Discussion:
Increased US Domestic Oil Drilling will not lower prices: The Market is an Oligopoly!!!!
(too old to reply)
Thomas Jigme Wheat
2011-06-19 21:32:29 UTC
Permalink
On Jun 19, 10:26 am, Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking
What you dont seem to realize is that your total demonization of
government, i.e., the liberal Keynesian Welfare State invites only one
This kind of line of argument is we're in five wars, have bases in
just about every country, are 14 trillion plus dollars of debt, all
our entitlements are broke, have a giant prison population, etc.
Correction we are in 2 wars and one police action in Libya. According
to the Quadrennial Defense Review, all combat operations in Iraq will
cease at the end of this year..

Your isolationist stance regarding the preeminent role of the USA in
world affairs if immplemented would take us back to the isolationist
Republican Congressional movement of the 1930's, which allowed for the
destabilizing rise of the NAZI's that thrust the world into Global
War. Republican Senator, John Mccain on ABC's This Week, with
Christiane Amanpour, invoked this same analogy, lambasting Freshman
Republican's in the House for advocating this kind of argument.

Regarding US military bases abroad, the geopolitical implications of
the US withdrawing from E. Asia or the Middle East would be
disasterous to our National Security. Regarding troops in Europe, I
think we could afford to shutter some bases there, and let the
Europeans take the lead in managing their regional security. However,
the US cannot afford to withdraw the nuclear umbrella from Europe,
given the large numbers of tactical nuclear weapons the Russians have
deployed near the borders of Europe. The US cannot afford to withdraw
from NATO, however, increased NATO membership, and making European
allies shoulder more of the costs for their collective security is
what we need to do.

Regarding the National Debt, it should be noted that the majority of
the debt was created by Republican Presidents. The last republican
that ran a balanced budget was Dwight D. Eisenhower, and he did so
with the highest rates of the Marginal Income Tax on the rich in the
history of USA. The majority of a national debt was created by Reagan,
GHWB, and George W. Bush (5 trillion). Bill Clinton was the last
Democrat that had a Balanced Budget, and a surplus of approximately
140 billion that was used to pay down the national debt. Unfortunately
for Obama, he is stuck with the deficit raising Bush Tax Cuts
extension till the end of this year.

I didn't agree with this decision, but You cant blame Obama, the
Legislature votes in tax increases/decreases, and handles
appropiations, and usually this requires a super majority. While the
Bush tax cuts were being debated in december of 2010, Obama was
attempting to get the 66 vote threshold for the New START treaty with
Russia, since we no longer had nuclear weapons inspectors in Russia.
The treaty called for the reduction/decomissioning of 1500 strategic
deployed nuclear weapons, from each country's nuclear arsenals, and
limited Mobile ICBM launchers and the number of nuclear bombers to
about 700 each. If we had not passed the New START treaty, with
Russia, it would have opened up the possibility of nuclear Armageddon,
given that the nuclear black market in the former Republics of the
old Soviet Union are rather porous, and littered with ex oppurtunistic
KGB appartchiks willing to sell Cold War Russian military hardware to
the highest bidder. With the treaty we now have inspection and
verification on both sides, which begins the process of ridding the
earth of the scourge of Nuclear weapons.

Regarding Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid), The
funds are in trouble because the economy tanked under Bush, and we are
still stuck with his tax cuts, and so tax revenues to the treasury
department are down dramatically.

You cant balance the Budget, by further decreasing Tax Revenues. Both
Eisenhower and Clinton knew this.

While the republicans claim to have a Job Creation agenda, the only
state that had the highest job increases, was Governor Rick Perry's
Texas, but the majority of those jobs his administration added were
low paying jobs. Texas is attractive to big Business because of the
antiregulatory environment in the state legislature, which incidentlly
is where all of the major US Chemical Companies are located, so its
not suprising that Govenor Perry denies the fact that Global Warming
is occuring, and Texas has one of the lowest standards of water and
air quality in the nation. Governor Perry has openly called for
secession from the Union, which means he has a long term racist agenda
of restoring the Confederacy.

Also the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, both Bush started,
have further drained the treasury, since defense spending is at the
highest level percentage of GDP since World War II, at roughly 750
billion dollars. While I agree that this budget should be cut, I dont
think it would be wise to immediately withdraw from Afghanistan or
Libya.

Currently the US is engaged with back channel peace negotiations with
the Taliban, and the Karzai government in Kabul. To withdraw
immediately from Afghanistan would severely damage ours or Karzai's
leveraging power in these negotiations. Regarding Libya and Qaddafi,
he has already attacked us twice, i.e., the bombing of Pan Am 103 that
killed 90 americans, and the bombing of a Berlin Disco frequented by
US military personell. Qaddafi also was in the process of developing a
nuclear uranium enrichment program with the help of A. Q. Khan, the
father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. While Qaddafi did
dismantle this pprogram, he now has every incentive to attack and
state sponsor terrorist activities against the West, if NATO allows
him to remain in power.

Also the cost of the Libyan operation is about 1 billion dollars a
month, 10 percent of what we are spending on military operations in
Afghanistan. In reality the US only has a support role in this
operation, the British, French and Italians have taken the lead role
in the NATO operation.
Note: I don't demonize the government. There are clear things it
should be doing(protect individuals
from force and fraud).
Then why would be opposed to the Dodd-Frank Bill, that attempts to
regulate rampant destablising Financial Speculation on Wall Street,
and sets up the Consumer Protection Bureau, that provides free
education and financial advice to consumers.
so that
future ideologues could argue for bullshit "adult conversations" about
entitlements, when in fact they plan to raid the trustfunds.
A good reason why the government should never have been involved in it
in the first place.
I argue for free market, free will and the right to allow people to
make their own choices and you argue for a giant all controlling, all
powerful government(worst kind of monopoly) that steals from the free
market and taxpayers..
If you are not rich there is no free will in the market place.. It is
an Oligapoly!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly
.And if they have the nerve to say "no" then
they're thrown in jail(or in some cases murdered by FBI agents raiding
their home).
I didnt agree with what happened at Ruby Ridge or Waco. Janet Reno was
a cunt. but you have to remember agencies are not politically
monolithic in nature. Also You would have to say that Bush himself
used a phony mandate launced by his contrived War on Terror, to allow
the NSA to spy on americans as late as 2005, so he could insure
himself reelection. Also his USA patriot Act, section 802 allowed for
warrantless wiretapping of Anarchists and Environmentalists, and
jailing protestors under national security grounds,

