The upper class has a higher propensity for unethical behavior, being more likely to believe – as did Gordon Gekko in the movie "Wall Street" – that "greed is good," according to a new study from the University of California, Berkeley.
"The increased unethical tendencies of upper-class individuals are driven, in part, by their more favorable attitudes toward greed," said Paul Piff, a doctoral student in psychology at UC Berkeley and lead author of the paper published today (Monday, Feb. 27) in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Piff's study is the latest in a series of UC Berkeley scholarly investigations into the relationship between socio-economic class and prosocial and antisocial emotions and behaviors, revealing new information about class differences during a time of rising economic tension.
"As these issues come to the fore, our research – and that by others – helps shed light on the role of inequality in shaping patterns of ethical conduct and selfish behavior, and points to certain ways in which these patterns might also be changed," Piff said.
To investigate how class relates to ethical conduct, the researchers surveyed the ethical tendencies of more than 1,000 individuals of lower-, middle- and upper-class backgrounds. Volunteers reported their social class using the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Socioeconomic Status and filled out surveys revealing their attitudes about unprincipled behaviors and greed. They also took part in tasks designed to measure their actual unethical behavior.
In two field studies on driving behavior, upper-class motorists were found to be four times more likely than the other drivers to cut off other vehicles at a busy four-way intersection and three times more likely to cut off a pedestrian waiting to enter a crosswalk. Another study found that upper-class participants presented with scenarios of unscrupulous behavior were more likely than the individuals in the other socio-economic classes to report replicating this type of behavior themselves.
Participants in the fourth study were assigned tasks in a laboratory where a jar of candy, reserved for visiting children, was on hand, and were invited to take a candy or two. Upper-class participants helped themselves to twice as much candy as did their counterparts in other classes.
In the fifth study, participants each were assigned the role of an employer negotiating a salary with a job candidate seeking long-term employment. Among other things, they were told that the job would soon be eliminated, and that they were free to convey that information to the candidate. Upper-class participants were more likely to deceive job candidates by withholding this information, the study found.
In the sixth study, participants played a computerized dice game, with each player getting five rolls of the dice and then reporting his or her scores. The player with the highest score would receive a cash prize. The players did not know that the game was rigged so that each player would receive no more than 12 points for the five rolls. Upper-class participants were more likely to report higher scores than would be possible, indicating a higher rate of cheating, according to the study.
The last study found attitudes about greed to be the most significant predictor of unethical behavior. Participants were primed to think about the advantages of greed and then presented with bad behavior-in-the-workplace scenarios, such as stealing cash, accepting bribes and overcharging customers. It turned out that even those participants not in the upper class were just as likely to report a willingness to engage in unethical behavior as the upper-class cohort once they had been primed to see the benefits of greed, researchers said.
"These findings have very clear implications for how increased wealth and status in society shapes patterns of ethical behavior, and suggest that the different social values among the haves and the have-nots help drive these tendencies," Piff said of the cumulative findings.
Explore further:
Rich man, poor man: study shows body language can indicate socioeconomic status
More information:
“High social class predicts increased unethical behavior,” by Paul K. Piff, Daniel M. Stancato, Stéphane Côté, Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton, and Dacher Keltner, PNAS (2012).
mbrmark
Feb 27, 2012Lurker2358
2.8 / 5 (30) Feb 27, 2012Something is wrong with a civilization which gives the majority of profits of collective work to one person, who then pats himself on the back and thinks they've "earned" it.
Bad enough that the rich now make 10 times more money relative to the poor than was the case a few decades ago, but now they hypocritically believe they are "entitled" to two or three times as much.
While there is nothing wrong with accepting a gift or freebie, a person who already has more than enough should be more likely to turn down such excesses, or take less than normal people.
This is the pharisee arrogance, greed, power, "entitlement," and hypocrisy.
It's like a police officer who runs a red light, because they know they can get away with it, since nobody else has the "power" to stop them and write a ticket.
Lurker2358
2.6 / 5 (20) Feb 27, 2012I don't remember all the details, but they probably had the money in their purses for whatever they stole, or could have got it from parents at any time.
