BUUUURRRRRRRRRPPPP!!!

So the way I interpret this essay is that matter is created from nothing and the Earth has infinite resources. What a douche bag.

The Philadelphia Inquirer's editorial page today had this and Rick Santorum's latest column. What was that about the Liberal Media again?

Gordon Gekko:Teldar Paper, Mr. Cromwell, Teldar Paper has 33 different vice presidents each earning over 200 thousand dollars a year. Now, I have spent the last two months analyzing what all these guys do, and I still can't figure it out. One thing I do know is that our paper company lost 110 million dollars last year, and I'll bet that half of that was spent in all the paperwork going back and forth between all these vice presidents. The new law of evolution in corporate America seems to be survival of the unfittest. Well, in my book you either do it right or you get eliminated. In the last seven deals that I've been involved with, there were 2.5 million stockholders who have made a pretax profit of 12 billion dollars. Thank you. I am not a destroyer of companies. I am a liberator of them! The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. Thank you very much.

oh no....bowa....that cant be right....I read here all the time that no president HAS EVER believed in God before bush........you must be mistaken......hee hee..


and here is a gift to all the socialists here this evening.

today on traveling to see my two nieces who are about to graduate from texas A & M.......(no, I havent disowned them over THAT.....)

I drove right by the houston HQ of...

HALIBURTON........OOOOOHhhhhhh
hhhhh...

I think when I drove by, there were people in there coming up with ways to have more men killed in iraq just so they could make more money...
(dont believe this for a second, I just thought I would beat most of you to that nonsense...)

oh no....bowa....that cant be right....I read here all the time that no president HAS EVER believed in God before bush........you must be mistaken......hee hee..

BL2, Can you imagine what the Lefties would say if Abraham Lincoln had made that same proclamation today?

They would be saying that he was attempting to turn the US into a Theocracy -- and comparing his "extremist" views about God to the Jihadists.

"It is the creation of wealth where nothing before existed--nothing useful to man." I guess a tree isn't worth crap until you burn it or make paper.

On Thanksgiving we are meant to give thanks for what we have. But Dr. Hull ignores all the non-material things that bring value to our lives. And so many of these things are crapped on by our overzealous materialism. Dr. Hull seems to believe that the ultimate goal in life is to work, make things, and use things. What a hollow existence that would be.

Production is important to help bring people out of poverty, but overzealous materialism creates another kind of poverty that is completely ignored here. It isn't so much Dr. Hull's appreciation for production and material wealth that is annoying, but his believe in those things at the exclusion of everything else. "The appropriate values for this holiday are not faith and charity, but thought and production." Why can't it be both?

Meh, While I acknowledge his rant could have been lifted directly from a lost chapter of "Atlas Shrugged", there has always been a grain of truth and humanity nestled in stark objectivism.

There is a certain gratification that can be found in personal success and responsibility. That includes the good with the bad. To denigrate personal accomplishment to nothing more then a by-product of the greater social scheme or to simply attribute it to the deity of your choosing seems as much dishonesty as taking all the credit yourself.

The adage' of "no man is an island" seems to misrepresent that first there is the man, everything that follows merely puts him into perspective.

There is no shame in acknowledging that you put in a 40+ hour week in order to better yourself and your family. To take pride in the fact that you work hard to provide for you and yours. While I can agree it can't be the only reason one has to be thankful, it also doesn't deserve scorn.

There is no shame in acknowledging that you put in a 40+ hour week in order to better yourself and your family. To take pride in the fact that you work hard to provide for you and yours. While I can agree it can't be the only reason one has to be thankful, it also doesn't deserve scorn.

Posted by GustoGus at 2007-11-22 11:52 PM | Reply | F


amen bro.....

is it any wonder that, for instance france lags behind other nations.....with thier work week being so short and all......and different things like that and even though we would all like to work three days a week.......( thats reserved for us old retired farts) the way so many people in this country works for thier family is pretty amazing at times.........
of course there will always be greed as long as we are capitalists......but the alternative has NEVER WORKED>.......well it seems to be okay in norway...or the netherlands, maybe...I think it was.....anyone else see that article about how they have DEVELOPED OFF SHORE OIL SUPPLIES.........(hint hint)......and they have like 360 billion in reserve for rainy days.......

