PDA

View Full Version : From WikiChina



john l
12-01-2010, 07:32 AM
From WikiChina
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: November 30, 2010

While secrets from WikiLeaks were splashed all over the American newspapers, I couldn’t help but wonder: What if China had a WikiLeaker and we could see what its embassy in Washington was reporting about America? I suspect the cable would read like this:

Washington Embassy, People’s Republic of China, to Ministry of Foreign Affairs Beijing, TOP SECRET/Subject: America today.

Things are going well here for China. America remains a deeply politically polarized country, which is certainly helpful for our goal of overtaking the U.S. as the world’s most powerful economy and nation. But we’re particularly optimistic because the Americans are polarized over all the wrong things.

There is a willful self-destructiveness in the air here as if America has all the time and money in the world for petty politics. They fight over things like — we are not making this up — how and where an airport security officer can touch them. They are fighting — we are happy to report — over the latest nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia. It seems as if the Republicans are so interested in weakening President Obama that they are going to scuttle a treaty that would have fostered closer U.S.-Russian cooperation on issues like Iran. And since anything that brings Russia and America closer could end up isolating us, we are grateful to Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona for putting our interests ahead of America’s and blocking Senate ratification of the treaty. The ambassador has invited Senator Kyl and his wife for dinner at Mr. Kao’s Chinese restaurant to praise him for his steadfastness in protecting America’s (read: our) interests.

Americans just had what they call an “election.” Best we could tell it involved one congressman trying to raise more money than the other (all from businesses they are supposed to be regulating) so he could tell bigger lies on TV more often about the other guy before the other guy could do it to him. This leaves us relieved. It means America will do nothing serious to fix its structural problems: a ballooning deficit, declining educational performance, crumbling infrastructure and diminished immigration of new talent.

The ambassador recently took what the Americans call a fast train — the Acela — from Washington to New York City. Our bullet train from Beijing to Tianjin would have made the trip in 90 minutes. His took three hours — and it was on time! Along the way the ambassador used his cellphone to call his embassy office, and in one hour he experienced 12 dropped calls — again, we are not making this up. We have a joke in the embassy: “When someone calls you from China today it sounds like they are next door. And when someone calls you from next door in America, it sounds like they are calling from China!” Those of us who worked in China’s embassy in Zambia often note that Africa’s cellphone service was better than America’s.

But the Americans are oblivious. They travel abroad so rarely that they don’t see how far they are falling behind. Which is why we at the embassy find it funny that Americans are now fighting over how “exceptional” they are. Once again, we are not making this up. On the front page of The Washington Post on Monday there was an article noting that Republicans Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee are denouncing Obama for denying “American exceptionalism.” The Americans have replaced working to be exceptional with talking about how exceptional they still are. They don’t seem to understand that you can’t declare yourself “exceptional,” only others can bestow that adjective upon you.

In foreign policy, we see no chance of Obama extricating U.S. forces from Afghanistan. He knows the Republicans will call him a wimp if he does, so America will keep hemorrhaging $190 million a day there. Therefore, America will lack the military means to challenge us anywhere else, particularly on North Korea, where our lunatic friends continue to yank America’s chain every six months so that the Americans have to come and beg us to calm things down. By the time the Americans do get out of Afghanistan, the Afghans will surely hate them so much that China’s mining companies already operating there should be able to buy up the rest of Afghanistan’s rare minerals.

Most of the Republicans just elected to Congress do not believe what their scientists tell them about man-made climate change. America’s politicians are mostly lawyers — not engineers or scientists like ours — so they’ll just say crazy things about science and nobody calls them on it. It’s good. It means they will not support any bill to spur clean energy innovation, which is central to our next five-year plan. And this ensures that our efforts to dominate the wind, solar, nuclear and electric car industries will not be challenged by America.

Finally, record numbers of U.S. high school students are now studying Chinese, which should guarantee us a steady supply of cheap labor that speaks our language here, as we use our $2.3 trillion in reserves to quietly buy up U.S. factories. In sum, things are going well for China in America.

Thank goodness the Americans can’t read our diplomatic cables.

Embassy Washington.

Maureen Dowd is off today.

skuthorp
12-01-2010, 07:37 AM
I was giong to post :D, but it's not really funny is it?

LeeG
12-01-2010, 07:44 AM
I would like a wikileaks on Saudi oil reserves

LeeG
12-01-2010, 07:47 AM
From WikiChina
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: November 30, 2010

In foreign policy, we see no chance of Obama extricating U.S. forces from Afghanistan. He knows the Republicans will call him a wimp if he does, so America will keep hemorrhaging $190 million a day there. .


