And if you needed me to clarify exactly why you're a fucking moron, it's because you're talking about what is today, and how that's somehow going to stay the same? Classic psychology would point out that you make the connections of a paranoid schizophrenic.
Either simplify your argument in basic language, or continue masturbating in the corner with your teddy bear, ball-gag and thumb in your mouth.
You still have made no connection between Bush's economy, and that of the future candidate for the presidency. Aside from conspiracy theory rhetoric, and half-assed assertions.
Which qualifies you as stupid. But you know, it's the internet, so you should really feel special for being able to type at all.
that Obama is backed by Brzezinski?
by Volcker?
that they are founding members of the TC?
that the TC is committed to breaking down barriers to planned plundering "free trade" caused by the obstacles of sovereignty, borders, and nationalism?
that Goolsbee subscribes to Friedman's "chicago school" economic theories?
that George Will loves Goolsbee?
that Goolsbee is Skull & Bones?
that commodity prices are zooming?
that the Fed is lowering interest rates?
If you see an assertion up there, I can back it up. You just name one specifically.
vermicious_knid said:
If you want to "spook the liberals" about "who Obama is getting advice from," urge them to take a hard look at his Skull & Bones "Chicago school of economics" adviser, Austan Goolsbee and urge them to research Pinochet's "Chicago Boys,"
Is there any serious connection between Gooslbee and the team that went down to work with/for Pinochet, apart from them all being located at the University of Chicago at very different times?
Come now, TFOK, you as well as I (former "laissez faire" subscriber) know what the theories behind "chicago school" are.
I also know that the vision of Chicago's economics department as being heavily ideologically associated with a small government libertarian view is well out of date. Friedman, Stigler and Becker are not the current generation of leading intellectuals. The last big hire in that vein was Bob Lucas, quite some time back.
The "fresh water" / "salt water" division between leading centrist/Keynesian schools on the coasts and free-market/monetarist schools in the midwest has largely vanished. Chicago's recent big hires include Steven Levitt and John List, who would fit in pretty well at any top school.
TheFuckOffKid said:
What this all has to do with Chile is beyond me.
Predictability in what the response to those specific converging crises will be - private bank consolidation of and then clearance sales/liquidation of a debting nation's assets.
TheFuckOffKid said:
What this all has to do with Chile is beyond me.
Response to crisis.
Feel free to continue feeling scared and looking for conspiracies and plots and intrigues in all possible locations.
I get that it makes you happy to do so.
Just, please, for the love of all that is good and holy, understand that when some of us see a Rorschach blot that looks slightly like a cigar, we don't all leap to the conclusion that somewhere a plan is being formed to anally rape everybody in the vicinity. If that's what gives you kicks, then knock yourself out, but most of the rest of us are a little more level-headed than that.
billybillybilly said:
Well, see, liberal minded folks understand the fact that they aren't the only people on the face of the planet, whereas conservatives think no one has a valid excuse to be where they are if not above and beyond...
This is still a non-issue. And it's still pointless.
This thread is a perfect example of why people choose apathy over activism. Because it doesn't matter. And it shouldn't effect us.
And you added nearly a page worth of posts to the pot. Way to go there, genius. You really showed us how much of a non-issue you think this thread is.
Which it is. I think I said that on the first page.
The only ones I've seen have been comments in which people claim that the speech includes Obama aligning himself with hate speech and anti-American sentiment. In other words, blathering idiots.
The only ones I've seen have been comments in which people claim that the speech includes Obama aligning himself with hate speech and anti-American sentiment. In other words, blathering idiots.
As the blathering idiots go, so goes the nation.
Seriously, I wish I could understand what the average person, averse as he is confronting complex issues of race and inequality at great length, is thinking after hearing this speech. I don't want to underestimate the general public, but I do think there's a danger that this response may be a popular one.
This becomes more likely as the speech is cut up into bytes and short paragraphs for mass consumption. Also, bear in mind that this speech is primarily meant for people who'd think ill of Obama for the words of his pastor in the first place, primarily because the man had the gall to express resentment towards the treatment of black people in this nation. To them, simple talking about racism like it's more than a historical footnote is anathema.
billybillybilly
Minneapolis, MN
March 2004
MAR 16, 2008 01:26 AM