This is 2007 ... Thanksgiving is about overeating, football, Black Friday shopping adds, and most importantly no work. Most people don't know that Thanksgiving wasn't celebrated until the Civil War, or that the Pilgrams were a bunch of over religious douches.

For the record Christmas is about Santa Claus and presents ... which is just fine by me

and I am sure that you didnt mean to leave out that its about family too......

and so now its an attack on the friggin pilgrims is it??????
WELL TO THE STOCKADE WITH YOU.......


hah.....you people are so funny.......

Gee! And I always thought it was about family and friends coming together in the fall of the year and giving thanks for the good graces that the creater has bestowed upon them?
Silly me.

Hey, eurojeff, I see you are up now. Yesterday you called me a stupid fuck and when I asked you to explain your sources for my "quote" you went to bed. Perhaps you'd like to explain yourself now?

Here's the last post I sent to you on the islamofascist thread.

HOw convenient, eurojeff. Call me fucking stupid for something I didn't say and when I ask for proof of it, it's beddy bye time.

Maybe tomorrow you'll get to it, OK?

But you are a "stupid fuck", Goatjizzz.

A stupid fuck that is quite full of himself.

BTW, Its ok to work hard and be proud of yourself. But that's what we are supposed to do. So that's like patting yourself on the back for getting out of bed in the morning.

Posted by JeffnDenmark

No,
Just No.

Getting out of bed and going to work is something to be proud of. Not everyone does it, and not everybody does it well and with pride. Otherwise we'de all be looking to do as little as possible just to get by, or trying to find new ways to avoid work altogether.

I respect any person that works hard to make a better life then the "bare minimimum". I hate to be cliche', but it really is what made this country great.

I would definately put going to work and doing it well right up there with any other value you may toss at it.

But you are a "stupid fuck", Goatjizzz.

What a very, very mature and adult like statement, itsallaboutme. HOw old are you? About 14 or 15, I would guess. At least that's about the age people are who talk like that around where I live.

Mr. Intellect's chain gets yanked quite easily.


Stupid Fuck.

I take it back. I'd say closer to 13

So the way I interpret this essay is that matter is created from nothing and the Earth has infinite resources. What a douche bag.

Posted by TFDNihilist at 2007-11-22 08:54

What kind of stupid interpretation is that?

It is from capitol and creative energy that man takes useless natural resources and converts them into useless things that improve our lives. Despite you gloom and doomers, abundance is increasing as new ways are found to find and utilize natural resources. We ain't going to break through earth's mantle.

When shortages do occur, if you dig deep enough, you'll find politics at the root of it. Greed for power supplants greed for material wealth.

The solons of sacrifice will crucify me if I don't correct my misspelling of capital.

Goatman,
I have gone back and looked at the posts from yesterday, and I still don't know what your question is.
I apoligized to you for calling you stupid, and said good night. Then you attacked me for apoligizing?
I don't know what your point is!
What's the question?

Gus,
My quote,
"Its ok to work hard and be proud of yourself"
Did you miss that part of my post?
You said you disagree with me, then you said the exact same thing,
Your quote,
"Getting out of bed and going to work is something to be proud of"
WTF?

You really are a stupid fuck Goatman! I'll be 50 in February....... : )


























Just kidding about the stupid fuck comment, but I really will be 50.

err jeff.. you said patting yourself on the back for going to work was analagous to patting yourself on the back for getting out of bed.

Perhaps I misunderstood..but to me going to work is much different from getting out of bed... and likening the two seemed to paint working in a negative light.

But please, I'm open to being corrected.

Just kidding about the stupid fuck comment, but I really will be 50.

