregone conclusion. But what about the millions or billions of dollars from ARAMCO or the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. The way it stands now, US corporations can already give to PACs, and they do, by the boatload (SarahPAC is getting money from who? Average Joe’s? Think again) (Obama took none of it, thank you very much). The only (and I mean only) upside to this is that you have to be a US citizen to give to a PAC. If the right wing in this country has their way, hedge fund billionaires could give unlimited sums of money to political campaigns, and that would be a disastrous thing for this country. Elections will turn into a three way battle between China, Saudi Arabia, and Goldman Sachs. I’m curious to know you’re position on the subject, seeing as how that last statement of yours belies a populist bent.

    “I bring this up because I wanted to point out what happens when the grassroots start noticing what happens to our nation’s fabric when organizations start dominating political landscape.”

    Grassroots? Like the Koch Industries-funded Tea Party rallies? Grassroots and conservatives are like oil and water (no pun intended). And what’s sad is that (mostly) well intentioned – but crazy citizens think that they have something organic, all the while being manufactured by the very agents they think they’re fighting against. All people know these days is their misdirected anger, and it really is just that.

    “For some reason; on their “interest and dividends” line, there is NOTHING. Which indicates no savings.”

    You mean, it indicates no investments?

    “But their cars are nice! Their clothes are top of the line. They vacation whenever they can (they have four weeks to do it). ”

    Okay, your schizophrenia is showing through here. I thought you were supposed to represent all those “real” Americans who worked hard and earned what they have. Turns out when those people did just that while belonging to unions, it’s evil and must be stopped…

    “So where is your middle-of-the-road here?”

    There isn’t one. Unions have no controlling stock in their workplaces, and are not allowed a seat at board meetings. They have collective bargaining abilities, and it’s just enough to keep the wolves at bay. Decisions that effect a company are made at the top, not in the middle or at the bottom. How many companies in how many industries have gone under without unions? Look at the banking industry. Their own unfettered greed did them in; no unions there. You, and all conservatives, have this uncanny knack for avoiding accountability at all costs. It’s always someone else’s fault. Looking for flaws in yourselves is never a priority. Never.

    “Is it because you don’t want to admit how entrenched the UAW was with liberal Democrats?”

    I’ve already admitted that. It’s not unusual to gravitate to the political party that best represents your interests. That’s what people do too. And like I said, big business is conversely in bed with conservatives; and it’s for the same reason: they best represent their interests. I have just as much of a problem with unions contributing to political campaigns as I do with corporations doing it (and I’m a staunch supporter of unions!). The goal of campaign finance reform is to remove ALL influence from the political process, regardless of who’s giving to what party. There is no lack of consistency on my part. That’s all on your side…

    “Or is it that you simply want everything to be the fault of CEO’s?”

    I don’t want anything to go wrong. I don’t want American jobs to be outsourced, and I don’t to see more Detroits as a result of it. I am not working backwards from a predetermined conclusion. I analyze all available data, and make an informed decision. The fact that my conclusion differs from yours and you don’t like it does not mean I want to force a puzzle piece that doesn’t fit. It’s very much possible that it’s the other way around.

    “knowing the true history of Wall Street and the campaign contributions going to liberal Democrats.”

    I hate to break this to you, but money has poisoned all sides of this issue. The contributors go where they think they’ll have influence, and right now, the Democrats are in power, so, while still giving less to Dems than they do to Cons, the spigot is still open (http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=F09). The only saving grace that comes from the Democratic Party is that they don’t always feel beholden to their contributors. The health care bill is a great example. Many a senator has taken contributions from the insurance industry. Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid have taken a combined total of over $300,000 from that industry in this election cycle. They both have also supported strong reforms that would have a negative impact on said industry. Chuck Grassley, on the other hand, thinks his contributions should come with a receipt for what it will get. And none of this is a secret. Opensecrets.org is a great tool for figuring this stuff out.

    “First, I have explained to you why the UAW is responsible for the Detroit meltdown”

    No, you just asserted something that isn’t true. You gave an opinion.