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-domestic-terrorism

while at the same time the reactionary White nationalist movement
recieved little federal attention, despite their role in the second
worst terrorist attack in American History, the Oklahoma City Bombing.
In your view we should never had the Social Security program, or
Medicare
No, I argue that a person should have a choice and should get to
choose where their money goes. If they choose to invest in such
things, then so be it. (Why do you hate free choice and free will?)
Only a sucker or someone who is rich and already is a trust funder
would make that argument. Its the same argument that these corporate
types make about "Right to Work," intiatives trying to trick the
common man into thinking he would have a better deal if he didnt have
to pay union dues. When in fact, union wages in the private sector pay
better,there's guranteed health benefits, and the workers are more
productive as a whole. Regarding your response to the "free choice" of
paying into social security or Medicare, you are in fact, perhaps
unkowingly aping, Dick Armey's Freedom Works, bullshit line, that
workers should have the choice whether to pay into social security.
The fact is if the tax were voluntary we would no longer have social
security or medicare, and life expectancy in the United States would
decline dramatically. For the over 50 percent of americans who will be
dependant on Social Security Medicare, etc., when they retire, this
tempoary illusion of "free choice" becomes the imposition of
tyrannical third world style dominion, with the defunding and or
abolishment of the program, which is Dick Armey's long term plan. So
what you argue for is temporary free choice, and then the determinist
chains of poverty follow suit.
thomaswheat1975

