(V): Unfotunately America is becoming more fascist all the time. The supreme court with their citizens united rul of corporate personhood has really put American politics into buying elections instead of electing good leadership. I just wish Free Europe would stand up to American corporate war profiteering and stop supporting it.

(V): Besides their are already copyright laws in place to protect all countries from theft and all we need to do is get together and start supporting the rule of law.

European Stability Mechanism under the lead of Germans, forward deployed for a year, just like that, with a snap on one's fingers. 500 billion Euro. Not as stimulus for starving villages and districts, but for finance metropoles to do business as usual in our much-vaunted waste economy, exploitation elsewhere for our consumption sedation. I'm proved (you can smile) in my assumptions to see dreadful earth destroyers in our top politicians.

You know, if governments would start to do useful things with money, people could realize how cheap money currently is, they seem to fear this.. As if Henry Fords words would be true, that if the people realize how the monetary system works, there would be revolutions of the worst and such. The contrary is true. We, the people, would in fact be very happy and even grateful.

At least generations die.

And here a religious joke: When individuals like intriguers realize that their game will be lighted, they start to fear to get hanged one day. But this makes everything worse. They should face up to eternal hell instead, that could lead them to the right path.

Bernice:

Hilarious! You could put just about anything at the end of that line. "Just like a democrat." "Just like a Communist." "Just like a Tea Partier." "Just like a shopper in Walmart." It works with just about anything!

gogul:

People forget that the entire "Representative Democracy" scam exists with one and only one purpose: To stop the people from going into another Fench Revolution. Capitalist governments fear revolution more than anything in the world. So the entire political and financial system exists only to stop revolutions from happening so that the rich and powerful can stay where they are. All the crisis and fear mongering exists to distract the population so that they can keep consuming like automatons. As long as the working class lowers its head, the rich and powerful are happy. Democracy and capitalism simply ensure that those heads stay lowered. We no longer need chains to be slaves. We use wages and money to keep the lower classes where they belong. Then we tell the wage slaves that they are "free" because they can consume anything they want. Then we tell them that they have "political power" because we let them cast a meager vote once every four years. Meanwhile the rich and powerful stay where they are: ruling everybody.

Übergeek 바둑이: Their are no capitalist governments they have all become fascist sucking up to corporate money and creating poverty in what was once called the free world.

gogul: Henry Ford was one of the greatest robber barons of all. He paid his workers $5.00 a day when his cars finally started selling.

Übergeek 바둑이: What changes everything is that informations reach almost every corner of this world. The degree of exploitation explodes in regions where soils get destroyed, homes and home get taken and given lost for these people to go to the factory, estranged from their own countrylands. I mean, I know adresses of Nestlé, Syngenta, ABB and so on, USB or rich Egyptians btw. Our multis are classical xenophobes, "hostile to foreigners", literally. Maybe not demagogs, but hostile to foreigners. Absolutely.

Übergeek 바둑이: You forgot, "Just like a Guatemalan."

Follow news from the dark side at the wef in davos .. :-)^џ

gogul: http://john101b.ipage.com/politics/oie_25124156p3YkPOTL.jpg

Jack: No ox or moke stop capitalism on its ride !!


http://www.stuttmann.de

gogul: Their is no capitalism anywhere now it's all fascism. Corporate control of the world by pigs feeding at the troth.

Übergeek 바둑이: you summed it up in a nutshell. theres no "left" or "right" but corporate and money changers.

Jack: Yes... mostly very good and rightfully there. I did (when in place) disagree with the law that disallowed copying of bought content to preserve the original or to allow playing on another media, such as in the old days vinyl to tape for ya walkman.

The only thing that to a degree is stopping alot of people going legit is price even through just watching it via a purely digital medium.

Now, not so much as the industry has listened to Joe public, yet in the pre digital age it was strange that in the UK we paid £10 for the same item that cost in the USA $10 (at the time £5)

... or as (don't know now) that it was cheaper for a person who worked on cruise ships to buy an item in the USA, pay the import duty and get it converted to 240V.

Jack: Since the 80's and Raygun started getting 'religion' ingrained in the election process. Yes.