Posted by JeffnDenmark at


50.....ah I remember it well..........okay not that long ago.....but if you think there are pains to getting up now.....just wait another 7 years and have one of the other 7 sins.....gluttony and neglect!.....pretty appropriate after yesterday, wouldnt you say?
but the REAL PROBLEM.........dont believe them when someone tells you that the eyes or the legs are the first to go........(wink wink).......

Of course I would suggest that the greater proportion of what we buy or consume does not improve our lives.

That's the beauty about the chaos of a free economy, Grendel. Many would say the same about things valuable to you - and me.

"Can you imagine what the Lefties would say if Abraham Lincoln had made that same proclamation today?"

I believe the opposition party would have been screaming "Impeach, Impeach" kinda like they do to the current republican president. They would list the following charges:

1. suspension of Habeas Corpus then ignoring the Order of the US Supreme Court concerning its reinstatement.
2. Quashing free expression, seizing his critics and shipping them to locations behind enemy lines
3. Fighting a War of choice against a country that did not attack the United States.
4. the unconstitutional and uncompensated "taking" of property contrary to the guarantees of the Fifth Amendment.

If the impeachment was unsuccessful, they would then point to the extraordinary loss of life, ask the question "For What?" Answer either "Nothing" or "profits for warmongers" and then refuse to fund the war without a time table for surrender.

I never made it to Greed.

I got stuck on Lust and Gluttony.

Well I damn sure ain't gratefull to the tax and spend government who hasen't created anything except coruption.

A citizen -- excellent post at 10:59. You summed it up perfectly.

"Dr. Hull is co-editor of The Ayn Reader and is a senior writer for the Ayn Rand Institute in Irvine, Calif. The Institute promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead."

It would be interesting to hear what Ayn Rand would have to say about Russia today. Gone are the communists but not necessarily the dictatorship.
Is Putin's Russia really that much of an improvement over Gorbachev's USSR?
I'm not stating an opinion here but asking a question.

refuse to fund the war

Perhaps you should read a little more history of the Civil War.

Lincoln had huge problems from within his own party maintaining the funding for the war. There was enormous pressure from the Republicans in the business sector to surrender and recognize the Confederacy so that cotton exports to Britain could resume.

Bowa,

Thank you for the kind words.

Silver,

Actually, I am pretty familiar with the time period. While I recall the "Peace Democrats" where the major problem that Lincoln faced. However the Republicans were able for forge an alliance with the War Democrats to enact a number of reforms. What I don't recall is Congress REFUSING to grant funding for the war effort until / unless Lincoln accepted a Surrender Timeline.

"The Third Party System was dominated by the Republican party (it lost in 1884 and 1892.) Lincoln proved brilliantly successful in uniting the factions of his party to fight for the Union.[5] However he usually fought the Radical Republicans who demanded harsher measures. Most Democrats at first were War Democrats, and supportive until the fall of 1862. When Lincoln added the abolition of slavery as a war goal, many war Democrats became "peace Democrats." All the state Republican parties accepted the antislavery goal except Kentucky. In Congress, the party passed major legislation to promote rapid modernization, including a national banking system, high tariffs, an income tax, many excise taxes, paper money issued without backing ("greenbacks"), a huge national debt, homestead laws, and aid to education and agriculture. The Republicans denounced the peace-oriented Democrats as Copperheads and won enough War Democrats to maintain their majority in 1862; in 1864, they formed a coalition with many War Democrats as the National Union Party which reelected Lincoln easily. During the war, upper middle-class men in major cities formed Union Leagues, to promote and help finance the war effort."

Is Putin's Russia really that much of an improvement over Gorbachev's USSR?
I'm not stating an opinion here but asking a question.
Posted by danni


Danni it's an excellent question.

Citizen,

Thanks for the excellent citation and I concede your distinction re Congress cutting funds, which I believe they have yet to do for Iraq.

My post was in response to your original post positing how Lincoln would be condemned by liberals today.

My intent was to illustrate that things are rarely as clear cut as they seem without some perspective as to what the actual political climate was at the time and these sort of imaginary scenarios across historical chasms may be fun, but are of little substantive value in understanding present day politics.