latest discussion archived here:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread/thread/96b8c6e0efc0315d/ab508cf7700f48ed?lnk=raot#ab508cf7700f48ed
On Jun 19, 10:26 am, Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking
What you dont seem to realize is that your total demonization of
government, i.e., the liberal Keynesian Welfare State invites only one
This kind of line of argument is we're in five wars, have bases in
just about every country, are 14 trillion plus dollars of debt, all
our entitlements are broke, have a giant prison population, etc.
Correction we are in 2 wars and one police action in Libya. According
to the Quadrennial Defense Review, all combat operations in Iraq will
cease at the end of this year..
Your isolationist stance regarding the preeminent role of the USA in
world affairs if immplemented would take us back to the isolationist
Republican Congressional movement of the 1930's, which allowed for the
destabilizing rise of the NAZI's that thrust the world into Global
War. Republican Senator, John Mccain on ABC's This Week, with
Christiane Amanpour, invoked this same analogy, lambasting Freshman
Republican's in the House for advocating this kind of argument.
Regarding US military bases abroad, the geopolitical implications of
the US withdrawing from E. Asia or the Middle East would be
disasterous to our National Security. Regarding troops in Europe, I
think we could afford to shutter some bases there, and let the
Europeans take the lead in managing their regional security. However,
the US cannot afford to withdraw the nuclear umbrella from Europe,
given the large numbers of tactical nuclear weapons the Russians have
deployed near the borders of Europe. The US cannot afford to withdraw
from NATO, however, increased NATO membership, and making European
allies shoulder more of the costs for their collective security is
what we need to do.
Regarding the National Debt, it should be noted that the majority of
the debt was created by Republican Presidents. The last republican
that ran a balanced budget was Dwight D. Eisenhower, and he did so
with the highest rates of the Marginal Income Tax on the rich in the
history of USA. The majority of a national debt was created by Reagan,
GHWB, and George W. Bush (5 trillion). Bill Clinton was the last
Democrat that had a Balanced Budget, and a surplus of approximately
140 billion that was used to pay down the national debt. Unfortunately
for Obama, he is stuck with the deficit raising Bush Tax Cuts
extension till the end of this year.
 I didn't agree with this decision, but You cant blame Obama, the
Legislature votes in tax increases/decreases, and handles
appropiations, and usually this requires a super majority. While the
Bush tax cuts were being debated in december of 2010, Obama was
attempting to get the 66 vote threshold for the New START treaty with
Russia, since we no longer had nuclear weapons inspectors in Russia.
The treaty called for the reduction/decomissioning of 1500 strategic
deployed nuclear weapons, from each country's nuclear arsenals, and
limited Mobile ICBM launchers and the number of nuclear bombers to
about 700 each. If we had not passed the New START treaty, with
Russia, it would have opened up the possibility of nuclear Armageddon,
given that the nuclear black market in the former  Republics of the
old Soviet Union are rather porous, and littered with ex oppurtunistic
KGB appartchiks willing to sell Cold War Russian military hardware to
the highest bidder. With the treaty we now have inspection and
verification on both sides, which begins the process of ridding the
earth of the scourge of Nuclear weapons.
Regarding Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid), The
funds are in trouble because the economy tanked under Bush, and we are
still stuck with his tax cuts, and so tax revenues to the treasury
department are down dramatically.
You cant balance the Budget, by further decreasing Tax Revenues. Both
Eisenhower and Clinton knew this.
While the republicans claim to have a Job Creation agenda, the only
state that had the highest job increases, was Governor Rick Perry's
Texas, but the majority of those jobs his administration added were
low paying jobs. Texas is attractive to big Business because of the
antiregulatory environment in the state legislature, which incidentlly
is where all of the major US Chemical Companies are located, so its
not suprising that Govenor Perry denies the fact that Global Warming
is occuring, and Texas has one of the lowest standards of water and
air quality in the nation. Governor Perry has openly called for
secession from the Union, which means he has a long term racist agenda
of restoring the Confederacy.
 Also the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, both Bush started,
have further drained the treasury, since defense spending is at the
highest level percentage of GDP since World War II, at roughly 750
billion dollars. While I agree that this budget should be cut, I dont
think it would be wise to immediately withdraw from Afghanistan or
Libya.
 Currently the US is engaged with back channel peace negotiations with
the Taliban, and the Karzai government in Kabul. To withdraw
immediately from Afghanistan would severely damage ours or Karzai's
leveraging power in these negotiations. Regarding Libya and Qaddafi,
he has already attacked us twice, i.e., the bombing of Pan Am 103 that
killed 90 americans, and the bombing of a Berlin Disco frequented by
US military personell. Qaddafi also was in the process of developing a
nuclear uranium enrichment program with the help of A. Q. Khan, the
father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. While Qaddafi did
dismantle this pprogram, he now has every incentive to attack and
state sponsor terrorist  activities against the West, if NATO allows
him to remain in power.
Also the cost of the Libyan operation is about 1 billion dollars a
month, 10 percent of what we are spending on military operations in
Afghanistan. In reality the US only has a support role in this
operation, the British, French and Italians have taken the lead role
in the NATO operation.
Note: I don't demonize the government. There are clear things it
should be doing(protect individuals
from force and fraud).
Then why would be opposed to the Dodd-Frank Bill, that attempts to
regulate rampant destablising  Financial Speculation on Wall Street,
and sets up the Consumer Protection Bureau, that provides free
education and financial advice to consumers.
so that
future ideologues could argue for bullshit "adult conversations" about
entitlements, when in fact they plan to raid the trustfunds.
A good reason why the government should never have been involved in it
in the first place.
I argue for free market, free will and the right to allow people to
make their own choices and you argue for a giant all controlling, all
powerful government(worst kind of monopoly) that steals from the free
market and taxpayers..
If you are not rich there is no free will in the market place.. It is
an Oligapoly!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly
.And if they have the nerve to say "no" then
they're thrown in jail(or in some cases murdered by FBI agents raiding
their home).
I didnt agree with what happened at Ruby Ridge or Waco. Janet Reno was
a cunt. but you have to remember agencies are not politically
monolithic in nature.  Also You would have to say that Bush himself
used a phony mandate launced by his contrived War on Terror, to allow
the NSA to spy on americans as late as 2005, so he could insure
himself reelection. Also his USA patriot Act, section 802 allowed for
warrantless wiretapping of Anarchists and Environmentalists, and
jailing protestors under national security grounds,
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-d...
while at the same time the reactionary White nationalist movement
recieved little federal attention, despite their role in the second
worst terrorist attack in American History, the Oklahoma City Bombing.
In your view we should never had the Social Security program, or
Medicare
No, I argue that a person should have a choice and should get to
choose where their money goes. If they choose to invest in such
things, then so be it. (Why do you hate free choice and free will?)
Only a sucker or someone who is rich and already is a trust funder
would make that argument. Its the same argument that these corporate
types make about "Right to Work," intiatives trying to trick the
common man into thinking he would have a better deal if he didnt have
to pay union dues. When in fact, union wages in the private sector pay
better,there's guranteed health benefits, and the workers are more
productive as a whole. Regarding your response to the "free choice" of
paying into social security or Medicare, you are in fact, perhaps
unkowingly aping, Dick Armey's Freedom Works, bullshit line, that
workers should have the choice whether to pay into social security.
The fact is if the tax were voluntary we would no longer have social
security or medicare, and life expectancy in the United States would
decline dramatically. For the over 50 percent of americans who will be
dependant on Social Security Medicare, etc., when they retire, this
tempoary illusion of "free choice" becomes the imposition of
tyrannical third world style dominion, with the defunding and or
abolishment of the program, which is Dick Armey's long term plan. So
what you argue for is temporary free choice, and then the determinist
chains of poverty follow suit.
thomaswheat1975
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...
Tom Jigme Wheat
2011-06-20 03:53:30 UTC
Permalink
Discussion regarding the The DOD's acceptance of Climate Change poses
a national security threat, and its plans to transition to alternative