It seems now a battle of who's the better Christian and therefore negates the separation of state and church. That churches are now being used as pulpits for political parties using that old tool fear.

"I just wish Free Europe would stand up to American corporate war profiteering and stop supporting it."

I wish that fines and consequences of white collar crime were as tough as for those who commit speeding and based on the amount. But with the lobbying that goes on.... or not if our politicians are to be believed!!

Bernice: Particulary funny as that video was made pre party switch over. Ironically now Republicans should be substituted for Democrats.

And after hearing some polls and studies as reported by Bill Maher...

... How can people not know who the allies fought against in WWII?

Bwild: It's not that the rich are rich. It's the difference in the scales of pay that has widened over the last few decades.

That the CEO's now earn 260 times+ the wage of the average earner (in the USA) compared to in 1965 when it was 26 times, and that the Church support them because of the donations they make. Often, not as much as declared on tax returns.

(V): It seems now all I can do legally is buy copyright material for my own personal use and I am breaking some law if I decide to just give it away.
The laws being created today are targeted to give complete control of the public to corporations. When I pay for something shouldn't I have a right to use it as I will and not be dictated to as long as I don't use it in a harmful way?

Corporate personhood http://john101b.ipage.com/politics/citizensunited.html is a good example of what America has degenerated to. Our ruling bodies have become so deep in conflicts of interest and insider trading they are no longer able to function as a body that supports the public will or the public good.

You are right about Reagan and the harm he did but since Reagan all presidents regardless of party have continued on his path to destruction. Bush was placed in the white house by the supreme court instead of allowing the election process to be carried out and then we go worldwide claiming rogue governments are destroying democracy.

It was hard to believe people do not know about WWII and what created it but now it is easy as I watch my fellow citizens continue to cheer on their own destruction.

Not so long ago our schools taught civics as a mandatory subject but today civic classes are unheard of unless people study political science in college and then they are getting a healthy does of fake history.
The media has a lot to do with this takeover to. Since corporations bought up all the media outlets their is no more news just the version that pays the highest profits.
I find foreign news services more reliable than our own media outlets.

Jack: The new enforcement systems were stupid. They were already useless and would have made no difference to the problem. The only people in the end that would benefit would be the lawyers.

"Our ruling bodies have become so deep in conflicts of interest and insider trading they are no longer able to function as a body that supports the public will or the public good."

Last night on "Question time", I watched as the question of whether the UK government would block the bonus to be paid to the RBS boss (which the UK owns 5/6's of) at the shareholders meeting. His Salary is £1,200,000.... the bonus is £932,000. We were told no bouses would be paid till the bank was back in the 'black'. If the UK government lets him get the bonus, I can see more demonstrations and an increased possibility of social unrest.

... Last December our UK gov wrote off £25,000,000,000 known to have been lost in tax fraud...

"since Reagan all presidents regardless of party have continued on his path to destruction."

Because the US political system is a joke from too many politicians at all levels being quite happy to take bribes from lobbyists.

"It was hard to believe people do not know about WWII and what created it but now it is easy as I watch my fellow citizens continue to cheer on their own destruction."

With so much home ed based on people not wanting their children to learn certain aspects of why we got here and other matters of life. With certain liberties that allow neo Nazism (probably as many German immigrants actually supported the Nazi's in WWII) .... I ain't suprised, just a little shocked the figures were over 30%

"Not so long ago our schools taught civics as a mandatory subject but today civic classes are unheard of unless people study political science in college and then they are getting a healthy does of fake history."

Not as bad as when I was a kid, we did have one savvy teacher though who taught economics.... it was more of that in the books, some details were missing.. like the reason for the Cuban revolution was greedy American corporations turning Cuba into a virtual new 'slave' labour force.

"Since corporations bought up all the media outlets their is no more news just the version that pays the highest profits. I find foreign news services more reliable than our own media outlets."

The Guardian and Independent are recognised as being the only unbiased papers in the UK where real news is still accessible. The rest is basically right wing fear merchants. And thanks to digital and the internet we can finally question what we are told to fear.