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/30/billions-down-the-drain-i_n_790043.html#s195062

The U.S. is spending more than $2 billion a week in a country with a gross domestic product of about $14 billion a year--

..
The Wall Street Journal reported in June that more than $3 billion in cash has been openly flown out of Kabul International Airport in the past three years -- “packed into suitcases, piled onto pallets and loaded into airplanes.” Only so much of that could be drug money. The bulk, presumably, was skimmed from U.S. aid and logistics spending.

And that’s just what people are declaring. The Journal calculated the $3 billion figure based on Afghan customs records, noting: “More declared cash flies out of Kabul each year than the Afghan government collects in tax and customs revenue nationwide.”

The actual amount of money flown out of the country is, of course, higher. As the Journal noted: “One courier alone carried $2.3 billion between the second half of 2008 and the end of 2009, said a senior U.S. official, citing other documents that are in the possession of investigators.”

LeeG
12-01-2010, 07:50 AM
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/in-the-energy-race-echoes-of-sputnik/

Dr. Chu and his department have become a target. Representative Fred Upton of Michigan, the ranking Republican member of a subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, sent a letter to Dr. Chu on Nov. 23 complaining that the Energy Department’s $40 billion slice of the $862 billion stimulus bill did not appear to be doing much to create jobs. “Is it true that as of the date of this letter, less than $10 billion of the approximately $40 billion has been paid out?’’ he asked.

But in his speech, Dr. Chu seemed to have longer-term goals in mind. He compared the recent rise in research and development and high-technology manufacturing in China to the Soviet launching of the Sputnik satellite in October 1957. In 1998, he said, the American share of worldwide high-tech exports was nearly 25 percent and China’s was less than 10 percent; by 2008, he said, China’s share was 20 percent and the American share was less than 15 percent.

In 2009, for the first time, a majority of United States patents were issued to foreigners, he said, and two Chinese universities, Tsinghua and Peking, are “the two largest suppliers of students who receive Ph.D.’s in the United States.”

Joe (SoCal)
12-01-2010, 08:00 AM
How much does a billion dollars weigh ?
Just a thought

Flying Orca
12-01-2010, 08:17 AM
Ten tonnes, roughly, figuring on hundred dollar bills at a gram each. A first-order estimate, but in the ballpark.

john l
12-01-2010, 08:22 AM
Ballast? Forget the mattress.

paladin
12-01-2010, 08:23 AM
How much does a billion dollars weigh ?
Just a thought


Freshly printed, uncirculated 100 dollar bills weigh 20 pounds per million.....so close to 20,000 pounds...

Joe (SoCal)
12-01-2010, 08:27 AM
Wow !!!!!

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 10:37 AM
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_BnALmAAD1ik/TMQ7R3A9LyI/AAAAAAAAAwo/8QB9-LL0t2Q/s1600/fingers.in.ears.jpg

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 11:49 AM
.
Cue the sound of crickets....
.

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 02:13 PM
.
Oh come on....

No one dares to dispute the NYT's ultra-lefty Thomas Friedman?

Donn? pefjr? Art Read? jbelow? Black-Jack? Phillip Allen? Y Bar Ranch? erster? delecta? bobbys?

Ya'll are disappointing me.
.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
12-01-2010, 02:57 PM
I work for a Chinese corporation, have lived in Beijing and have several Chinese friends.

The guoted article does indeed accurately reflect the Chinese view of the USA

TimH
12-01-2010, 03:11 PM
Im suprised they didnt mention Walmart.

pefjr
12-01-2010, 03:12 PM
.
Oh come on....

No one dares to dispute the NYT's ultra-lefty Thomas Friedman?

Donn? pefjr? Art Read? jbelow? Black-Jack? Phillip Allen? Y Bar Ranch? erster? delecta? bobbys?

Ya'll are disappointing me.
.I am deeply honored to have my name drug across the pages of WB with such honorable men. What is it I can help you with there, Tom. I was not aware I was off your ignore list. As for this article, what's to dispute , humor? It's funny but not that funny, as in "bobbys" funny. Give me bobby's humor anytime over this guy. Anything else?

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 03:14 PM
You were never on my "ignore list," Bud.