There was another case in which the male seniors had a scavenger hunt which involved stealing several items of progressive value, and if I remember right, one of the guys involved in it is now a lawyer! Figures.
pauljpease
3.4 / 5 (16) Feb 27, 2012210
1.3 / 5 (14) Feb 27, 2012Sanescience
2.6 / 5 (15) Feb 27, 2012Human psychology is long known for its study of the egocentric nature of people. Indeed natural selection probably weeds out "successful" individuals that feel undeserving or are less effective leveraging "success" into favoritism for their offspring.
I would also like to see a decent comparison against relative value judgements. if you really wanted to compare apples to apples, the rich and poor need to be tested against penalties of equal *proportionality*. Meaning a $150 dollar ticket doesn't have the same weight between the two.
And maybe even a psychology comparison between consumers of different kinds of cars and their performance. And the age range of who buys what kinds of cars.
*That* would be "science"!
350
1.4 / 5 (18) Feb 27, 2012210
1.3 / 5 (12) Feb 27, 2012You will find, when you make your fortune, and that may have already happened but if not, I pray it will, because it can be very good...and bad...sadly. But, the 'new money people' have/get a case of Amnesia from HELL! They do NOT remember their lonely nights...they forget that one guy or gal who could not 'come-over-to-see-you' because you/they slept in a car! They forget relatives who tried to find them for years not being able to write because your 'car' had no street address - forget those relatives for sure!! They become 'cheaters' like the rest of us, but they rebel against the image of themselves as they were fighting and struggling for the wealth: They HATE THEMSELVES because the price they paid was ignoring all the wonderful little things that they truly admired and loved...and the people, oh God, there WERE people who did NOT give a damn about how much money you made or had and you missed them! Now, you cant tell who 2 trust. Real PAIN!
word-
210
1.3 / 5 (13) Feb 27, 2012I know you have seen it in the movies...darn...I cannot think of a movie! But, anyway, too often wealthy parents are M. I. Friggin -A. TRULY! They throw money and tutors at the kid(s) and when crap like what you wrote happens they just throw lawyers at the judges and money at the lawyers. TRUST ME! Parents are human, BUT, try having a money-printing-press for a parent!!!! You will quickly learn to hate money and wish Hitler was your daddy... I am saying... by terse analogy, The young hunger for the approval or rebuke of someone who loves them deeply and truly...I kid you NOT!!!
word-from-ya-muthas
Objectivist
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 27, 2012We cheat because we are given the opportunity to do so. Not because we are "fundamentally" good or bad people. Being wealthy means you can afford getting a ticket, which in turn means you can afford to take the risk (opportunity).
This is how they (at least partially) solve this problem in Scandinavia, though it's not used for speeding as far as I know: http://en.wikiped...Day-fine
ryggesogn2
1.6 / 5 (21) Feb 27, 2012kochevnik
1.3 / 5 (14) Feb 27, 2012HealingMindN
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 27, 2012Dug
2.2 / 5 (19) Feb 27, 2012bredmond
2.2 / 5 (10) Feb 27, 2012Mandan
3.5 / 5 (8) Feb 27, 2012It would seem these findings put the lie to Murray's arguments that it is only a declining morality on the part of the white American underclass that is responsible for the socioeconomic crisis this nation is facing.
Far from being paragons of morality and law-abiding pillars to be imitated, the entitled feel, well, entitled. And leaving no stone unturned in their quest for profits, and letting no rule, regulation-- or certainly no law stand in their way, the entitled class itself is leading this nation on a cultural race to the bottom-- where crass consumerism and celebrity worship go hand in hand to convince people to spend money they don't have on things they don't need.
And the cash register rings.
DDBear
1.5 / 5 (8) Feb 27, 2012ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (24) Feb 27, 2012She told me, "Oh, no, Daddy, you don't understand. You don't come to Harvard to study. You come to Harvard to get to know the right people.""
http://www.wired....p;topic=
It's not what you know it's who.
