Wednesday, June 27, 2012

For Pat, in clarification

Pat sent me a comment on my last entry that I thought deserved a full reply- not just for Pat, but so all are clear on what my thoughts are on the topic.

This one is political, folks.  If you don't want to read it, stop here.  Fair warning.  :)

My use of Shakespeare was a bit tongue in cheek, but only a bit.  For one, I love Shakespeare.  For two, I felt it appropriate to the message.  (I also like showing off my "Liberal Indoctrination Center" [as Santorum defines a "University"] education)  ;)

Let's define Person, and I'll even use right wing terminology to emphasize the hypocrisy.

A Person is defined as LIFE. LIFE begins, according to the GOP, 2 weeks before you have sex (Arizona law). Life means a beating heart. Brainwaves. Respiration optional. In other words- biological life.

 Please explain where, in a corporation, is the aorta? Ventricles? Medulla oblongatta? (Them thar big words are liberal intellectual terms for parts of the heart and brain, btw).   ;)

Answer: in a corporation, they don't exist. A corporation is an entity on paper as defined by Lawyers.


If corporations are people, so are Trusts, wills, anything notarized, parking tickets... you get the idea. So by tearing up a parking ticket, you commit murder.

 Ridiculous, right?

 Oh wait, BANKS are corporations. AUTO companies are corporations. Romney and the teaparty said "Let them die." So they're advocating murder by that definition, right?

And those corporations Bain Captial cut apart and sold off?  Organ harvesting!  Mass murder!

Of course, not all corporations are evil.  But the ones buying the GOP are.

How bad have we gotten?  Here in Pennsylvania, the GOP ADMITTED to putting in the Voter ID law specifically to elect Romney. 

It's like the Supervillian telling the Hero his nefarious plan, thinking that there's no way he could ever be stopped.  In fact, it's exactly like that.

Pat, I don't hate corporations.  I hate CORRUPTION.  I have a passion for justice.  And the chances of the 99% getting ANY justice are ZERO under Romney or any other of the paid-for GOP.

So.  There's my mind in full, as the Bard wrote. 



  2. The Bard often would resort to allegories to make a point. Your use of the "Hath not a Jew eyes" speach from "Merchant of Venice" as a means of equating anti-semitism to your hatred of the GOP and corporations that contribute to the GOP may be appropriate. Your anger and distaste for corporations and for the GOP seems real.

    Like Shylock felt the pain of antisemitism some of us who may not see socialism as pure and good do feel the hatred and pain directed at us for having different political views or for expressing our First Amendment rights.

    Our Founders opted to treat corporate entities as people. This position was confirmed by SCOTUS shortly after the War of 1812 and has been a position consistently adopted for the past 200 years.

    Your comments mirror current Democrat talking points. The party line has been to slam Romney for his "...corporations are people..." comments last year. Earlier this month Senate candidate and pseudo minority Native American, Elizabeth Warren derisively lectured Romney and declared "No, Mitt, corporations are not people...People have hearts, they have kids, they get jobs...they live and die."

    I am not looking to play semantics. Corporations are not human beings but Romney's comments were correct. This is true both for large and small corporations and for those that support Democrats as well as the GOP. Your comments and those of Ms. Warren are divisive and consistent with Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals".

    Does your passion for justice permit you to support Ms. Warren and the fraud she hid behind that she was entitled to affirmative action treatment as a minority based on her false claim that she was 1/32 Native American? Does your hatred of corruption extend to the Obama bundlers who set up Solyndra and caused the taxpayers to lose $500+ million?

    I agree that your comparisons of trusts, wills, notarized documents, parking tickets to corporations is ridiculous. Your claim that Romney and the teaparty said "Let them die" is also inane.

    The Obama administration took over GM and Chrysler. They gutted the companies and gave plums to their union supporters. They trashed the bond and stock holders. Public and private pension funds that were invested in these companies as well as individual investors took a hit so the unions could gain power. On a side note there were thousands of GM and Chrysler dealerships shut down in the auto company purge. Almost all of those dealerships that were put out of business were owned by Republicans. Often their sales areas were simply picked up by dealers that supported the Democrat party. The politics of the takeover of GM and Chrysler were hard to stomach but the philosophy of the day was to "not let a good crisis go to waste". The auto company purge caused lots of people to lose their jobs so that union control could be maintained and closed shop union political contributions to the Democrats could continue.

    Your accusations against Bain of "Organ Harvesting...Mass Murder" are likewise misplaced. Multiple businesses were saved or started by VC companies. Not all business ventures could be saved but the 'attack the rich' and demonize the VC crew approach to class warfare has been called out by many prominent Democrats (including the former governor of Pa. and the current mayor of Newark, NJ) as a counterproductive political ploy. I would like to think that you are smarter than to fall for all of their class warfare political talking points. I may be wrong.