As for being "drug across the pages of WB," I certainly meant no insult. Ya'll simply strike me as sharing an ideological point-of-view contrary to the likes of Thomas Friedman.

So where are the WBF conservative, tea-party, right-wing voices ready and willing to contradict Friedman and the New York Times?

By the way... the difference between you and me is summed up by the fact that you consider Friedman's opinion piece to be humorous whereas I consider it to be accurate, sad, and disturbing.

pefjr
12-01-2010, 03:49 PM
You were never on my "ignore list," Bud.

As for being "drug across the pages of WB," I certainly meant no insult. Ya'll simply strike me as sharing an ideological point-of-view contrary to the likes of Thomas Friedman.

So where are the WBF conservative, tea-party, right-wing voices ready and willing to contradict Friedman and the New York Times?

By the way... the difference between you and me is summed up by the fact that you consider Friedman's opinion piece to be humorous whereas I consider it to be accurate, sad, and disturbing.I know you guys are always sad, or scared, or very scared, and disturbed often too, or looking for irony.:D The clue that it's humor was in the wikichina, did you miss that? That was the funniest part of the whole article. Go back and read it as humor or better yet, look for bobbys and have a really good laugh.

nw_noob
12-01-2010, 03:53 PM
.
Oh come on....

No one dares to dispute the NYT's ultra-lefty Thomas Friedman?


Friedman's an ultra-lefty? When did that happen?

I think of him as a day-late and dollar-short centrist hack who typically writes about what should be obvious, and re-enforces public support for foregone conclusion's, often when they are the wrong ones. Case in point, this piece.

Did anyone actually just learn that partisan bickering is killing political progress, elections in the US are a joke, our infrastructure is worse than that found in most developed countries, many of our fellow citizens are ignorant and/or delusional, we're irrationally attached to extremely expensive foreign wars that are creating enemies abroad, most politicians spout an endless stream of B.S. that some of them even believe while actively impeding progress toward a post fossil fuel economy, and most young people know China will own our a$$es one day? Anyone just learn that?

That said, this is one of Friedman's pieces that I actually liked.

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 03:54 PM
I know you guys are always sad, or scared, or very scared, and disturbed often too, or looking for irony.:D The clue that it's humor was in the wikichina, did you miss that? That was the funniest part of the whole article. Go back and read it as humor....

Your sense of humor is bizarre. Certainly Thomas Friedman did not intend to be funny.

Do you have anything substantial to contribute to the thread or are you going to stick with your delusion that Thomas Friedman intended this to be a humorous piece a'la Dave Barry?

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 03:59 PM
Friedman's an ultra-lefty? When did that happen?

I think of him as a day-late and dollar-short centrist hack who typically writes about what should be obvious

Claiming that Friedman merely states the obvious begs the question. Yes?

skipper68
12-01-2010, 04:00 PM
So depressing. Anarchy shall prevail in the future,I fear. No matter what your political affiliation is,this ship is sinking,and we can only debate,with no control. When the unenjoyment stops,the stores will stop. The country is coming to an ear deafening screech.Those of privilege are having nervous break downs,and murder seems to be their choice of opinion. Those of us who know how to be broke,aren't panicking as much,it seems.

pefjr
12-01-2010, 04:01 PM
Your sense of humor is bizarre. Certainly Thomas Friedman did not intend to be funny.

Do you have anything substantial to contribute to the thread or are you going to stick with your delusion that Thomas Friedman intended this to be a humorous piece a'la Dave Barry?My delusion.

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 04:04 PM
You confuse "clever" with "funny." But these are certainly not the only concepts about which you are confused.

pefjr
12-01-2010, 04:06 PM
Those of us who know how to be broke,aren't panicking I have 60 years of practice, and "on the job" training.

pefjr
12-01-2010, 04:08 PM
You confuse "clever" with "funny." But these are certainly not the only concepts about which you are confused.Well, you be sad and I'll be confused and we see which one of us get the ulcer.

nw_noob
12-01-2010, 04:08 PM
Claiming that Friedman merely states the obvious begs the question. Yes?

I'm not sure what you're getting at Tom. I see him as something of a centrist propagandist. For many years, I've heard both the right and left agree on one thing: Our country is headed in the wrong direction, and if we don't make some changes, we're screwed. Centrist propagandists don't help facilitate change, they help to preserve the status quo.

TimH
12-01-2010, 04:09 PM
When the unenjoyment stops,the stores will stop. The country is coming to an ear deafening screech.