On the other hand, I believe Joe Louis would have won easily over Muhammad Ali.

On the other hand, I believe Joe Louis would have won easily over Muhammad Ali.

Spud believes the Green Incredible Hulk woulda kicked the Things ass.

On Topic?

The Ayn Rand Institute of Rationalising Greed stresses the celebration of successful production over the gratitude and sharing aspect of Thanksgiving?

Quelle fuggin' suprise!

While there is some value in Rands realpolitik approach to Libertarianism those who traditionally support her work are the "I got mine and screw you" types in actuality.

The difference between Randian Libertarians, ClintCo Neo-Libs and BushCo Neo-Cons are more ones of style than substance.

Spud is thankful fer blog-world.

Be Well.

It would be interesting to hear what Ayn Rand would have to say about Russia today. Gone are the communists but not necessarily the dictatorship.
Is Putin's Russia really that much of an improvement over Gorbachev's USSR?
I'm not stating an opinion here but asking a question.

Posted by danni

It wasn't communism she was writing about, it was the flaws in socialism and collectivism.

Czar Putin has changed nothing in Russia. Russia just lost Eastern Europe with the fall of the USSR.

It would be interesting to here what she would have to say about the US today and it's socialist leanings.

by your logic, it is therefore possible that George Bush may be elevated to the status of Lincoln in the future

That is entirely possible. If, for example, things do come down to the "clash of civilizations" that the neocons are predicting and we are hit with a nuclear weapon by the jihadis, George Jr. could come to be regarded as a very prescient leader.

You know, Bowa, et al.,there was one sure fire way that Bush could have been vindicated and come out looking good through the eyes of history. He could have studied, planned and executed his war like he actually wanted to win it. Then maybe he would have won it and he'd be looking real good right now. If he had bothered to do a half decent job at it and not slack off there'd be Democracy and a decent infrastructure in Iraq right now and you'd all be rubbing our noses in it. But he did a crappy, lazy job just like he's done with anyother venture he's ever tried in his life and now he looks like a fool instead of a hero, like Lincoln and Roosevelt, who both, I admit, took mesures that I really don't agree with, but at least managed to win their wars and make things better for the world.

TFD,

You forgot, Lincoln was losing right up to the end. It wasn't until Grant and Sherman became the head of their respective armies that the damned Yankees became the least bit successful.

Yea, but don't forget that the whole thing still only took about 4 years. And that was 140 years ago with crappy tranportation and communication. Even Conservatives admit W could have taken care of this thing in a year or 2 if he hadn't screwed it up so bad. We're at 4+ years now, and we're pretty much still at square 1, maybe even in the negative.

Above, I see a corollary to "greed is good." WAR IS GOOD. Or "War IS GOD."

"...Where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. ... Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely."
-Lord Acton

Another view on greed in one of Paul Krugman's recent op-ed pieces. Leads with

"What were they smoking?" asks the cover of the current issue of Fortune magazine. Underneath the headline are photos of recently deposed Wall Street titans, captioned with the staggering sums they managed to lose.

The answer, of course, is that they were high on the usual drug -- greed. And they were encouraged to make socially destructive decisions by a system of executive compensation that should have been reformed after the Enron and WorldCom scandals, but wasn't.

The solons of sacrifice will crucify me... Ray 7:59

Wow. That's good. Up there with "nattering nabobs of negativism." Had to read a few more of your posts to convince myself you weren't Safire.

You know, Bowa, et al.,there was one sure fire way that Bush could have been vindicated and come out looking good through the eyes of history.

I don't think the history of the Bush Presidency has been written yet. Do you?

If over the next 15- 20 years, Iraq and Afghanistan (and hopefully Iran, Syria, et al.) stabilize into moderate, westernized free-market governments -- Then Bush will be seen as one of our greatest Presidents who had the strength, presence, and forethought to nip Islamo-Fascism in the bud even in the face of withering criticism.