Wonder why we haven't seen Obama's Columbia transcript.
enigma13x
3 / 5 (8) Feb 27, 2012ryggesogn2
1.5 / 5 (23) Feb 27, 2012So a socialist govt should take all his money to make the formerly rich moral?
Ever hear of Chuck Feeney? http://www.atlant...-founder
I would submit 'rich' and 'upper class' are not the same. Those who created wealth from nothing are usually not permitted into the upper class club.
Molly Brown is a classic example.
I suggest 'upper class' are those who seek power to control others.
kochevnik
1.6 / 5 (13) Feb 28, 2012Steven_Hales
1.5 / 5 (13) Feb 28, 2012Birger
3 / 5 (6) Feb 28, 2012-Apparently there is a psychological mechanism that encourages people to think "go ahead, you deserve it" if they are successful...
And if their conduct hurt others, so what? Those people don't count anyway. So go ahead and dump toxic waste outside a school, or acquire favourable deals for your campaign donors.
dogbert
1.3 / 5 (26) Feb 28, 2012Secondly, we have rich people saying rich people are less moral than other people. I doubt that is true in general, but it appears to be true for the study designers.
antialias_physorg
3.6 / 5 (18) Feb 28, 2012Not really. As a first approximation people think others act like themslves. Those who have, in the past, gamed the system to get rich will assume other's can/will do that, too. So there's no real reason why they should, all of a sudden, become noble people.
It's just good to have it finally as more than a vague feeling.
You're demanding mulivariate studies. Those require an ENORMOUSLY larger amount of data. A study like the one presented is a first step. Finding an effect there can justify going for a more in depth study. It's just prudent to first use limited resources to see whether using a lot orfresources is evenmerited.
What planet do you live on?
baudrunner
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 28, 2012dogbert
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 28, 2012Earth, Solar System. You live on the same planet.
There is a distribution of wealth in America as there is anywhere else. But there are no classes.
Britain and India are examples of class societies. There are no such boundaries in America.
AWaB
2.4 / 5 (7) Feb 28, 2012ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (22) Feb 28, 2012antialias_physorg
3.8 / 5 (10) Feb 28, 2012The US has about the same social mobility as the UK (47% vs. 50% chance of ending up in the same socioeconomic group that your parents were in)
Whether you call it classes or not doesn't really matter - they're a reality. (and they have found their way into the lingo for a long time: middle class, upper class, working class, class warfare, the 99% .. these aren't concepts that are unheard of in the US)
antonima
2.6 / 5 (5) Feb 28, 2012Sigh
2.8 / 5 (6) Feb 28, 2012Maybe, maybe not. But the mediating factor turned out to be greed. If the lower class was induced to think about the benefits of greed, the class differences disappeared.
Would you expect the rich to have a generally more positive attitude towards greed?
From dogbert:
From what I read, the US has quite low social mobility. Does your definition of class have nothing to do with that?
3432682
2.1 / 5 (22) Feb 28, 2012kochevnik
1.9 / 5 (14) Feb 28, 2012Ferky
1.9 / 5 (13) Feb 28, 2012I'd like to see a study in which kids of the same socio-economic class are tested for ethical behavior and then followed until middle age. Will the unethical kids grow to be more or less wealthy than their ethical mates? That would be an interesting experiment!
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 28, 2012More class warfare propaganda designed for left-wing mush-head Obama voters. Obama will be using such tactics soon in the 2012 campaign, and every dolt propagandist is laying the foundation in preparation.
http://www.thebla...be-fake/
Vendicar_Decarian
3.3 / 5 (12) Feb 28, 2012"Massa would never steal from his slaves. Massa is a good man."
- Uncle Tom
"The above 'study' is idiotic and a fraud from a left wing dolt." - noumenTard
Vendicar_Decarian
2.9 / 5 (10) Feb 28, 2012I already detect the spittle violently ejecting from his mouth at the thought.
"More class warfare propaganda designed for left-wing mush-head Obama voters." - NumenTard
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (10) Feb 28, 2012No. They have shown correlation.
