bit of a thread jump but as we started talking about rightwing nutjobs check out all the idiots on the 1.7 m (haha) march on Washington. These people are In serious need of a diet and a high school diploma

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUPMjC9mq5Y

and spell check! I swear, Glenn Beck is going to go down in history as either 'the guy who started an idiotic insurrection' or 'the buffoon who became the butt of all jokes'.

Hahaha wow.

In all fairness a lot of the protesters during Bush's term were similarly idiotic.

you know - the anti-war protests in 2003 drew 500k protesters in DC and did not even get 1/10th the coverage these 9-12ers got... in 2005 and 2007, the 'left protests' had 200k and 140k protesters, not even a blip on CNN...

and that's what's called a "liberal media"

Thucydides... I could not disagree more... the left protests of Bush... lets compare what Bush did vs what Obama has done...

1) Lied about Iraq-Al Qaida link to get us into a war that has cost $600billion so far
2) $1 trillion in tax cuts for the top 5% of income earners
3) Lied about WMDs in Iraq
4) Tortured prisoners
5) Medicare Part D, cost is around 200 billion - gvnt cant negotiate prices so drug companies make the big profits
6) the absolute disgrace that was "No Child Left Behind"
7) embarrassed the US on the world stage by being such an incompetent idiot
8) did not catch Osama after 7.5 years...
9) NSA wiretaping of ALL Americans (and the right-wingers worry about big-governemtn NOW? hahaha)
10) absolutely politicized the Department of Justice
11) gutted all regulators on the environment
12) appointed worthless regulators of the financial markets the results of which was a complete meltdown of the economic system
13) Katrina
14) didn't listen to the anti-terror experts (like Clarke) who told him "Bin Laden intent on attacking the US" a full 30 days before 9/11
15) $700 billion blank check to Paulson - former CEO of Goldman Sachs

and these are just the highlights... nevermind the Florida election rigging in 2000 (and I would argue 2004) but we'll just pretend THAT didn't happen.

oh yeah... and he left two steaming nuggets for us on his way out on the Supreme Court - the results of which will be felt over the next two decades... you just watch, the campaign contribution limits currently in place against corporations is about to be done away with... so you can look forward to all those banks and insurance companies directly injecting millions of dollars into political advertising during campaigns... they dont even have to try to hide their money trail to candidates anymore... they will be able to do it directly... thanks to Alito and Robers now on the bench.



so Thucydidies... I'd say that the anti-Bush protesters didn't go far enough...

@ Invictus

>with limitations to prevent a tyranny of the majority

Yes, limitations to safeguard freedom of speech, self defence, privacy, etc. Here I've listed things that are in the U.S. Constitution and should be (but aren't) in every constitution. And here's something else that should be in every constitution but is not in the U.S. Constitution: freedom of migration.

absolutely amazing video sean... thank you.

>(By this I am not saying that we should not police our borders - we must do this to prevent illegal activity such as smuggling - but not to 'keep out foreigners')

In fact, opening up the borders to immigrants will *help* stop smuggling and the rest.

Right now, a lot of the people who wish to migrate from México to the U.S. have to do so illegally, in secluded desert areas. Smugglers also use this method and even mix humans and drugs in the same shipment. If all of those immigrants are out of the area, then it will only be easier to focus on the drug smugglers.

On the other hand, the legal ports of entry would have to be upgraded to handle to increased numbers, including many people now who would like to migrate but don't try.

@babak you can accuse everything on your list Bushes fault except Katrina....you can not accuse a single person for a NATURAL Disaster you cant even blame him for the poor relief effort that was the best he could do

well babak... i agree mostly..
i disagree on 9, 12, 13, and 15 though... but those are different stories for a different time.

not that those aren't legitimate concerns i'm just saying that a lot of what the actual protesters on the streets in the bush years would have told you if you interviewed them would have been similarly stupid. people wanted to army to literally oust him.... that's really really stupid lol. i wouldnt be surprised if somebody at the 9-12 thing said something similar. either these videos are deliberating misrepresenting the number of stupid people at protests or i now have an extremely low view of the intellect of your average protester. that's unfortunate, to be sure

"There should be no place in our modern world for xenophobia and building up huge walls at our borders."