    “the CEO’s are not conservatives”

    If you say so. You’re right, though. It makes much more sense for liberal CEOs and their corporations to give money to political campaigns through PACs to enforce stringent regulations on them. I guess they’re just gluttons for punishment like that…

    “From this point on, you’re no longer going to stick me with defending Wall Street. ”

    We’ll see. As soon as you give your honest opinion of Citizens United Vs. FEC.

    “So to your candidates who accept their contributions, I say: “hahaha!””

    And to those same candidates who take their money but don’t vote how they’re expected to, I say: “good on you!” Too bad you can’t say the same for your side.

    “But as I have said, when the liberals’ true colors are shown, they get the fastest drop in approval ratings for any American president since 1953 (according to GALLUP).”

    That’s cute. But you’re forgetting about your hero, who had the same rating at the same time in his presidency. Remember, Mr. Landslide?

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/dec/17/karl-rove/rove-says-obamas-approval-ratings-after-year-are-w/

    “Moreover; more Americans are conservatives as also proven by USAToday/Gallup.”

    True, until pressed on it. Try it sometime.

  20. “I’m curious to know you’re position on the subject, seeing as how that last statement of yours belies a populist bent.”

    *your

  21. “And how convenient that you have this handy excuse of confidentiality that will no doubt prevent you from proving this assertion”

    Then don’t rely on me. Ask any accountant, on average, if the W2 brought in by an employee of Ford or GM did not top six figures and that those accompanying employees did not face retirement at age 55.

    “That argument makes no sense, because the employees paid into the pension, and assuming funds are matched dollar for dollar (which many pensions are not) and current employees are paying into their pensions, there should be no problem. There is no paying out more than taking in…”

    First, we had an entire generation of folks who worked only one job. Robert, the government themselves are acknowledging that the system is bankrupt and insolvent. Employers match the 7.65 for social security and medicare. But every other employer I know matches up to 5% of the gross wage for 401K. If we stopped the travesty known as social security, I could invest my own 7.65% in my own plan. Then my employer could raise my pay the 7.65% they have to match.

    “NAFTA did not earnestly attempt to address any problem.”

    Yes, it did. Moreover; that wasn’t my argument in its entirety. You’re acting as if NAFTA’s existence played a role in the demise of the US Auto industry when that responisbility lies with the UAW, just as the teacher’s unions are responsible for the demise of Detroit public schools and its massive dropout rates. But now, you have “No Child Left Behind” to blame, so you will tout the unions as successes for as long as you can. I can’t say that I blame you, it’s just that Americans know better.

    ” I thought you were supposed to represent all those “real” Americans who worked hard and earned what they have. Turns out when those people did just that while belonging to unions, it’s evil and must be stopped”

    No, I am saying that anybody can achieve that without unions that feel the need to cut massive campaign checks to liberals while folks like you pretend to care about the average American when in essence the “average Americans” are far more represented as “consumers” who work and earn in the free market as opposed to a small sector of people belonging to one union who keeps liberals in public office.

    “How many companies in how many industries have gone under without unions?”

    How many companies in how many industries have gone under WITH unions? How much quality within education and domestic auto production has suffered with them?

    “US corporations can already give to PACs, and they do, by the boatload (SarahPAC is getting money from who? Average Joe’s? Think again) (Obama took none of it, thank you very much). ”

    Obama took PLENTY from Wall Street and from unions. Who are you to say that corporations cannot give but the unions they have to bow to can? Corporations create this economy, they employ most of our people. Unions don’t do that! Corporations (mostly small-corporations in this country) are more involved in our economic process. But even with that, MORE grassroots citizens are donating to SarahPAC than corporations are.

    And your drivel about Billionaires after your party plays footsies with George Soros and Warren Buffet (and Al Gore) is hilarious. Go ahead, stop billionaires from doing things! Do you really think that’s going to hurt grassroots conservatism? I am will you all the way there.

    “No, you just asserted something that isn’t true. You gave an opinion”

    Detroit proves it. It is the most historically liberal city (one of those most anyway) entrenched in big unions and entitlements. What else do you need?