fuel sources. Includes excerpts and link to the 2011 Quadrennial
Defense Review. Focus, on cyber security, climate change and
identifying redundancies in the private contractor DOD-supply chain,
and strengthening export controls.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread/thread/51744d8ad89b80df/9abe668f877a5a9c?lnk=raot#9abe668f877a5a9c
Post by Thomas Jigme Wheat
On Jun 19, 10:26 am, Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking
What you dont seem to realize is that your total demonization of
government, i.e., the liberal Keynesian Welfare State invites only one
This kind of line of argument is we're in five wars, have bases in
just about every country, are 14 trillion plus dollars of debt, all
our entitlements are broke, have a giant prison population, etc.
Correction we are in 2 wars and one police action in Libya. According
to the Quadrennial Defense Review, all combat operations in Iraq will
cease at the end of this year..
Your isolationist stance regarding the preeminent role of the USA in
world affairs if immplemented would take us back to the isolationist
Republican Congressional movement of the 1930's, which allowed for the
destabilizing rise of the NAZI's that thrust the world into Global
War. Republican Senator, John Mccain on ABC's This Week, with
Christiane Amanpour, invoked this same analogy, lambasting Freshman
Republican's in the House for advocating this kind of argument.
Regarding US military bases abroad, the geopolitical implications of
the US withdrawing from E. Asia or the Middle East would be
disasterous to our National Security. Regarding troops in Europe, I
think we could afford to shutter some bases there, and let the
Europeans take the lead in managing their regional security. However,
the US cannot afford to withdraw the nuclear umbrella from Europe,
given the large numbers of tactical nuclear weapons the Russians have
deployed near the borders of Europe. The US cannot afford to withdraw
from NATO, however, increased NATO membership, and making European
allies shoulder more of the costs for their collective security is
what we need to do.
Regarding the National Debt, it should be noted that the majority of
the debt was created by Republican Presidents. The last republican
that ran a balanced budget was Dwight D. Eisenhower, and he did so
with the highest rates of the Marginal Income Tax on the rich in the
history of USA. The majority of a national debt was created by Reagan,
GHWB, and George W. Bush (5 trillion). Bill Clinton was the last
Democrat that had a Balanced Budget, and a surplus of approximately
140 billion that was used to pay down the national debt. Unfortunately
for Obama, he is stuck with the deficit raising Bush Tax Cuts
extension till the end of this year.
 I didn't agree with this decision, but You cant blame Obama, the
Legislature votes in tax increases/decreases, and handles
appropiations, and usually this requires a super majority. While the
Bush tax cuts were being debated in december of 2010, Obama was
attempting to get the 66 vote threshold for the New START treaty with
Russia, since we no longer had nuclear weapons inspectors in Russia.
The treaty called for the reduction/decomissioning of 1500 strategic
deployed nuclear weapons, from each country's nuclear arsenals, and
limited Mobile ICBM launchers and the number of nuclear bombers to
about 700 each. If we had not passed the New START treaty, with
Russia, it would have opened up the possibility of nuclear Armageddon,
given that the nuclear black market in the former  Republics of the
old Soviet Union are rather porous, and littered with ex oppurtunistic
KGB appartchiks willing to sell Cold War Russian military hardware to
the highest bidder. With the treaty we now have inspection and
verification on both sides, which begins the process of ridding the
earth of the scourge of Nuclear weapons.
Regarding Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid), The
funds are in trouble because the economy tanked under Bush, and we are
still stuck with his tax cuts, and so tax revenues to the treasury
department are down dramatically.
You cant balance the Budget, by further decreasing Tax Revenues. Both
Eisenhower and Clinton knew this.
While the republicans claim to have a Job Creation agenda, the only
state that had the highest job increases, was Governor Rick Perry's
Texas, but the majority of those jobs his administration added were
low paying jobs. Texas is attractive to big Business because of the
antiregulatory environment in the state legislature, which incidentlly
is where all of the major US Chemical Companies are located, so its
not suprising that Govenor Perry denies the fact that Global Warming
is occuring, and Texas has one of the lowest standards of water and
air quality in the nation. Governor Perry has openly called for
secession from the Union, which means he has a long term racist agenda
of restoring the Confederacy.
 Also the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, both Bush started,
have further drained the treasury, since defense spending is at the
highest level percentage of GDP since World War II, at roughly 750
billion dollars. While I agree that this budget should be cut, I dont
think it would be wise to immediately withdraw from Afghanistan or
Libya.
 Currently the US is engaged with back channel peace negotiations with
the Taliban, and the Karzai government in Kabul. To withdraw
immediately from Afghanistan would severely damage ours or Karzai's
leveraging power in these negotiations. Regarding Libya and Qaddafi,
he has already attacked us twice, i.e., the bombing of Pan Am 103 that
killed 90 americans, and the bombing of a Berlin Disco frequented by
US military personell. Qaddafi also was in the process of developing a
nuclear uranium enrichment program with the help of A. Q. Khan, the
father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. While Qaddafi did
dismantle this pprogram, he now has every incentive to attack and
state sponsor terrorist  activities against the West, if NATO allows
him to remain in power.
Also the cost of the Libyan operation is about 1 billion dollars a
month, 10 percent of what we are spending on military operations in
Afghanistan. In reality the US only has a support role in this
operation, the British, French and Italians have taken the lead role
in the NATO operation.
Note: I don't demonize the government. There are clear things it
should be doing(protect individuals
from force and fraud).
Then why would be opposed to the Dodd-Frank Bill, that attempts to
regulate rampant destablising  Financial Speculation on Wall Street,
and sets up the Consumer Protection Bureau, that provides free
education and financial advice to consumers.
so that
future ideologues could argue for bullshit "adult conversations" about
entitlements, when in fact they plan to raid the trustfunds.
A good reason why the government should never have been involved in it
in the first place.
I argue for free market, free will and the right to allow people to
make their own choices and you argue for a giant all controlling, all
powerful government(worst kind of monopoly) that steals from the free
market and taxpayers..
If you are not rich there is no free will in the market place.. It is
an Oligapoly!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly
.And if they have the nerve to say "no" then
they're thrown in jail(or in some cases murdered by FBI agents raiding
their home).
I didnt agree with what happened at Ruby Ridge or Waco. Janet Reno was
a cunt. but you have to remember agencies are not politically
monolithic in nature.  Also You would have to say that Bush himself
used a phony mandate launced by his contrived War on Terror, to allow
the NSA to spy on americans as late as 2005, so he could insure
himself reelection. Also his USA patriot Act, section 802 allowed for
warrantless wiretapping of Anarchists and Environmentalists, and
jailing protestors under national security grounds,
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-d...
while at the same time the reactionary White nationalist movement
recieved little federal attention, despite their role in the second
worst terrorist attack in American History, the Oklahoma City Bombing.
In your view we should never had the Social Security program, or
Medicare
No, I argue that a person should have a choice and should get to
choose where their money goes. If they choose to invest in such
things, then so be it. (Why do you hate free choice and free will?)
Only a sucker or someone who is rich and already is a trust funder
would make that argument. Its the same argument that these corporate
types make about "Right to Work," intiatives trying to trick the
common man into thinking he would have a better deal if he didnt have
to pay union dues. When in fact, union wages in the private sector pay
better,there's guranteed health benefits, and the workers are more
productive as a whole. Regarding your response to the "free choice" of
paying into social security or Medicare, you are in fact, perhaps
unkowingly aping, Dick Armey's Freedom Works, bullshit line, that
workers should have the choice whether to pay into social security.
The fact is if the tax were voluntary we would no longer have social
security or medicare, and life expectancy in the United States would
decline dramatically. For the over 50 percent of americans who will be
dependant on Social Security Medicare, etc., when they retire, this
tempoary illusion of "free choice" becomes the imposition of
tyrannical third world style dominion, with the defunding and or
abolishment of the program, which is Dick Armey's long term plan. So
what you argue for is temporary free choice, and then the determinist
chains of poverty follow suit.
thomaswheat1975
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...