The extended unemployment benefits are just starting to expire. And those living on them have still not found jobs. 2 million Americans extended unemployment benefits will run out this month alone. The good manufacturing and engineering jobs are gone, and they are overqualified for and thus unemployable by most of the service industry.

The dems say adding millions of people to the list of those losing their homes and not paying on their debts will slow the anemic economic growth. the Reps say the unemployed are a bunch of slackers and should be cut off.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40447966/ns/politics-more_politics/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101201/ap_on_re_us/us_jobless_benefits_the99ers

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 04:16 PM
I'm not sure what you're getting at Tom. I see him as something of a centrist propagandist. For many years, I've heard both the right and left agree on one thing: Our country is headed in the wrong direction, and if we don't make some changes, we're screwed. Centrist propagandists don't help facilitate change, they help to preserve the status quo.

It seems to me that Thomas Friedman is specific about what he believes comprises "the wrong direction." I presumed that when you claimed Friedman merely "states the obvious," you meant his specific criticisms. Given that presumption the question being begged is: if the specific problems are so obvious why is nothing being done to correct them?

But I guess I was wrong to presume. Evidently all you get from Friedman is the generality that we are "headed in the wrong direction." I would hazard a guess that Mitch McConnell would agree with that general assessment (as would Russ Feingold). But I doubt McConnell would agree with Friedman's (or Feingold's) specific points. And I suspect Friedman considers McConnell to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

john l
12-01-2010, 04:29 PM
they say: art is the art of making the obvious, obvious.

nw_noob
12-01-2010, 04:51 PM
Given that presumption the question being begged is: if the specific problems are so obvious why is nothing being done to correct them?

Because the real power brokers in both American and Global politics are pleased to see us bicker amongst ourselves, that means we aren't demanding real changes.



But I guess I was wrong to presume. Evidently all you get from Friedman is the generality that we are "headed in the wrong direction."

Actually I take away from Friedman that we're pretty close to the right direction, we just need to tweak things a bit here and there. He seems to think that congressional majorities matter, and that we can change things for the better within the parameters of business as usual.

I think he's dead wrong. I think we're past the point where minor changes will make a bit of difference as to where we're going to wind up.

yzer
12-01-2010, 05:01 PM
Keep in mind that the government of PRC is not a democracy. It is a one party government run by the Communist Party of China, which is steered by a handful of very senior people in the Politburo Standing Committee.

PRC has an advantage when it comes to charting a national course. Their government plans in terms up to fifty years in the future. Here in the US we have a democracy but it's difficult to make plans that extend very far past the next election cycle. The Republican promise to dismantle health care reforms is just one example.

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 05:06 PM
Because the real power brokers in both American and Global politics are pleased to see us bicker amongst ourselves, that means we aren't demanding real changes.

Actually I take away from Friedman that we're pretty close to the right direction, we just need to tweak things a bit here and there.
Well then, you and I read Friedman very differently. I understand him to mean that we are very far off the track and will face dire consequences unless we wise up, and soon.


He seems to think that congressional majorities matter, and that we can change things for the better within the parameters of business as usual.

I think he's dead wrong. I think we're past the point where minor changes will make a bit of difference as to where we're going to wind up.
As I said... unlike you it seems to me Thomas Friedman is not talking about "minor changes" but about radical changes in direction. Odd that we can read the same text and draw very different conclusions about the meaning.

And I am, frankly, disturbed that you seem to think congressional majorities and minorities do not matter. How do you imagine that anything meaningful gets accomplished? By revolution?

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 05:12 PM
Well, you be sad and I'll be confused and we see which one of us get the ulcer.


http://www.yhwh.com/images/Tarot0.jpg

skipper68
12-01-2010, 05:43 PM
The extended unemployment benefits are just starting to expire. And those living on them have still not found jobs. 2 million Americans extended unemployment benefits will run out this month alone. The good manufacturing and engineering jobs are gone, and they are overqualified for and thus unemployable by most of the service industry.

The dems say adding millions of people to the list of those losing their homes and not paying on their debts will slow the anemic economic growth. the Reps say the unemployed are a bunch of slackers and should be cut off.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40447966/ns/politics-more_politics/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101201/ap_on_re_us/us_jobless_benefits_the99ers
Those that did everything right,savings,health and life insurance..are killing their children,because they cant provide for them. When foreclosed on,they break,and murder on the way out. Their pride wont let them move to a lower standard of living,let alone charity.
It's heart braking to watch the news. Now add the others losing their last shred of dignity..with their unenjoyment gone. Where are these jobs coming from? It scares me.

pefjr
12-01-2010, 06:21 PM
http://www.yhwh.com/images/Tarot0.jpgIs this a statement or question? does it make you less sad, scared, disturbed? Does it make your argument better?, does it make you a bigger man? You can call me anything that makes you less sad, Tom, but don't call me late to dinner. I wonder why you guys even read these writers like Friedman or is it Freidman, that looks more accurate?