As it stands right now even - The Democrats have a huge problem for 2008 -- since they have invested so much in the defeat of their own country and are now faced with dramatically improved conditions in Iraq -- conditions that Harry "The War is Lost" Reid, and Nancy "there's no light at the end of the tunnel" Pelosi had promised could never happen.

Rest in peace Ken Lay...You great American !!

like Lincoln and Roosevelt, who both, I admit, took mesures that I really don't agree with, but at least managed to win their wars and make things better for the world.

So TFD admits that the end justifies the means as long as we win and makes things better for the world. And who wouldn't agree that Democracy in the Middle East is a far better thing for the world then the terrorist supporting totalitarian and/or dictatorships that have plunged the region into turmoil in the past 50 years.

And both Lincoln and FDR went much further in expanding the powers of their Presidency then Bush has to win the wars our Nation was in.

Essentially what TFD seems to be admitting is that he can be compelled to overlook just about anything -- as long as the President doing it is not Bush.

Bowa

What are you worried about? The Demoncrats are feigning resistance in the weakest way possible. There is a good chance that 2008 will sweep the Demoncrats into power. A assure you, they will continue where Bush left off. If Bush doesn't attack Iran, they will. Watch and learn.

If over the next 15- 20 years, Iraq and Afghanistan (and hopefully Iran, Syria, et al.) stabilize into moderate, westernized free-market governments

That would require them to abandon Islam. It ain't going to happen. Dream on.

Then Bush will be seen as one of our greatest Presidents who had the strength, presence, and forethought to nip Islamo-Fascism in the bud even in the face of withering criticism.

Just like Nixon validated Johnson.

I don't think the history of the Bush Presidency has been written yet. Do you?


Believe me ... the horse is out of the barn and nearly completely off farm property regarding President George W. Dumbass Bush.

He will be regarded as the most incompetent, pigheaded,manipulated, childlike President this country has ever had and he will be regarded as nearly destroying our economy and credibility as a world leader of Morals, Freedom , and Democracy. And what is really amazing is this idiot is too ignorant to understand the ramifications of what he has does.

His final act in his last year as President is to appropriate as many Dollars to the Iraq occupation as possible to line what he believes are his elitist buddies and friends pockets with as much money as possibleon his way out. This is trully the biggest raping and con job on America ever pulled in history.

Enjoy your retirement in Uraguay ...ASSHOLE !

We're at 4+ years now, and we're pretty much still at square 1, maybe even in the negative.

You are really crazy TFD. Yes, there were plenty of mistakes and missteps in the early years of this war -- as Churchill said, "War is a series of catastrophes leading to victory" ...but what we have seen in the past 18 months is a transformation on the battlefield that is nothing short of amazing -- for the first time in history, a modern westernized uniformed army has succesfully figured out how to defeat guerrila warfare with flexible counter-insurgency tactics that are able to respond to the immediate needs of even the tiniest locales.

We were never able to be able to defeat the fast-moving and constantly moving and morphing viet-cong in Vietnam -- but Petraous and Bush took a huge risk with the "surge" strategy and broke up large and cumbersome military units into small patrols which then moved into and lived in insurgent saturated areas in order to facilitate stronger relationships with the community and be able to respond to terrorist attacks immediately.

The result has been that the US soldiers were able to gain the trust of the locals, which brought in tons of actionable intel, which helped the soldiers to provide better security, which allowed these communities the breathing room they needed to begin rebuilding neighborhood by neighborhood, form community governments and take back the streets.

And while the Democrats are constantly screaming about national Benchmarks, they are missing the really big story -- the rise of federalism in Iraq, the fact that sunnis and Shia are working together, and the fact that even though the national government has yet to fulfill the pormise of its constitutions -- Iraq itself is working together, sharing oil (even without a national contract yet) and rebuilding their country.

Like I said before. If Iraq continues on the path it has been in earnest for the past three or four months, then the Democrats have a huge problem -- becasue they promised America a defeat in Iraq -- and a "victory" in Iraq would spell doom for their hopes in 2008.

He will be regarded as the most incompetent, pigheaded,manipulated, childlike President this country has ever had and he will be regarded as nearly destroying our economy and credibility as a world leader of Morals, Freedom , and Democracy.