Does unethical behavior produce wealth or wealth produce unethical behavior?
It's probably a two way street.
From my own observations, I see little ethical difference between the wealthy and the poor.
However I do see a lack of ethics in corporate actions.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.4 / 5 (8) Feb 28, 2012"Funny how we've never heard of this branch of inquiry and this result previously." - 3432682Tard
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012Beyond that, a classification of rich or poor has most often no bearing on whether or not a person is bound to cheat or steal or take more than his share of candy. These vices don't usually come on suddenly because the person has wealth or is penniless. It is most often a LEARNED trait that may come and go or is a consistent part of a person's personality.
The researchers from Berkeley are obviously biased against the rich. Perhaps if they had tested the same group a week later, each individual would have had a different or opposite answer.
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012And how many of these upper-class individuals were tested from how many areas of the country? Did they bother to give the same tests in Bel Air or Hollywood to movie stars and rich NBA players or to ghetto dwellers? Could they possibly replicate the same results with a far wider cross-section of wealthy upper-class individuals and blue collar workers?
I believe the results are not representative of ALL rich or ALL middle class and poor people. They are going on the premise that everyone in each class are pretty much the same no matter their upbringing, culture, and environment. For instance, ghetto dwellers are not ALL criminals even though many of them may be burglars and murderers. There are the best of people and the worst of people in all classes and levels of wealth.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012The subjective term "greed" will play big in the novelty presidents reelection campaign.
99% of every citizen wants more and more for themselves and their families. The upper class are simply used to being less inhibited wrt getting what they want, and the idiotic "study" above is simply gauging that momentum. Meaningless.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (18) Feb 28, 2012For the most part your above post is surprisingly coherent. Except that corporations are not morale beings; they are cold inanimate machines engineered to manufacture wealth,... and so, are not subject to "ethics", just the law.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.5 / 5 (11) Feb 28, 2012But legally people. So they are legally immoral people.
Hence the grand failure of America.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (20) Feb 28, 2012You didn't make any sense, dingus. Corporations are not people, they're things. It makes as much sense to apply ethics in a corporation as it does to my lawn mower.
The people who operate a corporation are expected to maximize profit, not to do less in order to "do the right thing to impress emotionally driven liberal bed-wetters".
Also, moron; The USA is and remains the greatest economic success in recorded history, and all came about because of a egotistical desire to better ones standard of living,... or as some class baiters on the left would phrase it, "greed".
enigma13x
3.2 / 5 (5) Feb 28, 2012"i really do deserve more than my fellow man, i really am a better person, really i am... really! and if you wont give me what i deserve im just going to take it!
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012Envy is weakness.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 28, 2012Unlike your irrational hatred of the right and GW Bush, I have no such hatred toward Obama. I think Obama is intelligent and is a patriot for serving his country, and wants what's best for the country and therefore is a good American. I just fundamentally disagree with his "progressive" liberal mentality, his gov imposed "fairness" mentality, and his envisioned increasing role for the government in everyone's lives.
Didn't you get your self into some trouble with your threats against Bush? Talk about hatred.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.6 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012Said the Tard who fails to comprehend.
"Corporations are not people, they're things." - NumenTard
Yet under U.S. law they are considered people. In fact it was just this equality that the U.S. supreme court used to decide that corporations may spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections since, as persons, they have the same free speech rights as U.S. citizens.
You did know that about your own failed nation didn't you Tard Boy?
Vendicar_Decarian
3.6 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012So are Slave owners, Mafia bosses and Drug dealers.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012"The USA is and remains the greatest economic success in recorded history" - NumenTard
As a ConservaTard you are clearly suffering from the first three deficits which explains your delusional denial of the forth.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012This computer was assembled by me from components largely manufactured in Socialist China, and utilizes a CPU designed mostly outside of the U.S.
What are you jabbering about? Fool.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012"Unlike your irrational hatred of the right and GW Bush..." NumenTard
"Didn't you get your self into some trouble with your threats against Bush?" - NumenTard
The only thing I threatened Bush with was justice.