.. Unless we are taught not to question and punishment for such was hellish

(V): Yes Cuba was a horrible case of the rich and shameless gone mad. It was the same with Iran. People are taught to hate these people and call them terrorists because they are tired of seeing their children starved and and murdered for no reason.

It was a sad day when the American public decided it could trust Hollywood actors to represent them and today all politicians seem to take acting lessons to win elections. Most of our politicians don't have enough eduction to even write a simple speech and only have to suck up to corporations to buy elections.

My own people just whine about things they don't like but keep supporting them.

Look at our TSA at airports. The harassment is nothing but sexual harassment and it is allowed to continue. People will not stop flying for a few weeks to stop this criminal all they do is take the abuse and keep running.

We don't even have a two party system any more it's the same fascism with business regardless who we elect. This endless neocon war profiteering has to stop and it would help if our allies would stop supporting it.

.... Perfect example ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXqLwiy2adU&feature=related


Who in the Republican party support base is for tax fraud by the rich and your representatives?

I have looked at the news and debates on these laws. It is funny that the American and other governments are so interested in stopping illegally copied and counterfeit goods (mostly music and movies). At the same time they will do nothing to stop truly destructive things.

It is illegal to copy a movie, but it is legal to make a mysogynistic pornographic film. Half of the Internet is full of pornography that objectifies and denigrates women, men and even children. I wonder if they will shut down or fine advertisers of those sites.

It is illegal to copy a video game, but it is legal to make a video game where people get blown up. I wonder if they will make it illegal to feed to children and youth graphic, interactive violence.

As usual, it is all about money. The only reason why they care about this law is to protect the revenues of billionaires. Here are the Hollywood and media billionaires. Not content with having made billions, they want to continue to make billions. I don't blame artists for wanting to protect their interests and money. If they pass SOPA and PIPA, will they also pass laws that ban violence and pornography in the Internet? After all, many of the users of the Internet are children and youth.

At this point the defenders of "free speech" will stand up on their soap box and say that pornography and violence are a necessary evil to protect free speech. I wonder if free speech is on the mind of the mysogynists that make pornography or the sociopaths that make violence a game. They will say it is up to the parents to stop children from watching pornography and violence. Should it be up to the parents to stop kids from copying movies and games?

Here is the ridiculous thing:
It is illegal to copy a movie of a woman being fisted or being penetrated by three men at the same time, but it is perfectly legal to make that movie.
It is illegal to copy a game where people get beheaded or blown up, but it is legal to make such a game.

(V): The entire republican party supports nothing but big business and communist union busting. It was the republican party that deregulated Wall Street and allowed outsourcing jobs.

Übergeek 바둑이: SOPA and PIPA are dead in America for now but I see Britain has just wrote up legislation that is just as bad.
I am sure our corporate interests will come up with legislation similar to SOPA and PIPA and just try to color it over. Your right about violence and pornography on the internet and even TV is being allowed to use disgusting language now.

Jack: It's EU legislation regarding intellectual property. It's not law yet and may never be. most attempts by the industry to directly interfere with internet have failed and found to be illegal.

(V): They should support copyright laws that cover all countries.

I can understand companies wanting to protect their creations but I don't believe taking over the internet is the way to support existing copyright laws.

Übergeek has some very good comments on this issue.

How about turning this board into a humoristic, real-life satire virtually political cabaret? Just a proposal.

I'll probably have horrible internet problems from march on.

(V): I don't trust one word that guy says. I wish you'd come up with a more reliable and less biased source.

Übergeek 바둑이: Not children, that level even though it does happen is illegal and one actual problem that gets the various law bodies around the world to work as a team.

The considerable problem with porn is the same as boxing. Drive it underground by making it illegal will just make things worse. At least now the 'actors' are protected and they have to have regular check ups for SDI's.

"As usual, it is all about money."

Mostly.

"will they also pass laws that ban violence and pornography in the Internet?"

Pointless to try. There are vast areas of the net that are impossible to regulate.

"It is illegal to copy a game where people get beheaded or blown up, but it is legal to make such a game."

But then isn't it upto the parents to make the young aware of the difference between fiction and reality? Most people are aware of this difference.