    “If you say so. You’re right, though. It makes much more sense for liberal CEOs and their corporations to give money to political campaigns through PACs to enforce stringent regulations on them. I guess they’re just gluttons for punishment like that…”

    You’re half-right. They don’t funnel money to liberal politicians for stricter regulation on their industries. They do it to be exempt from whatever regulation of the week Nancy Pelosi is yammering about.

    “And to those same candidates who take their money but don’t vote how they’re expected to, I say: “good on you!” Too bad you can’t say the same for your side” — I am going to write an entire reply on this one alone.

    “That’s cute. But you’re forgetting about your hero, who had the same rating at the same time in his presidency. Remember, Mr. Landslide?”

    It makes more sense. As would be the case with Sarah Palin (my prediction for 2013), she will have mediocre approval ratings in her first year as President. Much like Reagan’s approval ratings that carried him to his second term, Palin’s as Governor were earned as she did right by Alaskans.

    Obama’s historical high approval ratings when he entered in wound up being his own worst nightmare. That’s why Reagan’s drop wasn’t historic as Obama’s was. Obama was built up on a much higher pedestal that Reagan was from the beginning.

    It’s also why he won a Nobel Peace Prize for getting a family dog and taking a family portrait.

  22. “And to those same candidates who take their money but don’t vote how they’re expected to, I say: “good on you!” Too bad you can’t say the same for your side”

    You are so full of crap about that.

    You can start rolling your eyes now because this reply is going to focus on Sarah Palin. To start, I am offering up my treasured-signed copy of Going Rogue (provided you send it back) to have you read it word-for-word. If interested, e-mail me your mailing address.

    Sarah Palin is a prime example for fairness. Throughout the entire book, she references Murkowski, the Republican enemies she made when working for the AOGC and why she was forced to resign.

    She also references ExxonMobil many times. ExxonMobil made a contract with the previous Governor to lease up a lot of Alaska’s land. This was an example of Republican-dirty-old-men politics, behind closed doors. (Murkowski also denied Palin a Senate seat because she had children but then later handed it to his daughter who had two children of her own).

    It’s really too much to go into here. But the facts of Palin have been out there so long, how she reformed the Republican party, how she fought against them — how she acknowleged that folks wanted to see “diversity” within a party ran by “rich old white guys.”

    Anyway — after being elected Governor, Palin was ecstatic to get her hands on reforming the existing AGIA bill. Part of that reforming process was answering the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Exxon Valdez spill and how the benefits for Alaskans were cut down immensely. They were cut down partly because of the existing contract with Murkowski. You can see Palin’s response to it (before she was tapped for VP) here:

    She explains personal involvement in helping the people clean up back when it happened. (in the book, not the video)

    But prior to this video, she had been working on reforming the old contracts so that Alaskans could start receiving their share of the resources in which they owned. The Alaskan Constitution guarantees ownership of the state’s natural resources to the citizens.

    Being an avid outdoor person, she understood first-hand the value of refining energy in environmentally-responsible ways. Obviously, the steps needed by the oil companies like Exxon required more money. What did they do? They chose to sit on those leases and do nothing and pursued to refine in other countries that did not have those environmental restrictions.

    If you remember, a lot of the controversy among then-Republicans and then-Democrats on a national level was whether or not to lift environmental restraints from the oil companies so that we could tap into our own resources.

    Apparently then, Palin sided with the Democrats.

    The big oil companies price-gauged Alaskans in an effort to cover the costs required for responsible refining domestically but still sat on those leases and watched their profit margins go up.

    THAT was when she proceeded with the surcharge on oil companies. That’s when the people began receiving checks. Through legal technicalities drummed up by the previous Murkowski administration, Exxon was able to put the state and the country last, so Palin used her power to respond. Not only did they pay back money that would have belonged to Alaskans anyway if they had did the responsible thing by utilizing Alaska’s resources, Palin then moved forward with re-writing the contract and replacing the old “closed-door” legislation drafted by Murkowski.