That is what was said about Lincoln in 1864 -- which is why he almost lost the election. And now Lincoln is on our currency.

So face it -- you nor I have any idea how history will view the Bush presidency -- because the events he has set in motion are not complete yet.

If moderate governments and free market economies flourish in the middle east then he will be seen as a great President. On the other hand, if WW3 breaks out in the next few years, he will be seen as one of the worst -- the president who further destablized
and unstable region which led to a worldwide conflict.

But the jury is still out for now.

But the jury is still out for now.

Only for those like you who take the wrong cues from the lessons of history. European colonization came to an end the same way American colonization will end.

The Colonial Brits once had a saying, "The sun never sets on the Union Jack." When Britain went bankrupt, their pound ceased to be the world currency, and combined by fierce native resistance, the Brits were forced to withdraw their colonial claims. You're not paying attention to the economic side of the equation.

That would require them to abandon Islam. It ain't going to happen. Dream on.

Ray, are you suggesting that "Islam" is inherently extrmeist and totatlitarian and incapable of embracing moderate forms of governemnt which stress individual liberties, and capitalism?

Only for those like you who take the wrong cues from the lessons of history. European colonization came to an end the same way American colonization will end.

It's a good thing then that we are not trying to establish "colonies" anywhere.

What are you worried about? The Demoncrats are feigning resistance in the weakest way possible. There is a good chance that 2008 will sweep the Demoncrats into power. A assure you, they will continue where Bush left off. If Bush doesn't attack Iran, they will. Watch and learn.

Well, the three top-tier democrats have all refused to promise that we wouldn't still have a significant military presence by the end of their first term in 2013. So to that extent, the "Bush Doctrine" in Iraq will be maintained regardless of which party wins the Presidency.

As for Iran - I don't believe that America will be the first to strike. I think that when we didn't find WMD's in Iraq, we lost any chance to use a "pre-emptive strike" for at least a generation.

My fear is that the moment that Iran gets the bomb, it will use it against Israel. I'm sure Israel fears that too -- which is why an Israeli strike on Iran in the next couple of years seems more realistic then one by us.

Finally, as to the 2008 sweep by the democrats -- I don't see it. There are way too many things that can happen between now and election day to be able to even make that prediction. I will say that certain candidates have advantages over other candidates - and depending on what things take place in the economy, or in Iraq, etc. then these events will likely help one party and hurt the other.

In my opinion, if the Democrats want to give themselves the best chance in 2008 then they need to nominate Obama. And if the GOP does, they need to nominate Rudy.

Ray, are you suggesting that "Islam" is inherently extrmeist and totatlitarian and incapable of embracing moderate forms of governemnt which stress individual liberties, and capitalism?

Yes. That is why Bush is a loser.

As for Iran - I don't believe that America will be the first to strike.

Iran doesn't have a history of military aggression, as we do. We don't have to convince them or our power to strike back and they are not suicidal as you try to believe. Look to the Cold War for a good example.

My fear is that the moment that Iran gets the bomb, it will use it against Israel.

You must be terribly insecure. More likely that's your excuse for another preemptive war.

Finally, as to the 2008 sweep by the democrats -- I don't see it.

You might be unaware how fast the economy is falling apart. If Americans don't care about war, they certainly do about economic matters. This depends on how well lying government statisticians can hide the facts. I have my doubts because I'm meeting a lot of people who are feeling the effects.

In my opinion, if the Democrats want to give themselves the best chance in 2008 then they need to nominate Obama. And if the GOP does, they need to nominate Rudy.

It doesn't matter who wins. The seeds of war and depression have sprouted.

It's a good thing then that we are not trying to establish "colonies" anywhere.

Only one place. The State Department didn't build that Vatican sized embassy in Iraq for nothing.

This rationalization is ridiculous and not at all honorable.

You know what I don't tire of when I visit the DR?


Lokiderflaninjabowalicksmyball
s cut and paste.

You have shit for brains Bowa.