I certainly meant no insult. Tombut then you post this? just because I said this is humor. It would really be hard to insult someone on the internet. I mean unless you resort to a family remark like Blight does. I always figured it you don't talk about my wife, mother, daughter, girlfriend, sister, etc. then it's almost impossible to insult me. Keep trying though, if it helps you.

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 06:22 PM
Just responding in kind, Bud. When you address the topic with something substantive, I will do the same. Cut the fool and so will I.

pefjr
12-01-2010, 06:28 PM
Cut the fool and so will I.That mean you are having fun?:D

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 06:30 PM
I wouldn't be here otherwise.

nw_noob
12-01-2010, 06:31 PM
As I said... unlike you it seems to me Thomas Friedman is not talking about "minor changes" but about radical changes in direction. Odd that we can read the same text and draw very different conclusions about the meaning.

And I am, frankly, disturbed that you seem to think congressional majorities and minorities do not matter. How do you imagine that anything meaningful gets accomplished? By revolution?

I'm speaking about Friedman in general terms, as I said, I actually liked this piece. That said, I think there's a good chance we've already lost the game with China.

When it's time to ramp up a war, he's under the delusion that it can be won, and says something to the effect of "well, the generals know best." When the issues of torture, detention, and due process come up, he doesn't hold the claims made by the government up to much if any scrutiny, he say's "well, the president knows what he's doing." By and large, he doesn't seem to add any new perspective to the conversation. I just prefer writers that challenge the prevailing POV and suggest new ways to interpret the events of the day.

As to the majorities thing; I see them as two branches of the same centrist party. When it comes to corporate bailouts, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to perpetual wars, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to torture and rendition, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to spying on citizens, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to opposing a single payer health care system, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to passing weak credit reform that the banks actually love, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to blocking an audit of the Fed, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to an unwillingness to make big changes, and preserve the status quo, support is bi-partisan. In short, I see it all as bad theater. Elections and gamesmanship trump policy at every turn.


I almost forgot... I don't think meaningful things do get accomplished very often, and when they do it's due to public outcry. We've been headed down the same road for quite some time, and I think the power brokers like it.

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 06:38 PM
.... I don't have the luxuary of sitting around all day on a union or high paying job;) and do double duty posting on some internet forum.

Sorry to disappoint you, Mike, but I didn't post today on company time. On my job I have no access to a PC with internet access.

Our production was shut down after 4 hours and I was sent home because an Asian supplier, once again, has failed to deliver an electronic part on time. So I've had some extra time on my hands today.
.

TimH
12-01-2010, 06:43 PM
Where are these jobs coming from? It scares me.


I believe that baring a huge war or some other major event, at the current rate of job and wealth transfer, in 10 or 15 years China and India will offer us here in the US jobs making trinkets for them.

And those of us that dont get jobs here making trinkets can sneak over the great wall of china to obtain good landscaping jobs in suburban Shanghai.

Tom Montgomery
12-01-2010, 06:52 PM
No disappointment here,,,, There are plenty that seems to never miss a day for sure. But you did include me in the big list there and I for one do not place the bilge and the topics high on my lists of priorities, knowing that most subjects will end up with the same conclusion without me too.:ycool:

Ditto. ;)

I don't take the Bilge too seriously. I probably should make greater use of the smilies so that people don't get the wrong idea. Y:o

TimH
12-02-2010, 12:09 AM
Sometimes the truth hurts and is best avoided.

skuthorp
12-02-2010, 06:17 AM
I'm speaking about Friedman in general terms, as I said, I actually liked this piece. That said, I think there's a good chance we've already lost the game with China.

When it's time to ramp up a war, he's under the delusion that it can be won, and says something to the effect of "well, the generals know best." When the issues of torture, detention, and due process come up, he doesn't hold the claims made by the government up to much if any scrutiny, he say's "well, the president knows what he's doing." By and large, he doesn't seem to add any new perspective to the conversation. I just prefer writers that challenge the prevailing POV and suggest new ways to interpret the events of the day.