Artful Dodger: Regardless of who he is, you know he is right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJCfESavCn8&feature=relmfu

Ten years of fighting to close loopholes and no closure?

Why?

The UK government willing in the current situation to write off £25,000,000,000 in tax fraud?

Why?

We see the headlines all full of wage freezes, loss of support for those who need help in the community, benefit fraud costing the UK £1,000,000,000.

... but little on the £25,000,000,000.

Is that because the majority of the UK press is right wing owned, ie in bed with the businesses??

(V): No, I actually don't know he's right. And if he were, it would be all over the news that Newt broke the law. That guy is a radical left wing lying fact twisting moron. He's unreliable. And in this case, he's not presenting anything factual. No evidence, just his big blowhard mouth stumbling along. He's an idiot.

What I'm asking of you is to provide a reliable source that backs up this idiot's claims. If you can't do that, then it simply proves my case. You can find anything on the internet. And idiots on the left can make any claim they want but that doesn't make it true. Remember Rather-gate? Proof positive that the left will say whatever they can to attack someone on the right. But in this case, Rather lost his career over it and still has plenty of mud sticking to his ugly face.

Artful Dodger: It was in the news when he first did it...

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/01/25/Group-seeks-info-on-Gingrich-ethics-probe/UPI-56641327539926/

WASHINGTON, Jan. 25 (UPI) -- A government watchdog group Wednesday requested the release of all documents in the 1990s ethics investigation into U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.

Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, said all information should be made public so voters can decide for themselves if Gingrich was let off too lightly, The Hill reported. The group filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act.

In 1997 a House ethics panel's investigated allegations Gingrich improperly used a college course, funded by political donors, to promote political causes, potentially violating federal tax laws and House ethics rules. The House voted 395-28 to adopt the committee's report that recommended reprimanding Gingrich and imposing a $300,000 penalty.

....
....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/012297.htm
House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker

By John E. Yang
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 22 1997; Page A01

The House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to reprimand House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and order him to pay an unprecedented $300,000 penalty, the first time in the House's 208-year history it has disciplined a speaker for ethical wrongdoing.

The ethics case and its resolution leave Gingrich with little leeway for future personal controversies, House Republicans said. Exactly one month before yesterday's vote, Gingrich admitted that he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information.

"Newt has done some things that have embarrassed House Republicans and embarrassed the House," said Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.). "If [the voters] see more of that, they will question our judgment." .........

.....The 395 to 28 vote closes a tumultuous chapter that began Sept. 7, 1994, when former representative Ben Jones (D-Ga.), then running against Gingrich, filed an ethics complaint against the then-GOP whip. The complaint took on greater significance when the Republicans took control of the House for the first time in four decades, propelling Gingrich into the speaker's chair.

With so much at stake for each side -- the survival of the GOP's speaker and the Democrats' hopes of regaining control of the House -- partisanship strained the ethics process nearly to the breaking point.

All but two of the votes against the punishment were cast by Republicans, including Rep. Roscoe G. Bartlett (Md.), many of whom said they believed the sanction -- especially the financial penalty -- was too severe.

....
....

"Fifteen Years Ago Today, Newt Gingrich Became The First House Speaker In American History To Be Reprimanded By His Colleagues"

Today is the South Carolina GOP presidential primary and, as this Mitt Romney campaign reminds us, another special date, too:

Happy 15th Anniversary, Mr. Speaker
The House Voted “Overwhelmingly” to Reprimand Gingrich and Ordered Him to Pay a $300,000 Penalty After He Violated House Rules and Misled Ethics Investigators:

On January 21, 1997, Gingrich Became The Only Speaker In History To Be Formally Reprimanded By The House For “Ethical Wrongdoing.” “The House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to reprimand House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and order him to pay an unprecedented $300,000 penalty, the first time in the House's 208-year history it has disciplined a speaker for ethical wrongdoing. … Exactly one month before yesterday's vote, Gingrich admitted that he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information.” (“House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker,” The Washington Post, 1/22/97)

The House Voted 395-28 To Reprimand Speaker Gingrich – With Roughly Nine In Ten House Republicans Voting Against Gingrich. (H.Res. 31, Vote #8: Passed 395-28: R 196-26; D 198-2; I 1-0, 1/21/97)

And now the Newt has been caught again..
http://bungalowbillscw.blogspot.com/2012/01/gingrich-thinks-romneys-tax-returns-are.html

I guess tax fraud is not big press in the right wing press now, even though I find it reported everywhere but....