On Jun 19, 10:26 am, Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking
What you dont seem to realize is that your total demonization of
government, i.e., the liberal Keynesian Welfare State invites only one
This kind of line of argument is we're in five wars, have bases in
just about every country, are 14 trillion plus dollars of debt, all
our entitlements are broke, have a giant prison population, etc.
Correction we are in 2 wars and one police action in Libya. According
to the Quadrennial Defense Review, all combat operations in Iraq will
cease at the end of this year..
Your isolationist stance regarding the preeminent role of the USA in
world affairs if immplemented would take us back to the isolationist
Republican Congressional movement of the 1930's, which allowed for the
destabilizing rise of the NAZI's that thrust the world into Global
War. Republican Senator, John Mccain on ABC's This Week, with
Christiane Amanpour, invoked this same analogy, lambasting Freshman
Republican's in the House for advocating this kind of argument.
Regarding US military bases abroad, the geopolitical implications of
the US withdrawing from E. Asia or the Middle East would be
disasterous to our National Security. Regarding troops in Europe, I
think we could afford to shutter some bases there, and let the
Europeans take the lead in managing their regional security. However,
the US cannot afford to withdraw the nuclear umbrella from Europe,
given the large numbers of tactical nuclear weapons the Russians have
deployed near the borders of Europe. The US cannot afford to withdraw
from NATO, however, increased NATO membership, and making European
allies shoulder more of the costs for their collective security is
what we need to do.
Regarding the National Debt, it should be noted that the majority of
the debt was created by Republican Presidents. The last republican
that ran a balanced budget was Dwight D. Eisenhower, and he did so
with the highest rates of the Marginal Income Tax on the rich in the
history of USA. The majority of a national debt was created by Reagan,
GHWB, and George W. Bush (5 trillion). Bill Clinton was the last
Democrat that had a Balanced Budget, and a surplus of approximately
140 billion that was used to pay down the national debt. Unfortunately
for Obama, he is stuck with the deficit raising Bush Tax Cuts
extension till the end of this year.
 I didn't agree with this decision, but You cant blame Obama, the
Legislature votes in tax increases/decreases, and handles
appropiations, and usually this requires a super majority. While the
Bush tax cuts were being debated in december of 2010, Obama was
attempting to get the 66 vote threshold for the New START treaty with
Russia, since we no longer had nuclear weapons inspectors in Russia.
The treaty called for the reduction/decomissioning of 1500 strategic
deployed nuclear weapons, from each country's nuclear arsenals, and
limited Mobile ICBM launchers and the number of nuclear bombers to
about 700 each. If we had not passed the New START treaty, with
Russia, it would have opened up the possibility of nuclear Armageddon,
given that the nuclear black market in the former  Republics of the
old Soviet Union are rather porous, and littered with ex oppurtunistic
KGB appartchiks willing to sell Cold War Russian military hardware to
the highest bidder. With the treaty we now have inspection and
verification on both sides, which begins the process of ridding the
earth of the scourge of Nuclear weapons.
Regarding Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid), The
funds are in trouble because the economy tanked under Bush, and we are
still stuck with his tax cuts, and so tax revenues to the treasury
department are down dramatically.
You cant balance the Budget, by further decreasing Tax Revenues. Both
Eisenhower and Clinton knew this.
While the republicans claim to have a Job Creation agenda, the only
state that had the highest job increases, was Governor Rick Perry's
Texas, but the majority of those jobs his administration added were
low paying jobs. Texas is attractive to big Business because of the
antiregulatory environment in the state legislature, which incidentlly
is where all of the major US Chemical Companies are located, so its
not suprising that Govenor Perry denies the fact that Global Warming
is occuring, and Texas has one of the lowest standards of water and
air quality in the nation. Governor Perry has openly called for
secession from the Union, which means he has a long term racist agenda
of restoring the Confederacy.
 Also the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, both Bush started,
have further drained the treasury, since defense spending is at the
highest level percentage of GDP since World War II, at roughly 750
billion dollars. While I agree that this budget should be cut, I dont
think it would be wise to immediately withdraw from Afghanistan or
Libya.
 Currently the US is engaged with back channel peace negotiations with
the Taliban, and the Karzai government in Kabul. To withdraw
immediately from Afghanistan would severely damage ours or Karzai's
leveraging power in these negotiations. Regarding Libya and Qaddafi,
he has already attacked us twice, i.e., the bombing of Pan Am 103 that
killed 90 americans, and the bombing of a Berlin Disco frequented by
US military personell. Qaddafi also was in the process of developing a
nuclear uranium enrichment program with the help of A. Q. Khan, the
father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. While Qaddafi did
dismantle this pprogram, he now has every incentive to attack and
state sponsor terrorist  activities against the West, if NATO allows
him to remain in power.
Also the cost of the Libyan operation is about 1 billion dollars a
month, 10 percent of what we are spending on military operations in
Afghanistan. In reality the US only has a support role in this
operation, the British, French and Italians have taken the lead role
in the NATO operation.
Note: I don't demonize the government. There are clear things it
should be doing(protect individuals
from force and fraud).
Then why would be opposed to the Dodd-Frank Bill, that attempts to
regulate rampant destablising  Financial Speculation on Wall Street,
and sets up the Consumer Protection Bureau, that provides free
education and financial advice to consumers.
so that
future ideologues could argue for bullshit "adult conversations" about
entitlements, when in fact they plan to raid the trustfunds.
A good reason why the government should never have been involved in it
in the first place.
I argue for free market, free will and the right to allow people to
make their own choices and you argue for a giant all controlling, all
powerful government(worst kind of monopoly) that steals from the free
market and taxpayers..
If you are not rich there is no free will in the market place.. It is
an Oligapoly!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly
.And if they have the nerve to say "no" then
they're thrown in jail(or in some cases murdered by FBI agents raiding
their home).
I didnt agree with what happened at Ruby Ridge or Waco. Janet Reno was
a cunt. but you have to remember agencies are not politically
monolithic in nature.  Also You would have to say that Bush himself
used a phony mandate launced by his contrived War on Terror, to allow
the NSA to spy on americans as late as 2005, so he could insure
himself reelection. Also his USA patriot Act, section 802 allowed for
warrantless wiretapping of Anarchists and Environmentalists, and
jailing protestors under national security grounds,
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-d...
while at the same time the reactionary White nationalist movement
recieved little federal attention, despite their role in the second
worst terrorist attack in American History, the Oklahoma City Bombing.
In your view we should never had the Social Security program, or
Medicare
No, I argue that a person should have a choice and should get to
choose where their money goes. If they choose to invest in such
things, then so be it. (Why do you hate free choice and free will?)
Only a sucker or someone who is rich and already is a trust funder
would make that argument. Its the same argument that these corporate
types make about "Right to Work," intiatives trying to trick the
common man into thinking he would have a better deal if he didnt have
to pay union dues. When in fact, union wages in the private sector pay
better,there's guranteed health benefits, and the workers are more
productive as a whole. Regarding your response to the "free choice" of
paying into social security or Medicare, you are in fact, perhaps
unkowingly aping, Dick Armey's Freedom Works, bullshit line, that
workers should have the choice whether to pay into social security.
The fact is if the tax were voluntary we would no longer have social
security or medicare, and life expectancy in the United States would
decline dramatically. For the over 50 percent of americans who will be
dependant on Social Security Medicare, etc., when they retire, this
tempoary illusion of "free choice" becomes the imposition of
tyrannical third world style dominion, with the defunding and or
abolishment of the program, which is Dick Armey's long term plan. So
what you argue for is temporary free choice, and then the determinist
chains of poverty follow suit.
thomaswheat1975
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tom Jigme Wheat
2011-06-20 04:20:21 UTC
Permalink
regarding How Increased US Domestic Oil Drilling will not lower oil
Prices since the prices are set by speculators in the oil derivatives
market, and by OPEC see the link below: 75 responses, also discusses
the US Real Estate Market and impact of the new Affordable Care Act,
and how its repeal adds to the US deficit.