I wish that statement were true, but I think it is idealistic and naive. Countries need to make decisions that are in the best interests of their citizens. In many cases a purely open door policy could be disastarous. Aside from social cohesion and the impact on the pre-existing culture there are infrastructure considerations to consider. I am an Australian. Our country is very dry and our soils very poor quality. Some scientists say that the sustainable population carrying capacity of Australia is only 8,000,000 (Professor Tim Flannery, former Australian of the year for one), yet our population is around 20,000,000 and growing, largely due to immigration. We may well be sowing the seeds of a future disaster due to our current policies.
Social factors are important too. Not all groups of people get a long. Sometimes social groups have diametrically opposing customs and world views, such that clash can be inevitable. Take a look at the Israel and the Middle East for example, and there are numerous examples in Indonesia where migration has been disastarous.
In a genral sense I agree with the notion that we should all "just get along", but alas this is not realistic. Perhaps some day in a utopian future we will, but that day is not now.

Agreed. You simply can't have a country without borders.

@ timetokill... Bush's failure during Katrina was Brownie. its not his fault that a hurricane hit - but it is his fault that he appointed another incompetent (what was he a horse judge) to be put in charge of such an important government agency. On top of that, his personal leadership and response were inadequate... and i'm not even getting into the fact that there was not enough investment made in the levees in NO... (and yes, there were army corps of engineers reports stating that the levees should have been improved BEFORE the Katrina hurricane hit).

most of all, it was his decision not to spend the money to fix the city after... of course because he drained the treasury on the other 14 items on the list - but none-the-less, his administrative decisions resulted in the city still not being rebuilt after 4 years.

so yes, I can lay quite a blame directly at his feet.

@ Thuc - on

9) "those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither". but I'd like to hear your point on this

12) you remember Harvey Pitt? Bush's first SEC appointment. the guy's job before Bush appointed him was a lawyer for firms trying to get around SEC rules. He was the perfect fox to guard the henhouse... and during his tenure, Enron collapsed... then WorldCom... and it was he who created a culture at the SEC of looking the other way instead of regulating the 'credit default swaps'. (read this: http://econ161.berkeley.edu/movable_type/archives/001120.html)

beyond just Mr. Pitt, Bush appointed the regulators that, in my opinion, INTENTIONALLY did nothing to stop the Economic collapse of 2009. the revenue streams were too lucrative, and the profits too addicting for the Bush regulators to put a stop to it all. so I do blame the lack of regulation, in part (but a big part), on the guy who appointed the regulators.

13) answered above

15) this is longer. but suffice to say, I do agree that SOMETHING, and something big, had to be done... i'm glad that we didnt do 'nothing' as McCain (initially) and the House Republicans seemed to want to do (or not do as the case may be). BUT, thats a far cry from that being the 'best' way to address the crisis. I dont trust Paulson one bit... and i would not be surprised if in 10-20 years we come to find out it was all a great set-up for Goldman and BoA and Morgan to get their over-leveraged risky investments recouped. We already saw with the 150billion to AIG that paid out 100 cents to the dollar to all counter parties, including over 15 billion to Goldmans (which as it turned out, managed a record-breaking profit in the 2nd quarter of 2009 - surprise!).

This is one area I agree with the wing-nuts on... the TARP was badly set-up and horribly managed. This is also an area where I very much doubt Obama's decisions to appoint Giethner and Summers (another Goldman's Golden boy)... and to a lesser extent Bernanke. I would have loved for him to have been bold and picked a Baird to be Sec Tres. or who is that guy from the Federal Bank of St Louis? that guy.

but I digress - the point is, under W - the $700b went out the door (or at least 350b of it)

also...

*********** READ THIS ************

http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_10957

an excerpt from Matt Latimer's new book (coming to bookshelves in early October). Latimer, was one of Bush's speech writers for the last 22 months of his Presidency, and you really gotta read this (go to link) talks about Bush's opinions of Palin, McCain, Obama, and even Hillary's "Big Fat A**". As well as how completely LOST Bush was after the collapse of Lehman's and Bear Sterns... seriously worth your time.

back to Thuc - on the rest of your post... I think the vast majority of anti-Bush protesters could at least point out to Bush's actual Lies and have truth on their side (ie, no Iraq-Bin Laden connection... ie no WMD in Iraq) whereas the 'birthers' and 9-12ers' "Lies" that they claim Obama has told include crap like his place of birth and what? healthcare for illegals (which is explicitly excluded from the 3 house bills and the 1 Senate bill).

its one thing to say both sides have complaints... but when one side is making shit up, and the other is actually accurate, you cant equate the two and call it even. its just not the case that they are in the same scale.