" “It appears that he is not paying his fair share of Medicare tax,’’ Robert E. McKenzie, a partner in the Chicago law firm of Arnstein & Lehr LLP concluded, in an email to Forbes, after reviewing Gingrich’s 2010 tax return. McKenzie, a past chairman of the Employment Tax Committee of the American Bar Association Tax Section and a member of the IRS’ Advisory Council, added: “There are a multitude of cases where the IRS has successfully challenged the improper tax strategy of this candidate and his accountants. Service businesses are only allowed to distribute a fair return on investment from an S corp. as profits exempt from Medicare taxes. The remainder of profits must be paid as salary subject to a 2.9% Medicare tax levy.”

As Forbes notes, the IRS has specific rules on how payments from a small business like Gingrich Holdings should be treated for tax purposes, and the amount Gingrich says he invested in his companies — between $500,000 and $1 million — is likely “far too little” to “justify booking $2.4 million as profit.” The ploy, however, is used widely. According to the Government Accountability Office, S corps. like Gingrich Holdings underpaid wages by $24 billion in 2003 and 2004, allowing owners to avoid payroll taxes.

Gingrich’s dodge of Medicare taxes, though, pales in comparison to the tax break he’d give himself should he get to the White House. His tax reform plan calls for a flat 15 percent tax rate, slashing his effective rate to 14.6 percent and giving himself a $540,000 tax break in the process."

http://www.nationofchange.org/gingrich-used-gimmick-avoid-paying-taxes-millions-income-1327424546

Artful Dodger: The bigots on the right took Gingrich out of the house under guard. Gingrich is a wing nut not a democrat they don't allow that caliber of scum in the party.

(V): are you talking 20 years ago?

(V): And we both know politics is mud slinging. which is why the Repubs can't seem to find a decent candidate to run against Obama. It's a nasty business. As for Newt, you're stating old news and apparently it's not enough to keep him from running for office. I'll bet there are more like Newt (like Pelosi) who fudge on their taxes (like Rangle did and so do many other dems). They write the laws but can't even keep track of them!

Either way, it's old news and that Turk is a Jerk and his blather won't work. And if you have something more current, with a reliable data source, then you've got something. But with the media mostly for the Left, where's the beef?

"The bigots on the right took Gingrich out of the house under guard. Gingrich is a wing nut not a democrat they don't allow that caliber of scum in the party."


Jack: I'm asking of you to provide a reliable source that backs up this idiot's claims.

Gingrich is a wing nut not a democrat they don't allow that caliber of scum in the party."

Jack: specify


*Edit" Two posts gone

Jack: "The bigots on the right took Gingrich out of the house under guard."

Explain. This sentence is incomplete, believe me, I understand english better as my writing.

"Gingrich is a wing nut not a democrat they don't allow that caliber of scum in the party."

specify, it would be interesting to hear more about.

Why so flushed?

gogul:

I agree. The sentence reads strange. I think a few words are missing.

From what I was reading, New Gingrich was speaker of the house during the Clinton administration. That had made him the most powerful Republican at the time. Then the ethics violations came into place in 1997 and almost the entire House of Representatives voted to fine him $300,000. He attempted to stay in his position as Speaker of the House but in the congressional elections of 1998 the Republicans did poorly and he was blamed (rightly so) with damaging the reputation of the Republican Party. He ended up resigning in 1999.

He left politics and went into the private sector. He remained politically active, wrote books, etc. I imagine that after 13-14 years he thought that people might have forgotten his ethics violations. However, his opponents were bound to bring that back. At this point I imagine that it is the Romney camp pushing the issue. For the Democrats the nomination of Newt Gingrich would have been better than Romney because reviving his past ethics violation would have been better right at crunch time one week before the vote.

