priscianusjr's Comments (112)

“Now I'm curious. Was Oral Roberts involved in the electoral politics of the religious right like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson? I don't remember seeing his name come up in that connection. If not, he deserves respect for that.”

“I think you're the one that's confused. Paul Volcker is chairman of the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. Summers and Geithner are not on the PERAB, and Volcker is one of their strongest and most outspoken critics.”

“Wait a minute, now I'm really confused. I thought Obama = Hitler. So that must mean they love Obama.”

“The mob was centrally involved, and performed the actual hit, but unfortunately for your point, they were working closely with certain elements of the CIA and Cuban exile community, especially those connected with the Bay of Pig invasion. See Lamar Waldron, Ultimate Sacrifice. My main criticism of this book is that, while he shows the CIA connection, he lets the CIA off too lightly. I think that's because, as a careful historian, he sticks to documentation, and a lot of the documentation of the CIA involvement either never existed or has been destroyed or is still off limits. But if you see what is documented, it seems obvious that there were more than a few CIA guys involved.”

“The interesting thing is not that he cried. The interesting thing is WHY he cried. Obviously he was scared sh*tl*ss. He knew it was a conspiracy, not just some lone nut. This suggests to me that he understood who was behind it and why. Not necessarily the exact people, but more or less what forces. That really does change the picture. First thing I would do is look over everything Johnson did and said for more clues about what he knew or, anyway, what he thought about the assassination. I don't mean what he said publicly but things that might have slipped out here and there.”

“I agree with you Melissa. And the fact that Cheney had to weigh in this week with his "dithering" remark kind of gives the game away, doesn't it? And he was roundly slammed for it. Who the hell cares what that loser thinks? (Answer: McChrystal does.)”

“"The tactic's failure to produce tangible success in all those cases has not shaken the president's confidence in playing that game..." I think you're right in identifying the tactic, but I also think the jury's still out as to its success. I think there has been incremental success with all of them, especially health care, which is clearly the top priority right now.
Everybody wants and expects instant gratification, even when it's a fight against some of the world's most powerful and relentless opponents. Fortunately Obama is extremely patient and, as you say, his confidence is not shaken.”

“Not all military agree with McChrystal either. retired army intelligence analyst Colonel Ralph Peters says "get out now."
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/pakistan_us_pows_mcOfZhyFtUpgOD4gLefUIP
General Chuck Krulik, former commandant of the US Marines, says the amount of troop buildup needed to be effective is far too great to be feasible.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/06/george-will-debates-neoco_n_278462.html”

“"A corporation in and of itself does not have any power over individuals. For any business to stay viable it must provide products or services that people want to buy. They must be competitive with other businesses. No business can legally force you to buy what they offer."
Right, capitalism would work like a well-oiled machine, if only government would keep its paws off. Sure, that's just what we saw for the last eight years. I just don't understand how people can go on chanting this nonsense, with no reference to actual experience.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vivian-norris-de-montaigu/the-narcissistic-ego-and_b_311188.html”

“Oh, come off it. Maybe you really believe that, but it's absolutely false.
From the article, "Grover Norquist: 'Field Marshal' of the Bush Plan," (The Nation, 2001]:
"To Norquist, who loves being called a revolutionary, hardly an agency of government is not worth abolishing, from the Internal Revenue Service and the Food and Drug Administration to the Education Department and the National Endowment for the Arts. "My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years," he says, "to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub."
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20010514/dreyfuss”

“The even newer mantra is, "What's good for me is what's good for me. Fv¢I< the country!"”

“You're both right. America has an openness that makes it easier for narcissists to achieve power and game the system. Read DeToqueville. Read Sinclair Lewis's Elmer Gantry. Read especially Melville's The Confidence Man, published in 1857. A difficult book, but that's what it's about., the con artist. America's problem is not only the idolization of individualism, "success" as the highest value, it's also the constant appeal to trust, have faith in those who are "successful.". Don't think, just trust how wonderful it all is (or could be). Just think positive!”

“"Positive thinkers also create problems because in their quest to see everything from a positive light, they become increasingly naive (I have this problem on this website a lot). They are unable to process factual information as it creates a distortion of their current worldview."

Absolutely right! I have long thought that somebody should write a book on THE POWER OF NEGATIVE THINKING.”