As to the majorities thing; I see them as two branches of the same centrist party. When it comes to corporate bailouts, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to perpetual wars, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to torture and rendition, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to spying on citizens, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to opposing a single payer health care system, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to passing weak credit reform that the banks actually love, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to blocking an audit of the Fed, support is bi-partisan. When it comes to an unwillingness to make big changes, and preserve the status quo, support is bi-partisan. In short, I see it all as bad theater. Elections and gamesmanship trump policy at every turn.


I almost forgot... I don't think meaningful things do get accomplished very often, and when they do it's due to public outcry. We've been headed down the same road for quite some time, and I think the power brokers like it.

It's a cosy club dedicated to ensuring no one else get's to play. Big money likes it, they bought them all years ago, the Military industries like it as do the Government because the perpetual "war on something, somebody, anybody" keeps the population in a patriotic fervor and not thinking about the domestic shortcomings of whatever admin. happens to be 'in'. Thats the ultimate bipartisan arrangement.

Bruce Hooke
12-02-2010, 10:21 AM
I know you guys are always sad, or scared, or very scared, and disturbed often too, or looking for irony.

It is easy to mock the other side as a bunch of scardy-cats but I think it is worth noting that conservatives in this country have been acting pretty "scared" when it comes to issues like the deficit. Here I am defining "scared" to mean thinking that it is an issue that if we do not deal with it could cause very serious problems for this country, which, of course, is what liberals think about many of the issues raised in the Friedman piece. Someone who does not see the deficit as an important issue could mock those who do. In the end mocking the other side's fears only serves to demonstrate how sophomoric the mocker is and ultimately it damages the mocker's side of the issue since it gives the impression that they do not care to seriously engage on the issues that are facing us as a nation and prefer to "fiddle while Roma burns."

So, I might almost say please keep doing what you are doing as it helps my side more than yours, except that I think if we are going to do anything to make this country better and stronger we need to get better at talking to each other.

Flying Orca
12-02-2010, 10:44 AM
Now, class, over the past fifty years, which party's administrations have been in power when the country's financial position improved, and which have been in power when it deteriorated?

pefjr
12-02-2010, 10:50 AM
It is easy to mock the other side as a bunch of scardy-cats but I think it is worth noting that conservatives in this country have been acting pretty "scared" when it comes to issues like the deficit. Here I am defining "scared" to mean thinking that it is an issue that if we do not deal with it could cause very serious problems for this country, which, of course, is what liberals think about many of the issues raised in the Friedman piece. Someone who does not see the deficit as an important issue could mock those who do. In the end mocking the other side's fears only serves to demonstrate how sophomoric the mocker is and ultimately it damages the mocker's side of the issue since it gives the impression that they do not care to seriously engage on the issues that are facing us as a nation and prefer to "fiddle while Roma burns."

So, I might almost say please keep doing what you are doing as it helps my side more than yours, except that I think if we are going to do anything to make this country better and stronger we need to get better at talking to each other.I am not on a side, I am in the middle of the road and I am not mocking, I am commenting on the # of times I see this from a lefty post: "This is scary, I am scared, this frightens me, this is disturbing, oh the irony, etc. It does stand out as a popular ending sentence on a lefty post. Maybe I just have more confidence in our country than you lefties. Sure I can see problems, but what can I do about them on a WBF post. Talk, that all. I am not frightened by a humorous thread C&P, so shoot me. Go back and count the political threads on this forum and tell me how it helped strengthen our country. Puuleaseeeeeee ............... The lefties need to oil their funny bone.

pefjr
12-02-2010, 10:54 AM
Now, class, over the past fifty years, which party's administrations have been in power when the country's financial position improved, and which have been in power when it deteriorated?This two party system is a check and balance, so has to be judged by that standard.

TimH
12-02-2010, 11:15 AM
I agree entitlements for the select few are absolutely wrong. The rich are not more worthy to have a disproportionate share of resources than the rest.
For those who forgot...its greed that led us to this mess.

mikefrommontana
12-02-2010, 01:44 PM
It is easy to mock the other side as a bunch of scardy-cats but I think it is worth noting that conservatives in this country have been acting pretty "scared" when it comes to issues like the deficit.

I only wished the conservatives were scared ten years ago when we had a chance to remain in fiscal trim and leave ourselves room to leeward, rather than this mess we have now. But, as others have said, the whole situation is precipitated by greed.