Something American conservatives know nothing about apparently.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.9 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012"Envy is weakness." - NumenTard
tyree
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012The problem with so much of our popular culture being generated by the left wing is they create lasting images of those that they hate that endure for a long time. Gordon Gekko was a left wing fantasy of the right wing that they pray for. He wasn't real, he never existed and "studies" run by liberals about those they hate are not to be trusted. For every fictitious Gordon Gekko there is a real Andrew Carnegie. I never got a job from a poor man, and almost all of my employers in my long life have been wonderful people.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012http://www.thefre...is-good/
Do we need any more examples of the lack of Libertarian/Conservative Morality?
Interesting I posted 5 other references from various Conservative Publications all claiming that Greed was good, and only the first one survived.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012http://www.pickth...n-gekko/
Greed Is Good
http://online.wsj...229.html
Ferky
1.9 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Please Google "Scott Nudds" and "Vendicar Decarian" before you engage that person in a discussion.
RitchieGuy
1.7 / 5 (22) Feb 29, 2012VendiTard, the one whose intellectual pursuits depends heavily on Wiki and Google search, (GhostofGirlyman is the other) is completely unaware of his own hypocrisy as to living in the free hemisphere (doesn't include Cuba and Venezuela) where he is able to spout his ugly venom and not be tracked down and shot dead for his disloyalty to the country of his birth and its way of life. VendiTard seems to be unappreciative of what he greedily takes from the Capitalist system while giving the system a resounding punch to the gut verbally in any which way he can
RitchieGuy
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 29, 2012RitchieGuy
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 29, 2012Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (21) Feb 29, 2012Ethelred
3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012It was wrong but you believe President Dumbass was competent so you clearly don't have a clue about political reality.
Bush was one of our worst presidents and lying about things won't change that.
Ethelred
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012Do you know the difference between product development and assembly?
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012Where did I say Bush was great? He was far from an ideal conservative.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012Adam Smith called it 'self interest'.
Were Lenin and Stalin good Russians for wanting what was best for the country?
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012"Please Google "Scott Nudds" and "Vendicar Decarian" before you engage that person in a discussion." - Ferky
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012I do. And virtually nothing in the PC that I use was developed in America.
It is funny to see people like NumenTard who pay lip service to Randism actually turn into ranting Statists at the drop of a hat.
So funny.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.1 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012Your continual defense of the Murderous War Criminal and congenital liar gives us a clue.
"Nobody anticipated that the levees would be breached." - George Bush Jr.
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012Not a fair comparison.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012And here I thought it was hunger.
"Without a certain amount of greed, there is no motivation to get a job and go to work to earn money to fulfill the need to feed oneself and one's family and to have the money to buy necessities and some extras." - RitchieTard
"What can be called greed is necessary for survival" - RichieTard
Nope.. Wrong again.
Definition of GREED: a selfish an excessive desire for more of something (as money) than is needed
So by definition RichieTard's comments are false.
One wonders about his motivation for equating greed with necessity.
I can only conclude that it is done out of his desire to provide an excuse for social vermin to be greedy.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (20) Feb 29, 2012I'm surprised that you are not a 911 truther with your way over the top manner of speaking.
GWBush was no more a "war criminal" than the vast majority of democrats who voted for that legitimate war in Iraq.
No president can possibly micro manage every f'ing levee in the country, you bonehead. Bush was blamed for that hurricane like he was the scal goat for everything. I recall seeing a hundred school buses siting in water while the dolt Nagin ignored Bush's repeated warning.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012You have about 15 years left on this planet before joining them. Isn't that right Tard Boy?
"Were Lenin and Stalin good Russians for wanting what was best for the country?" - RyggTard
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012Why, yes he was.
"GWBush was no more a "war criminal" than the vast majority of democrats who voted for that legitimate war in Iraq." - NumenTard
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012But the war crimes were the illegal invasions themselves, and the fact that mass murder for political gain was the order given by your War Criminal President.