    My point in writing these comments is that your writings, speech and beliefs, while they may be your deeply held beliefs, are hurtful. Being lumped in with the antisemitism of the middle ages or being included among organ harvesters, mass murderers, supervillians, the corrupt and the unjust does make me wonder "Hath not a Republican eyes".


    1. The funny part about this, Pat, is that NONE of what I wrote is a talking point. I came up with all the arguements (organ harvesting, etc) myself. Give me some credit! I think they're great analogies.

      As to the Founders, I have read most of their writings. While I am NOT a constitutional scholar like all the Fox news pundits (that's sarcasam, btw), I have NEVER seen anything that supports your assertion that THEY believed "corporations are people." In fact, i find Jefferson and Madison warning AGAINST corporate power. I will supply quotes and sources if you wish.

      As to Ms. Warren... WHO CARES???? Tempest in a teapot, that. Like spending $20 million in tax payer money because of a stain on a blue dress. Ridiculous. That said, The statement you quote from her is spot on.

      As to the other allegations (car dealerships), those are serious charges. Please provide evidence (you still have my email, right?)

      $500 million? How, exactly did Obama manage that? Whil throwing around numbers, the GOP's desire to NOT provide oversight to Wall Street has cost $9 BILLION to date.... FROM ONE COMPANY! (Not counting the others that Bush bailed out.)

      As to Class Warfare (and this is something I saw on FB that I agree with) "It's only class warfare if you're rich." For the rest of us, the 99%, it's trying to get our Country back from the greed, graft and bribes OF the rich.

      AND (I saved the best for last) Please refer me to any of my writings, ANYWHERE, where I write/say we should be a socialist country. THAT is a REPUBLICAN propaganda talking point spewed by people who don't know the definition of the term. our system has flaws, the greatest of which is that now corporations and the rich can openly and legally buy elected officials, but it's still the best out there.

      PS: The "republican eyes" part- give me a break. The GOP noise machine makes Goebells proud. And that machine has the Dems cowering and liberals afraid to say "I'm Liberal." And they do it by saying "boo hoo I'm being repressed." Oh puh-leeze.

      On second thought- a TRUE MODERATE republican could make that statement. Shame there arent any of those in office anymore.

  3. Oh, and reality Check, i <3 Abbott and Costello! :)

  4. Sophie,
    You are on target in pegging me as a fan of Jefferson and Madison. Both were concerned with the potential for government to grow too big and have too much power. I have seen several of their quotes expressing concern about the power of banks and they consistently warned against too much governmental or bank generated interference in our monetary policy or in our commerce. I believe Jefferson quipped along the lines that 'banking institutions were more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies'.

    I cited Ms. Warren because your comment about corporations closely tracked her 'stump' speech that "...corporations are not people...". I can do the research but I believe it was a case in 1818-19 where the Supreme Court confirmed the principal that under the law corporations have standing to sue and be sued as persons. Romney was correct, legally, but he did give the Democrats a means of expanding their class warefare attack by confusing semantics. He did not say corporations were 'human beings'. I surmise that Warren knows better as a Harvard Law Prof. but is choosing the cheap shot to pander to her base.

    Nevertheless, I do accept your assertion that the comments you make about corporations and the GOP are yours and not party talking points. That is why I chose to comment in the first place. While I found your words to be hurtful, I respect your right to your beleifs and your speech.

    "As to Ms. Warren...WHO CARES???". I would like to think that anyone who cares for truth and justice would care. I would think anyone who opposes fraud and corruption would care.

    Imagine if a GOP candidate lied about being part Native American.
    Imagine if the GOP candidate had used that lie to list herself as a minority at Harvard, qualifying her for special treatment and priviledges.
    Imagine if after living the lie for many many years and reaping the benefits of affirmative action that were meant to aid truly disadvantaged minorities, the only proof the candidate could offer was her 'high cheekbones'.
    Imagine that if to achieve maximum political correctness she allowed herself to be described as a "woman of color" in the Harvard Law Journal.

    Because Ms. Warren is a very left wing liberal she has been given a pass by the media and enjoys the full support of the President. Please excuse me if I do not agree that this is a mere "Tempest in a Teapot". I would think that if a GOP candidate referred to her 'high cheekbones' as proof of ancestry it would be seen as being as much of a racial slur as if you were to claim black heritage because you have a wide nose or somewhat nappy hair. I doubt that a GOP candidate would still be running for Senator.

    More in another comment.

    PS: BTW I do admire your photos. You have good makeup skills and do a good job of creating the image of 'high cheekbones'. I am jealous.

  5. Sophie,
    This continues my last comment as I was running out of space.

    We also agree that it was a waste of taxpayer money to chase the stain on Monica's blue dress. I really never cared if WJC was getting a BJ from an intern. I did not like the Hillary talking points that there was no truth to the Lewinsky allegations and claiming that it was all part of a "vast right wing conspiracy". I believe that Hillary was too smart to not know that she was blowing smoke. She was covering up for Bill and she thought that the two of them could get away with the lies and ride out the storm. They were correct. That they are currently two of the most esteemed and highly regarded Democrats in the country does not fully excuse the lies that they told. Do you believe that we were entitled to honesty from the Clinton's?