thomaswheat1975

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread/thread/51744d8ad89b80df/9abe668f877a5a9c?lnk=raot#9abe668f877a5a9c
Post by Tom Jigme Wheat
Discussion regarding the The DOD's acceptance of Climate Change poses
a national security threat, and its plans to transition to alternative
fuel sources. Includes excerpts and link to the 2011 Quadrennial
Defense Review. Focus, on cyber security, climate change and
identifying redundancies in the private contractor DOD-supply chain,
and strengthening export controls.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...
Post by Thomas Jigme Wheat
On Jun 19, 10:26 am, Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking
What you dont seem to realize is that your total demonization of
government, i.e., the liberal Keynesian Welfare State invites only one
This kind of line of argument is we're in five wars, have bases in
just about every country, are 14 trillion plus dollars of debt, all
our entitlements are broke, have a giant prison population, etc.
Correction we are in 2 wars and one police action in Libya. According
to the Quadrennial Defense Review, all combat operations in Iraq will
cease at the end of this year..
Your isolationist stance regarding the preeminent role of the USA in
world affairs if immplemented would take us back to the isolationist
Republican Congressional movement of the 1930's, which allowed for the
destabilizing rise of the NAZI's that thrust the world into Global
War. Republican Senator, John Mccain on ABC's This Week, with
Christiane Amanpour, invoked this same analogy, lambasting Freshman
Republican's in the House for advocating this kind of argument.
Regarding US military bases abroad, the geopolitical implications of
the US withdrawing from E. Asia or the Middle East would be
disasterous to our National Security. Regarding troops in Europe, I
think we could afford to shutter some bases there, and let the
Europeans take the lead in managing their regional security. However,
the US cannot afford to withdraw the nuclear umbrella from Europe,
given the large numbers of tactical nuclear weapons the Russians have
deployed near the borders of Europe. The US cannot afford to withdraw
from NATO, however, increased NATO membership, and making European
allies shoulder more of the costs for their collective security is
what we need to do.
Regarding the National Debt, it should be noted that the majority of
the debt was created by Republican Presidents. The last republican
that ran a balanced budget was Dwight D. Eisenhower, and he did so
with the highest rates of the Marginal Income Tax on the rich in the
history of USA. The majority of a national debt was created by Reagan,
GHWB, and George W. Bush (5 trillion). Bill Clinton was the last
Democrat that had a Balanced Budget, and a surplus of approximately
140 billion that was used to pay down the national debt. Unfortunately
for Obama, he is stuck with the deficit raising Bush Tax Cuts
extension till the end of this year.
 I didn't agree with this decision, but You cant blame Obama, the
Legislature votes in tax increases/decreases, and handles
appropiations, and usually this requires a super majority. While the
Bush tax cuts were being debated in december of 2010, Obama was
attempting to get the 66 vote threshold for the New START treaty with
Russia, since we no longer had nuclear weapons inspectors in Russia.
The treaty called for the reduction/decomissioning of 1500 strategic
deployed nuclear weapons, from each country's nuclear arsenals, and
limited Mobile ICBM launchers and the number of nuclear bombers to
about 700 each. If we had not passed the New START treaty, with
Russia, it would have opened up the possibility of nuclear Armageddon,
given that the nuclear black market in the former  Republics of the
old Soviet Union are rather porous, and littered with ex oppurtunistic
KGB appartchiks willing to sell Cold War Russian military hardware to
the highest bidder. With the treaty we now have inspection and
verification on both sides, which begins the process of ridding the
earth of the scourge of Nuclear weapons.
Regarding Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid), The
funds are in trouble because the economy tanked under Bush, and we are
still stuck with his tax cuts, and so tax revenues to the treasury
department are down dramatically.
You cant balance the Budget, by further decreasing Tax Revenues. Both
Eisenhower and Clinton knew this.
While the republicans claim to have a Job Creation agenda, the only
state that had the highest job increases, was Governor Rick Perry's
Texas, but the majority of those jobs his administration added were
low paying jobs. Texas is attractive to big Business because of the
antiregulatory environment in the state legislature, which incidentlly
is where all of the major US Chemical Companies are located, so its
not suprising that Govenor Perry denies the fact that Global Warming
is occuring, and Texas has one of the lowest standards of water and
air quality in the nation. Governor Perry has openly called for
secession from the Union, which means he has a long term racist agenda
of restoring the Confederacy.
 Also the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, both Bush started,
have further drained the treasury, since defense spending is at the
highest level percentage of GDP since World War II, at roughly 750
billion dollars. While I agree that this budget should be cut, I dont
think it would be wise to immediately withdraw from Afghanistan or
Libya.
 Currently the US is engaged with back channel peace negotiations with
the Taliban, and the Karzai government in Kabul. To withdraw
immediately from Afghanistan would severely damage ours or Karzai's
leveraging power in these negotiations. Regarding Libya and Qaddafi,
he has already attacked us twice, i.e., the bombing of Pan Am 103 that
killed 90 americans, and the bombing of a Berlin Disco frequented by
US military personell. Qaddafi also was in the process of developing a
nuclear uranium enrichment program with the help of A. Q. Khan, the
father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. While Qaddafi did
dismantle this pprogram, he now has every incentive to attack and
state sponsor terrorist  activities against the West, if NATO allows
him to remain in power.
Also the cost of the Libyan operation is about 1 billion dollars a
month, 10 percent of what we are spending on military operations in
Afghanistan. In reality the US only has a support role in this
operation, the British, French and Italians have taken the lead role
in the NATO operation.
Note: I don't demonize the government. There are clear things it
should be doing(protect individuals
from force and fraud).
Then why would be opposed to the Dodd-Frank Bill, that attempts to
regulate rampant destablising  Financial Speculation on Wall Street,
and sets up the Consumer Protection Bureau, that provides free
education and financial advice to consumers.
so that
future ideologues could argue for bullshit "adult conversations" about
entitlements, when in fact they plan to raid the trustfunds.
A good reason why the government should never have been involved in it
in the first place.
I argue for free market, free will and the right to allow people to
make their own choices and you argue for a giant all controlling, all
powerful government(worst kind of monopoly) that steals from the free
market and taxpayers..
If you are not rich there is no free will in the market place.. It is
an Oligapoly!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly
.And if they have the nerve to say "no" then
they're thrown in jail(or in some cases murdered by FBI agents raiding
their home).
I didnt agree with what happened at Ruby Ridge or Waco. Janet Reno was
a cunt. but you have to remember agencies are not politically
monolithic in nature.  Also You would have to say that Bush himself
used a phony mandate launced by his contrived War on Terror, to allow
the NSA to spy on americans as late as 2005, so he could insure
himself reelection. Also his USA patriot Act, section 802 allowed for
warrantless wiretapping of Anarchists and Environmentalists, and
jailing protestors under national security grounds,
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-d...
while at the same time the reactionary White nationalist movement
recieved little federal attention, despite their role in the second
worst terrorist attack in American History, the Oklahoma City Bombing.
In your view we should never had the Social Security program, or
Medicare
No, I argue that a person should have a choice and should get to
choose where their money goes. If they choose to invest in such
things, then so be it. (Why do you hate free choice and free will?)
Only a sucker or someone who is rich and already is a trust funder
would make that argument. Its the same argument that these corporate
types make about "Right to Work," intiatives trying to trick the
common man into thinking he would have a better deal if he didnt have
to pay union dues. When in fact, union wages in the private sector pay
better,there's guranteed health benefits, and the workers are more
productive as a whole. Regarding your response to the "free choice" of
paying into social security or Medicare, you are in fact, perhaps
unkowingly aping, Dick Armey's Freedom Works, bullshit line, that
workers should have the choice whether to pay into social security.
The fact is if the tax were voluntary we would no longer have social
security or medicare, and life expectancy in the United States would
decline dramatically. For the over 50 percent of americans who will be
dependant on Social Security Medicare, etc., when they retire, this
tempoary illusion of "free choice" becomes the imposition of
tyrannical third world style dominion, with the defunding and or
abolishment of the program, which is Dick Armey's long term plan. So
what you argue for is temporary free choice, and then the determinist
chains of poverty follow suit.
thomaswheat1975
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...
On Jun 19, 10:26 am, Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking
What you dont seem to realize is that your total demonization of
government, i.e., the liberal Keynesian Welfare State invites only one
This kind of line of argument is we're in five wars, have bases in
just about every country, are 14 trillion plus dollars of debt, all
our entitlements are broke, have a giant prison population, etc.
Correction we are in 2 wars and one police action in Libya. According
to the Quadrennial Defense Review, all combat operations in Iraq will
cease at the end of this year..
Your isolationist stance regarding the preeminent role of the USA in
world affairs if immplemented would take us back to the isolationist
Republican Congressional movement of the 1930's, which allowed for the
destabilizing rise of the NAZI's that thrust the world into Global
War. Republican Senator, John Mccain on ABC's This Week, with
Christiane Amanpour, invoked this same analogy, lambasting Freshman
Republican's in the House for advocating this kind of argument.
Regarding US military bases abroad, the geopolitical implications of
the US withdrawing from E. Asia or the Middle East would be
disasterous to our National Security. Regarding troops in Europe, I
think we could afford to shutter some bases there, and let the
Europeans take the lead in managing their regional security. However,
the US cannot afford to withdraw the nuclear umbrella from Europe,
given the large numbers of tactical nuclear weapons the Russians have
deployed near the borders of Europe. The US cannot afford to withdraw
from NATO, however, increased NATO membership, and making European
allies shoulder more of the costs for their collective security is
what we need to do.
Regarding the National Debt, it should be noted that the majority of
the debt was created by Republican Presidents. The last republican
that ran a balanced budget was Dwight D. Eisenhower, and he did so
with the highest rates of the Marginal Income Tax on the rich in the
history of USA. The majority of a national debt was created by Reagan,
GHWB, and George W. Bush (5 trillion). Bill Clinton was the last
Democrat that had a Balanced Budget, and a surplus of approximately
140 billion that was used to pay down the national debt. Unfortunately
for Obama, he is stuck with the deficit raising Bush Tax Cuts
extension till the end of this year.
 I didn't agree with this decision, but You cant blame Obama, the
Legislature votes in tax increases/decreases, and handles
appropiations, and usually this requires a super majority. While the
Bush tax cuts were being debated in december of 2010, Obama was
attempting to get the 66 vote threshold for the New START treaty with
Russia, since we no longer had nuclear weapons inspectors in Russia.
The treaty called for the reduction/decomissioning of 1500 strategic
deployed nuclear weapons, from each country's nuclear arsenals, and
limited Mobile ICBM launchers and the number of nuclear bombers to
about 700 each. If we had not passed the New START treaty, with
Russia, it would have opened up the possibility of nuclear Armageddon,
given that the nuclear black market in the former  Republics of the
old Soviet Union are rather porous, and littered with ex oppurtunistic
KGB appartchiks willing to sell Cold War Russian military hardware to
the highest bidder. With the treaty we now have inspection and
verification on both sides, which begins the process of ridding the
earth of the scourge of Nuclear weapons.
Regarding Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid), The
funds are in trouble because the economy tanked under Bush, and we are
still stuck with his tax cuts, and so tax revenues to the treasury
department are down dramatically.
You cant balance the Budget, by further decreasing Tax Revenues. Both
Eisenhower and Clinton knew this.
While the republicans claim to have a Job Creation agenda, the only
state that had the highest job increases, was Governor Rick Perry's
Texas, but the majority of those jobs his administration added were
low paying jobs. Texas is attractive to big Business because of the
antiregulatory environment in the state legislature, which incidentlly
is where all of the major US Chemical Companies are located, so its
not suprising that Govenor Perry denies the fact that Global Warming
is occuring, and Texas has one of the lowest standards of water and
air quality in the nation. Governor Perry has openly called for
secession from the Union, which means he has a long term racist agenda
of restoring the Confederacy.
 Also the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, both Bush started,
have further drained the treasury, since defense spending is at the
highest level percentage of GDP since World War II, at roughly 750
billion dollars. While I agree that this budget should be cut, I dont
think it would be wise to immediately withdraw from Afghanistan or
Libya.
 Currently the US is engaged with back channel peace negotiations with
the Taliban, and the Karzai government in Kabul. To withdraw
immediately from Afghanistan would severely damage ours or Karzai's
leveraging power in these negotiations. Regarding Libya and Qaddafi,
he has already attacked us twice, i.e., the bombing of Pan Am 103 that
killed 90 americans, and the bombing of a Berlin Disco frequented by
US military personell. Qaddafi also was in the process of developing a
nuclear uranium enrichment program with the help of A. Q. Khan, the
father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. While Qaddafi did
dismantle this pprogram, he now has every incentive to attack and
state sponsor terrorist  activities against the West, if NATO allows
him to remain in power.
Also the cost of the Libyan operation is about 1 billion dollars a
month, 10 percent of what we are spending on military operations in
Afghanistan. In reality the US only has a support role in this
operation, the British, French and Italians have taken the lead role
in the NATO operation.
Note: I don't demonize the government. There are clear things it
should be doing(protect individuals
from force and fraud).
Then why would be opposed to the Dodd-Frank Bill, that attempts to
regulate rampant destablising  Financial Speculation on Wall Street,
and sets up the Consumer Protection Bureau, that provides free
education and financial advice to consumers.
so that
future ideologues could argue for bullshit "adult conversations" about
entitlements, when in fact they plan to raid the trustfunds.
A good reason why the government should never have been involved in it
in the first place.
I argue for free market, free will and the right to allow people to
make their own choices and you argue for a giant all controlling, all
powerful government(worst kind of monopoly) that steals from the free
market and taxpayers..
If you are not rich there is no free will in the market place.. It is
an Oligapoly!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly
.And if they have the nerve to say "no" then
they're thrown in jail(or in some cases murdered by FBI agents raiding
their home).
I didnt agree with what happened at Ruby Ridge or Waco. Janet Reno was
a cunt. but you have to remember agencies are not politically
monolithic in nature.  Also You would have to say that Bush himself
used a phony mandate launced by his contrived War on Terror, to allow
the NSA to spy on americans as late as 2005, so he could insure
himself reelection. Also his USA patriot Act, section 802 allowed for
warrantless wiretapping of Anarchists and Environmentalists, and
jailing protestors under national security grounds,
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-d...
while at the same time the reactionary White nationalist movement
recieved little federal attention, despite their role in the second
worst terrorist attack in American History, the Oklahoma City Bombing.
In your view we should never had the Social Security program, or
Medicare
No, I argue that a person should have a choice and should get to
choose where their money goes. If they choose to invest in such
things, then so be it. (Why do you hate free choice and free will?)
Only a sucker or someone who is rich and already is a trust funder
would make that argument. Its the same argument that these corporate
types make about "Right to Work," intiatives trying to trick the
common man into thinking he would have a better deal if he didnt have
to pay union dues. When in fact, union wages in the private sector pay
better,there's guranteed health benefits, and the workers are more
productive as a whole. Regarding your response to the "free choice" of
paying into social security or Medicare, you are in fact, perhaps
unkowingly aping, Dick Armey's Freedom Works, bullshit line, that
workers should have the choice whether to pay into social security.
The fact is if the tax were voluntary we would no longer have social
security or medicare, and life expectancy in the United States would
decline dramatically. For the over 50 percent of americans who will be
dependant on Social Security Medicare, etc., when they retire, this
tempoary illusion of "free choice" becomes the imposition of
tyrannical third world style dominion, with the defunding and or
abolishment of the program, which is Dick Armey's long term plan. So
what you argue for is temporary free choice, and then the determinist
chains of poverty follow suit.
thomaswheat1975
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tom Jigme Wheat
2011-06-20 04:38:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Jigme Wheat
regarding How Increased US Domestic Oil Drilling will not lower oil
Prices since the prices are set by speculators in the oil derivatives
market, and by OPEC see the link below: 75 responses, also discusses
the US Real Estate Market and impact of the new Affordable Care Act,
and how its repeal adds to the US deficit.
thomaswheat1975
correction the discussion on how increased US Domestic Oil Drilling
will not lower Prices in the US Domestic Market, along with discussion
of the role of derivatives and speculation in the Oil and Real Estate
market, and how the repeal of the Affordable Care Act will add to the
Deficit please see this link: 75 messages exchanged in total with
right wing crypto fascist corporatist tard:
thomaswheat1975