    First, she brought in TV Cameras. Then she demanded the citizens be involved in writing the legislation. Then she demanded the AGIA bill be drafted in layman’s terms so that every Alaskan would not have to hire a lawyer to interpret it. In response to all of this, ExxonMobil and its Board of Directors began sending nasty e-mails and phone calls to Palin along with public statements to the media all over the country portraying Alaska as incapable of moving forward with a plan, to which the then-Governor Palin said:

    “What bothers me is that Alaska tried it Exxon’s way. The result was a contract [Murkowski’s] that is not viable. It did not have the support of the public or the legislature. That’s why we need a competitive, open, and transparent process. It’s painfully obvious that ExxonMobil does not want that process. We know exactly where we’re going and have a plan to move forward. Exxon doesn’t like that plan because it puts the interests of Alaska and the nation first—and not Exxon.”

    Can you imagine the hell she went through fighting off previous Republican lobbyists and other Republicans who held power for so long ALONG with the honchos at Exxon?

    And other issues are detailed in the book as well where she “went Rogue” outside of her party without buying into full liberalism either. She exercised common sense.

    That’s who I have been supporting!

    You liberals are the ones who have demonized her as a radical, as a religious-right-winged extremist, etc. Part of the fun for me — as is the case when you and I debate — is watching liberals get worked up over her.

    But I do not support someone solely because liberals hate them.

    I realized the reform needed on both sides of the aisle.

    You cannot say the same thing Robert about Obama with this whole Health Care debacle.

    Closed door meetings, back-door deals with Ben Nelson, answering to lobbyists, drug companies not addressed, nothing of any meaning whatsoever.

    Shit, do you know easy it would have been to just come out and say: “you must have health insurance now or you must pay a fine or be jailed — even if you are young and healthy and half of the 30M Americans that do not want it!”?

    Sarah Palin — as with the oil industry — understands the lobbyists hold a lot of power. Health Care as a whole cannot be risked by delivering one black and white big government “solution.”

    Micromanagement is needed here. Drug companies, passing legislation preventing drug companies to lobby, making sure that the fair and average is represented. Tort reform, allowing us to purchase across state lines, ridding the corruption….

    I find it hard to believe that we can still hate Sarah Palin for being a partisan Republican when she hasn’t been one! I also find to hard to believe that this woman who worked so hard for her state would be recognized the way she has been.

    She would have tackled health care. And she would have pissed off both Democrats and Republicans in the process.

    Sorry, Obama has not given us the CSpan hearings we were promised. This process has not been out in the front for all to see. If he were half of what Palin was as governor, we’d all be working together for the betterment of this country’s future.

    I am tired of you suggesting that I or Mel excuses any kind of back-door deals from campaign contributions to lobbyists when we have screamed about it over and over again.

    Be fair. Because you know it isn’t true!

  23. “Ask any accountant, on average, if the W2 brought in by an employee of Ford or GM did not top six figures and that those accompanying employees did not face retirement at age 55.”

    Why do you care if someone does well enough for themselves to retire at 55? If you work hard enough, you can retire at 40. Not everyone thinks it’s a good idea to work up until the day you die.

    “First, we had an entire generation of folks who worked only one job. Robert, the government themselves are acknowledging that the system is bankrupt and insolvent.”

    What are you talking about? What does the government have to do with pensions from the private sector?

    “You’re acting as if NAFTA’s existence played a role in the demise of the US Auto industry”

    I’m acting? That’s rich. Yup, I’m merely pretending that GM opened up plants in Mexico and closed them in Detroit. NAFTA absolutely played a big role in the demise of the US auto industry in the US.

    “just as the teacher’s unions are responsible for the demise of Detroit public schools and its massive dropout rates.”

    That’s disingenuous at best. What of all the rest of the nation’s schools that have high graduation rates? Do unions just not exist there?

    “No, I am saying that anybody can achieve that without unions that feel the need to cut massive campaign checks to liberals while folks like you pretend to care about the average American when in essence the “average Americans” are far more represented as “consumers” who work and earn in the free market as opposed to a small sector of people belonging to one union who keeps liberals in public office.”