    Regarding the closing of car dealerships I would refer you to the 5/26/09 article in the Washington Examiner, "Furor grows over partisan car dealership closings". Both Chrysler and GM complained that they did not want to close the dealerships and that they did not select the dealerships to close but were told by the White House and Obama's Car Czar which dealerships to shut down. They closed the dealerships of Republican congressmen. They closed dealerships that were in competition to dealerships owned by Democrats such as Clinton's former chief of staff. Mike McCarty was part of a large chain of dealerships known as RLJ-McCarty-Landers. The 'J' is for Robert Johnson the founder of BET and a major corporate Democrat donor. Do you smell corporate donor corruption?

    Perhaps it is a coincidence that Rattner, the Car Czar who created the list of which dealerships to close is married to Maureen White a former DNC finance chairman. Even as early as May 2009 it was known that 88% of the dealerships that were closed were owned by Republicans. Those closures cost human beings over 100,000 jobs. Car salesmen and mechanics, order takers and secretaries, car cleaners and gofers...not just dealership owners. That is a lot of people suffering so the Obama Car Czar can hurt Republican donors.

    The speed with which the Car Czar shuttered dealerships for partisan reasons was noted in the Barofsky report. He was an Obama Administration special inspector general for TARP. A year after the closings he found that there was no economic benefit to the closing of the car dealerships. He confirmed the large scale loss of jobs under the edict of the Car Czars, first Rattner then Ron Bloom.

    On June 22, 2010 The American Thinker headline read "Race Played Role in Obama Car Dealer Closures". The Barosky report found "Dealerships were retained because they were...minority or woman owned dealerships." The jobs of thousands of people were lost simply because they did not work for a woman or minority owned dealership. Families with children suffered for the sake of Democrat fundraising politics.

    The Barofsky report GMs position that closing a dealership would save GM "not one damm cent". Ron Bloom, the second Car Czar confirmed to Barofsky investigation that a reason for the dealership closings was to keep in line with the Obama goal of "Shared sacrifice".

    The Barofsky report specifically found that "A disproportionate number of Obama-forced closings were of rural dealerships in areas unfriendly to Obama."

    More to follow.



  6. Sophie,
    This should be my last installment in answering your questions. There is limited room for a comment response.

    Even the Automotove post picked up on the partisan nature of the selection of dealerships to close. On 5/26/2009 "The Truth About Cars" ran an article "Did Chrysler Kill 'Republican' Dealers, or what?" Look also at "Anti-Obama Campaign Contributions dictate which Chrysler dealers were shuttered" in the Free Republic. By May 2009 Chrysler had produced a list of its dealership closings...GM had not.

    The analysis showed that in case after case of closed dealerships there was a record of campaign contributions that only went to Republicans. The survey found that the closed dealerships were ones that did not contribute to Obama.

    Finally I would refer you to an article in "Ethics Matters" by Prof John Copeland. Prof. Copeland found that "From the beginning politics played a large role in Rattner's decisions". Rattner, a Democratic fund raiser and operative, used TARP to take control of Chrysler and give 55% of the company to the UAW. In 2008 the union donated over $13 million...99% to Democrats.

    On the other hand of 789 dealerships closed early in the proceedings 788 gave money only to Republicans. The one that did give money to Democrats gave mostly to Hillary and Edwards.

    Prof. Copeland, in his analysis of the Barofsky findings, confirmed that the dealership closings of over 2000 dealerships did not save money but did cost over 100,000 jobs. The selection of which dealerships to close were done by the administration, not the car companies. The selection of the dealerships to close were based on bias and politics.

    Prof. Copeland, in looking at the ethics of the situation rather than the politics concluded that this was a wrong that "shows what can happen when and administration takes control of an industry. POLITICAL PATRONAGE AND BIAS TAINT BUSINESS DECISIONS IN FAVOR OF A PRIVILEDGED FEW" (his caps).

    TARP provided $62 Billion to Chrysler and GM. Over 100,000 people, mostly in rural areas that did not vote in favor of Obama, lost their jobs. These are not mere 'rounding errors'. This is real money and real people who were hurt. I have not even mentioned the destruction of vast wealth held by individuals, pension plans and others in GM and Chrysler bonds that were scrubbed by the Car Czar.

    The White House merely shelved the Barofsky report and claimed that it was a coincidence since most dealerships are owned by Republicans. This is consistent with their class warfare approach to politics.

    That should give you enough about the politics of the car company bailout.

    My reference to 'Republican Eyes' was to link back to "Hath not a Jew Eyes". Again you have a right to your thoughts and your speech. I am merely suggesting that to equate someone who supports the GOP or GOProud or the Log Cabin Republicans with the Nazi, Goebells could be hateful and hurtful.