Reading about Willard Mitt Romney, it seems to me that he is as conservative (and perhaps more so) than Newt Gingrich. Mitt Romney (like George W. Bush) seems to represent more the wealthy elite and inherited wealth.

At this point I am inclined to believe that Romney will win the nomination. I think he will attract more voters within the Republican caucuses. At this point the party will probably see him as the best chance to defeat the Democrats.

As for the Democrats, Romney seems to represent the more difficult opponent because he seems "cleaner" and better equipped to defeat Obama's charisma. However, ultimately Obama has the full support of the finance and banking sectors, and that will give him the edge to win. I am inclined to believe that Obama will be reelected just like Bill Clinton was, specially since the American economy is showing signs of improvement at this point.

Übergeek 바둑이:<b>Übergeek 바둑이</b>: You have it pretty much right. Romney is their best chance but it's a very slim chance. Romney supports nothing but the rich. Romney off shores millions to hide it from the tax man.

Romney and the rest of the republicans campaigning have one agenda. Destroy Social Security, Medicare, stop funding education, end all the safety nets created to keep people in their homes. The republicans support more free tax rides for the wealthy and huge subsidies to energy companies while the public drowns in poverty.

Romney may win the republican nomination but the majority of republican voters nationwide are religious hypocrites and Romney is a Mormon and that will keep many republicans home on election day.

The bankers support Obama because of the huge bailouts he continued with the Bush program and they know they can get more if they need them.

The republicans have been obstructionists since the 2010 tea party wins and have shown for two years their only agenda is to get rid of Obama at any cost including destroying the country.

The economy is really not getting better it just looks a little better for now because of temp jobs created for the holidays and those jobs are being taken away fast now and the next quarter will show a loss.

People are still losing their homes to crooked bankers and inflation is rising fast. Food here is getting very expensive and gasoline continue to rise in price due to Wall Street speculation. Jobs are still being outsourced to China. The government only uses people collecting unemployment figures with people collection compensation not people that have  used up their benefits and have no income and they do not use figures for the people that are under employed so the public has no real information to use when making decisions on the economy.

The American media is just a corporation now and does not give any real news they show whatever politician pays the most to say and show.

Artful Dodger: Not unless my maths is 5 years out

"And we both know politics is mud slinging. which is why the Repubs can't seem to find a decent candidate to run against Obama."

I thought that was a just a left wing attribute.

"As for Newt, you're stating old news and apparently it's not enough to keep him from running for office."

True, it doesn't. But it reminds me of an argument in the UK over directors who have businesses closed down for fraud, etc. They then go and open up elsewhere, just change their position. How certain disgraced UK politicians/advisers just fade for a while then turn up elsewhere in the world of government.

"it's old news and that Turk is a Jerk and his blather won't work"

Turk picks up on stuff just like everyone else does.

"And if you have something more current, with a reliable data source."

What like Murdoch run Fox, who's empire is now facing in the UK more scrutiny over the "The Sun" paper and it's bribing of police for information.

... But this is a matter that dates back over ten years!! Should it be ignored, counted as dated?? Or just noted that it has just been exposed, just like NOTW caught intercepting and then deleting the messages of a murdered girl... That caused Murdoch to close down the NOTW last year

... Something that they tried to bury under the rug due, as it exposes police corruption and politician a*** kissing of Rupert Murdoch's butt!!

(V): V, I don't know to much about British politics but I read one time that politicians were not allowed to take gifts from anyone because they were paid to be on the job not on the golf course. Is that true?

Jack: The rules are that UK politicians are not allowed to take gifts.... .... Yet we all know at some level it does happen. But if caught 'red handed' .. then you will be held accountable for your actions.

We know from recent news that political parties have made deals with the likes of Murdoch to get good press. N' we can extrapolate from certain cases (such as the building companies price fixing scandal) that public officials are somehow turning a big blind eye to blatant fraud.

So it happens... but not legally.

(V): Murdock is something else. His FOX Media is a joke here, if they don't have a real headline to support political corruption they just make one up.

Politicians here are not supposed to take gifts either but it's never prosecuted. Somehow we need to get our justice department to enforce the rule of law again.