    I wish you had the capacity to appreciate irony, because while you demonize unions for donating to political campaigns (which I also oppose), you fail to see that big business that has no tolerance for unions also donates to political campaigns. It’s just that you like where one set of contributions are going, thus making you an inconsistent hypocrite.

    “Obama took PLENTY from Wall Street and from unions”

    I said PACs, Steve. PACs. He didn’t take money from PACs. Learn to read, would you? And let me remind you that a vast majority of his contributions came from everyday people who gave $200 or less.

    “Who are you to say that corporations cannot give but the unions they have to bow to can? ”

    Again, learn to read. Slow yourself down before being purely reactionary. I have already said that I don’t think unions should be allowed to donate money to politicians. The real question that should be aimed at you should be why do you think it’s okay for multinational corporations to give to republicans, but not okay for unions to give to democrats? All the inconsistency lies on your side of this argument.

    “Corporations create this economy”

    Well said. Unintended, I’m sure, but well said.

    “Unions don’t do that!”

    It’s not the goal of unions to create jobs any more than it is of corporations. Let’s not pretend that their goal is to do anything but make a profit. The only, and I mean only reason that corporations hire people is because they know that worker will make more money than it costs to employ them. Pure and simple.

    “And your drivel about Billionaires after your party plays footsies with George Soros and Warren Buffet (and Al Gore) is hilarious”

    What;s hilarious is that you found two that weren’t playing for your team. Two.

    “Go ahead, stop billionaires from doing things! Do you really think that’s going to hurt grassroots conservatism?”

    YES! How do you think the teabaggers would react if they knew that their “grassroots” movement was funded by Koch Industries, and that they were once again actively fighting against their own best interests? That’s a lot of egg on a lot of faces…

    “Detroit proves it. It is the most historically liberal city (one of those most anyway) entrenched in big unions and entitlements. What else do you need?”

    Facts instead of innuendo. A direct correlation between what your gripe is and the reality of the situation.

    “They don’t funnel money to liberal politicians for stricter regulation on their industries. They do it to be exempt from whatever regulation of the week Nancy Pelosi is yammering about.”

    Yeah? How’d that work out?

    “As would be the case with Sarah Palin (my prediction for 2013), she will have mediocre approval ratings in her first year as President”

    Holy shit. Oh, Steve. Do you genuinely believe that she could be elected? Oh man, you’re a true believer, aren’t you? God bless you, you poor, deluded bastard. If she were foolish enough to run, she would not make it out of the primary. That’s my prediction. That’s priceless. Oh, and you can save your little fingers from typing out the predictable response of me being “afraid” of her, cause no one’s buying it…

    “It’s also why he won a Nobel Peace Prize for getting a family dog and taking a family portrait.”

    Oh, jealously does not look good on you. Tell you what, if you guys manage to elect a con who isn’t a corporatist war monger, you might have a shot at getting one too…

  24. @Steve:

    After sifting through all your Palin leg humping (which, by the way, does not apply to what I was saying about contributions in exchange for votes, seeing as how Palin is thankfully not a member of either house of Congress), this little gem stood out:

    “Sorry, Obama has not given us the CSpan hearings we were promised. This process has not been out in the front for all to see. If he were half of what Palin was as governor, we’d all be working together for the betterment of this country’s future.”

    You should have known better than to come around that topic. First of all, Obama is not a member of Congress, so complaining about closed door meetings at this point is nothing more than cheap political theater. You people had every opportunity in the world to be productive members of this process. Instead, you chose to obstruct and delay at every step of the way. Then you threw in good old fashioned lies to sucker stupid people. Obama has tried, time and time again, to reach out, to work together for the betterment of this country’s future, but your party has done nothing but bite the hand that feeds its insincerity. And because of that, no one is particularly happy with the legislation that is moving through the conference committee. Perhaps if people on your side of the aisle gave a fuck about anybody but themselves, this could have been different…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s