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread/thread/96b8c6e0efc0315d/363a693c1fa3a903?lnk=raot#363a693c1fa3a903

also see quoted text in first post for links regarding The TOKAMAK
Fusion Test Reactor
regarding this project

http://www.pppl.gov/projects/pages/tftr.html

The Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor (TFTR) operated at the Princeton
Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) from 1982 to 1997. TFTR set a number
of world records, including a plasma temperature of 510 million
degrees centigrade -- the highest ever produced in a laboratory, and
well beyond the 100 million degrees required for commercial fusion. In
addition to meeting its physics objectives, TFTR achieved all of its
hardware design goals, thus making substantial contributions in many
areas of fusion technology development.

In December, 1993, TFTR became the world's first magnetic fusion
device to perform extensive experiments with plasmas composed of 50/50
deuterium/tritium -- the fuel mix required for practical fusion power
production. Consequently, in 1994, TFTR produced a world-record 10.7
million watts of controlled fusion power, enough to meet the needs of
more than 3,000 homes. These experiments also emphasized studies of
behavior of alpha particles produced in the deuterium-tritium
reactions. The extent to which the alpha particles pass their energy
to the plasma is critical to the eventual attainment of sustained
fusion.

In 1995, TFTR scientists explored a new fundamental mode of plasma
confinement -- enhanced reversed shear. This new technique involves a
magnetic-field configuration which substantially reduces plasma
turbulence.

the biggest conspiracy of all to block the implementation of a Hot
Fusion nuclear power plant, from becoming viable. Bush slashed the
Fusion Energy budget at Los Alamos national labs. the bottom link will
take you to an archived page from 2004, including all known research
up to that date: Fuckin George Bush Bastard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://fusionenergy.lanl.gov/

thomaswheat1975
Post by Tom Jigme Wheat
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...
Post by Tom Jigme Wheat
Discussion regarding the The DOD's acceptance of Climate Change poses
a national security threat, and its plans to transition to alternative
fuel sources. Includes excerpts and link to the 2011 Quadrennial
Defense Review. Focus, on cyber security, climate change and
identifying redundancies in the private contractor DOD-supply chain,
and strengthening export controls.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.democrats.d/browse_thread...
Post by Thomas Jigme Wheat
On Jun 19, 10:26 am, Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking
What you dont seem to realize is that your total demonization of
government, i.e., the liberal Keynesian Welfare State invites only one
This kind of line of argument is we're in five wars, have bases in
just about every country, are 14 trillion plus dollars of debt, all
our entitlements are broke, have a giant prison population, etc.
Correction we are in 2 wars and one police action in Libya. According
to the Quadrennial Defense Review, all combat operations in Iraq will
cease at the end of this year..
Your isolationist stance regarding the preeminent role of the USA in
world affairs if immplemented would take us back to the isolationist
Republican Congressional movement of the 1930's, which allowed for the
destabilizing rise of the NAZI's that thrust the world into Global
War. Republican Senator, John Mccain on ABC's This Week, with
Christiane Amanpour, invoked this same analogy, lambasting Freshman
Republican's in the House for advocating this kind of argument.
Regarding US military bases abroad, the geopolitical implications of
the US withdrawing from E. Asia or the Middle East would be
disasterous to our National Security. Regarding troops in Europe, I
think we could afford to shutter some bases there, and let the
Europeans take the lead in managing their regional security. However,
the US cannot afford to withdraw the nuclear umbrella from Europe,
given the large numbers of tactical nuclear weapons the Russians have
deployed near the borders of Europe. The US cannot afford to withdraw
from NATO, however, increased NATO membership, and making European
allies shoulder more of the costs for their collective security is
what we need to do.
Regarding the National Debt, it should be noted that the majority of
the debt was created by Republican Presidents. The last republican
that ran a balanced budget was Dwight D. Eisenhower, and he did so
with the highest rates of the Marginal Income Tax on the rich in the
history of USA. The majority of a national debt was created by Reagan,
GHWB, and George W. Bush (5 trillion). Bill Clinton was the last
Democrat that had a Balanced Budget, and a surplus of approximately
140 billion that was used to pay down the national debt. Unfortunately
for Obama, he is stuck with the deficit raising Bush Tax Cuts
extension till the end of this year.
 I didn't agree with this decision, but You cant blame Obama, the
Legislature votes in tax increases/decreases, and handles
appropiations, and usually this requires a super majority. While the
Bush tax cuts were being debated in december of 2010, Obama was
attempting to get the 66 vote threshold for the New START treaty with
Russia, since we no longer had nuclear weapons inspectors in Russia.
The treaty called for the reduction/decomissioning of 1500 strategic
deployed nuclear weapons, from each country's nuclear arsenals, and
limited Mobile ICBM launchers and the number of nuclear bombers to
about 700 each. If we had not passed the New START treaty, with
Russia, it would have opened up the possibility of nuclear Armageddon,
given that the nuclear black market in the former  Republics of the
old Soviet Union are rather porous, and littered with ex oppurtunistic
KGB appartchiks willing to sell Cold War Russian military hardware to
the highest bidder. With the treaty we now have inspection and
verification on both sides, which begins the process of ridding the
earth of the scourge of Nuclear weapons.
Regarding Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid), The
funds are in trouble because the economy tanked under Bush, and we are
still stuck with his tax cuts, and so tax revenues to the treasury
department are down dramatically.
You cant balance the Budget, by further decreasing Tax Revenues. Both
Eisenhower and Clinton knew this.
While the republicans claim to have a Job Creation agenda, the only
state that had the highest job increases, was Governor Rick Perry's
Texas, but the majority of those jobs his administration added were
low paying jobs. Texas is attractive to big Business because of the
antiregulatory environment in the state legislature, which incidentlly
is where all of the major US Chemical Companies are located, so its
not suprising that Govenor Perry denies the fact that Global Warming
is occuring, and Texas has one of the lowest standards of water and
air quality in the nation. Governor Perry has openly called for
secession from the Union, which means he has a long term racist agenda
of restoring the Confederacy.
 Also the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, both Bush started,
have further drained the treasury, since defense spending is at the
highest level percentage of GDP since World War II, at roughly 750
billion dollars. While I agree that this budget should be cut, I dont
think it would be wise to immediately withdraw from Afghanistan or
Libya.
 Currently the US is engaged with back channel peace negotiations with
the Taliban, and the Karzai government in Kabul. To withdraw
immediately from Afghanistan would severely damage ours or Karzai's
leveraging power in these negotiations. Regarding Libya and Qaddafi,
he has already attacked us twice, i.e., the bombing of Pan Am 103 that
killed 90 americans, and the bombing of a Berlin Disco frequented by
US military personell. Qaddafi also was in the process of developing a
nuclear uranium enrichment program with the help of A. Q. Khan, the
father of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. While Qaddafi did
dismantle this pprogram, he now has every incentive to attack and
state sponsor terrorist  activities against the West, if NATO allows
him to remain in power.
Also the cost of the Libyan operation is about 1 billion dollars a
month, 10 percent of what we are spending on military operations in
Afghanistan. In reality the US only has a support role in this
operation, the British, French and Italians have taken the lead role
in the NATO operation.
Note: I don't demonize the government. There are clear things it
should be doing(protect individuals
from force and fraud).
Then why would be opposed to the Dodd-Frank Bill, that attempts to
regulate rampant destablising  Financial Speculation on Wall Street,
and sets up the Consumer Protection Bureau, that provides free
education and financial advice to consumers.
so that
future ideologues could argue for bullshit "adult conversations" about
entitlements, when in fact they plan to raid the trustfunds.
A good reason why the government should never have been involved in it
in the first place.
I argue for free market, free will and the right to allow people to
make their own choices and you argue for a giant all controlling, all
powerful government(worst kind of monopoly) that steals from the free
market and taxpayers..
If you are not rich there is no free will in the market place.. It is
an Oligapoly!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly
.And if they have the nerve to say "no" then
they're thrown in jail(or in some cases murdered by FBI agents raiding
their home).
I didnt agree with what happened at Ruby Ridge or Waco. Janet Reno was
a cunt. but you have to remember agencies are not politically
monolithic in nature.  Also You would have to say that Bush himself
used a phony mandate launced by his contrived War on Terror, to allow
the NSA to spy on americans as late as 2005, so he could insure
himself reelection. Also his USA patriot Act, section 802 allowed for
warrantless wiretapping of Anarchists and Environmentalists, and
jailing protestors under national security grounds,
http://www.aclu.org/national-security/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-d...
while at the same time the reactionary White nationalist movement
recieved little federal attention, despite their role in the second
worst terrorist attack in American History, the Oklahoma City Bombing.
In your view we should never had the Social Security program, or
Medicare
No, I argue that a person should have a choice and should get to
choose where their money goes. If they choose to invest in such
things, then so be it. (Why do you
...
read more »- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Loading...