“A very important point. It's not that there are per capita more narcissists (sociopaths) in America than elsewhere. It's that the reigning American ideology offers the perfect conditions for them to flourish, the American way of life fosters their style, does not set up obstacles to them (i.e. to protect their likely victims) but instead encourages them. American society was open, narcissists got in and retooled it for their own benefit. Thus they are at the top of every field. Not that everyone at the top is a narcissist, just an awfully high percentage. For example, in most other societies, there are social consequences for lying, cheating, total BS, or going back on your word. Here it's rare that you DON'T get away with it. You just make up some new BS, or at worst you leave for the Caribbean.”

“Well, that's an interesting point of view. Are you saying that America only became America when the Europeans got here? Well, they gave it a new name, but I think the place was already here before they arrived, otherwise how could they have found it? And guess what? When there were only a few Europeans and lots of Indians, many of the European settlers and traders, did learn Cherokee and Lakota and Navajo. Take Sam Houston, for example. Nobody more American than Sam Houston. He had a Cherokee wife and he spoke Cherokee. A lot of folks of African descent in Alabama and Florida spoke Creek (Muskogee). And so on.”

“I know that was your point. But Ukraine still isn't in Asia. Are you implying that some of the original inhabitants of America came from Europe as well? Because in that case, they may as well have come from England... in which case we should all be speaking English.”

“Maybe it's because I grew up in New York, a polyglot city for well over 350 years. We seem to have done all right. To me this is a non-issue, get a life.”

“Possibly we should all be speaking Ukrainian, but Ukraine is not in Asia, it's in Europe.”

“Wikipedia:
One of the earliest known usages was in "baseball czar", applied to Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, who was named Commissioner of Baseball, with broad powers to clean up the sport after it had been dirtied by the Black Sox scandal of 1919.”

“Do you know what a blue-ribbon panel is? It's not a czar.”

“President Obama should appoint a bipartisan blue-ribbon panel or task-force consisting of such people as Elizabeth Warren, Eliot Spitzer, Simon Johnson, Robert Reich, Paul Krugman, Nouriel Roubini, and all the other economists, financial watchdogs, and bankers (yes, they are not all pigs and whores) of credibility and integrity. There are many. They should immediately draw up a report with recommendations, and the government should follow those recommendations and reform this stinking mess before it's too late.”

“President Obama should appoint a blue-ribbon panel or task-force consisting of such people as Elizabeth Warren, Eliot Spitzer, Simon Johnson, Robert Reich, Paul Krugman, Nouriel Roubini, and all the other economists, financial watchdogs, and bankers (yes, they are not all pigs and whores) of credibility and integrity. There are many. They should immediately draw up a report with recommendations, and the government should follow those recommendations and reform this stinking mess before it's too late.”

“OK, I see what you're saying. But still .... Yes, it is literally true that "the determination of homeowners to secure a property at any price under any conditions helped create the system." But to me that's a little like saying, "the determination of humans to eat or breathe under any conditions helps create disease." The choices open to homeowners are not so free as all that. I have wondered for a long time how ordinary working people could afford homes of half a million and up. Now I know -- they can't. But there are many places where that was the going rate. People do need houses. If you are a couple with small children, at some point you'll need more room than you get in a three or four-room apartment. The market is extremely high, everybody tells you it will keep going higher forever. But hey, no problem, you can buy a house because your credit is good. Personally, I thought the whole thing was insane, but I was lucky because I didn't absolutely need to buy a house yet. What the banks and real estate business really did was to brainwash society into a new (and deceptive) definition of the word "afford." Remember, a dwelling is not a luxury, and a house that cost $10,000 in the 1950s could well go for half a million today.”

“That is part of the issue, but it is a relatively minor part. Most of the "aggression and criminality" was on the side of the lenders, not the borrowers. You paint a ridiculous scenario where masses of millions of criminally-minded homebuyers are extorting or tricking the banks to give them mortgages. That just ain't what happened.”

“What you don't understand is that Obama with all his popularity is not Master of the Universe. He does not wield absolute power. When it comes to the banks he's working under tight constraints. Geithner was the banksters' choice and O was not in a position to reject him. There are other areas (big pharma, health insurance, AIPAC, the entity formerly known as the GOP) where it's similar. In these cases, O's only effective strategy is "give them enough rope so they can hang themselves." No need to single out Geithner anyway, he's not the leader of that bunch. The issue is now squarely in front of the American people, and Durbin has deliberately put the focus on the Senate. The best that can be said is that even if the administration is not opposing the big banksters head on, they are not covering their @$$. That's already progress, considering where he had to start from. The question is not about Obama. It's whether there exists enough "rope" in the universe. If yes, then certainly they will all hang themselves.”