I would also suggest to you that there are hundreds of thousands of liberals who are actually informed (with actual evidence) because of our domination of the blogosphere... we actually pay attention to what we are reading and saying... vs simply spouting crap Glenn Beck tells us.

so no false equivalency please.

to spyman and invictus on borders - I agree actually... borders are a reality based on our current world-order... which post-bismark (and post treaty of Westphalia if I'm not mistaken) is centered around the concept of Nation-states.

it was not always so... nor will it remain this way forever. the concepts of nation states and borders as we currently understand them is only about 150-200 years old out of some 30,000 years of human history and 10,000 years of recorded human history. sooo, its a pretty new trend, and I'm sure we'll come up with a new one sometime soon... the whole EU example is one direction in which the world may be headed.

but for now - yes we have borders (so we need immigration policies) and that's not gonna change for a while yet.

wow - I wrote a lot. if anyone actually reads this stuff, bravo!

Why, thank you, Babak; it's nice to get some appreciation! Can you believe that my spouse is trying to get me to do housework instead?

"borders are a reality based on our current world-order... which post-bismark (and post treaty of Westphalia if I'm not mistaken) is centered around the concept of Nation-states."

The Westphalian state is different from the nation-state. It's pretty technical, so look for a better explanation than I can give, but they are not the same. A simplistic way is that a nation-state has a dominant culture entwined with the country, while a Westphalian state is just a polity with sovereignty. Nigeria is a Westphalian state, for instance, but it is not a nation-state.

The European Union is pretty much just a empire of consent. It isn't doing away with the idea of borders, its just swallowing them up. There's still no freedom of movement from the EU to Russia or Morocco.

I can't understand why you have this passion for complete freedom not just of movement, but of immigration. Nationalism and localism are natural feelings and will never go away. Indeed, they are desirable and foster a sense of authentic community which would feel threatened by an influx of strangers.

People fear change, and sometimes they're right.

i'll get back to babak i just spent like a hour writing a post in the abortion thread

oh oh... that sounds a bit like a threat =P

but seriously, if you continue to write like you did on the abortion thread, i need to up my game to keep up with you. that was a damn good post. (and that's coming from a pro-choice guy)

lol people always start complimenting my writing when i go long... its not any better than others, just longer maybe. thanks though.

"Nationalism and localism are natural feelings and will never go away. Indeed, they are desirable and foster a sense of authentic community which would feel threatened by an influx of strangers."

I agree with you there. But increasingly, the "nation" is the globe, the citizens are humans, and our locale is Earth. The authentic community is humanity and the influx of strangers could be any sort of non-human factor, or perhaps someone who does not share the sense of global community.

I know a little bit about your views Invictus, or at least I think I do, and you seem as best I can tell like an old-school not-stupid conservative. Someone who indeed would say that nationalism is a good thing. That in itself is debatable, but I would tell you that I promise, despite everything you may think, America and its citizens are not the most important things out there. I know you know that intellectually, but it doesn't seem like you've gotten there all the way.

I never said they are the most important things out there, but they're certainly the most important things to me.

Thanks for saying I'm not stupid. More people on the right are like me than not, we're just often ignored.

"But increasingly, the "nation" is the globe, the citizens are humans, and our locale is Earth."

This more true for some than others. It is true for most of the west, especially the English speaking west. Americans, Brits, Canadians, Australians etc, we can all live in each others countries without very disruption - we share very similar cultures and we fit in with each other seamlessly. It is not true for much of the rest of the world. For many other cultures Globalization means destruction. I think this notion of an authentic human community is still a long way off. That said, I think it will happen, and I think we are heading in that direction, but it is not there yet. I also think that there will be a lot of causalities on that road to a human community, as smaller cultures are either destroyed or absorbed by the larger more powerful cultures.

You are absolutely right spyman. That is why it is merely my *belief* about human movement and free settlement. I know that such a law would never be passed, especially not globally. However, the only way to move forward to a global community is to hope for it and work for it; if no one wants it, it won't come. So I want it, and I will work for it. I do not claim it is nearby or inevitable. Just desirable and, for now, on its way.

Invictus, I know from experience that the right is not populated by a bunch of idiots as some people sometimes think, or as is sometimes represented. My own family contains some of the smartest people I know, as well as some of the staunchest conservatives. That's not mutually exclusive either.

The fact that they are the most important things to you is not something I can force you to change, but I can hopefully point out that if what was most important to you was humanity as a whole, then we would be one step closer to have a much less painful world.