"No president can possibly micro manage every f'ing levee in the country, you bonehead." - NumenTard
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (22) Feb 29, 2012Acording to what body was that war illegal? Iraq? The UN specifically stated it would NOT admonish the USA if it invaded Iraq.
The same will occur with Iran. Everyone suspects they're developing nuclear weapons, but no one knows for absolute certainty outside Iran. What matters is what the majority suspects, because access to certainty is not available.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.4 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012The invasion of another nation without cause is illegal under international law.
"The same will occur with Iran." - NumenTard
Excellent. The death of America will only be accelerated by that action.
EverythingsJustATheory
3.3 / 5 (11) Feb 29, 2012http://voteview.c...g/?p=317
Obama is really a republican from 20 years ago. The republicans just moved so far to the radical right that now a democrat has to be a moderate republican to get elected.
Noumenon
1.7 / 5 (24) Feb 29, 2012Again, did the United Nations declare that action illegal? Answer, No. It was not illegal. There was justified cause, just not in your opinion.
Really, by what force, ... the cavemen rag-heads? Israel can handle several of those countries at once with little direct help from the USA. Again, what country are you from originally? Do you reside in the USA but are middle-eastern? Your wanna-be radicalism and over-the-top-absurdity tells me you're Intellectually immature.
@EverythingsJustATheory,.. the exact opposite of everything you said is the truth. Obama was rated the most liberal senator.
Vendicar_Decarian
3.9 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012Poor NumenTard. Can't even figure out how his own nation is being destroyed.
"Here in Lake County Florida a long time Republican state the number of homeless students has skyrocketed, from 122 in 2005 to more than 2,600 this school year. It's the largest increase in hard hit Florida and echoes the rising numbers seen nationwide as well. Some of those children are living with their parents in a friend's or relative's house. Others are in shelters or motels like Zach. Some with nowhere else to turn take refuge in the woods."
http://hosted.ap....12-59-14
"the cavemen rag-heads?" - NumenTard
Scratch a Republican - reveal a Racist.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012America of course. I escaped when the death of the American State at the hands of Republican Traitors became obvious.
EverythingsJustATheory
3.2 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012I have backed up my claim with a study that has actually examined the voting records, whereas you have just stated your opinion. I wonder then, who should be taken more seriously?
EverythingsJustATheory
3.4 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012Yes you have done exactly that.
But you must remember that the Republican hasn't lived who wasn't a chronic and congenital liar. NumenTard is just another example of Lying Republican filth.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012Which ones?
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012Markets Start to Anticipate Obama Victory in November
http://www.cnbc.c...46556820
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012LOL. . .if Obama happens to get reelected by a majority or dumbed down idiots, it is HE who will be soiling his underpants when he finds out what Obama's Socialist/Communist agenda is. The Utopian future that people like VendiTard is waiting for will consist of slavery of the mind and body, and he will be cursing Obama and the rest of the Socialist Democrats and Obama's appointees. He will be thanking G-d that he is in Canada until the moderate/Conservative Canadian government is overthrown by the Communists too. . .and he will want to flee possibly to Australia which,
RitchieGuy
1.6 / 5 (21) Feb 29, 2012I can always go back to Sicily which is the place of my birth and work to get the radical Muslims out of Europe. Communism is dead in Europe. Nationalism is in and getting more popular as Europeans wake up from their stupor, except for welfare queens in Greece.
Oh, and you must remember that the Liberal/Socialist hasn't lived who wasn't a chronic and congenital liar. VendiTard is just another example of Lying Liberal/Socialist filth.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012He has done all the work for me.
kochevnik
1.8 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012"Despite the repeated statements made by United States Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta which have clearly indicated that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons and the analysis of the American intelligence community, the heated anti-Iranian rhetoric never seems to let up.
Indeed, it has even been reported by none other than the New York Times that intelligence analysts in America have yet to find any hard evidence indicating that Iran has even decided to construct a nuclear bomb. contd
kochevnik
1.7 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012American intelligence assessments have continued to be congruent with the 2007 intelligence report which clearly concluded that Iran had in fact completely abandoned their nuclear program years before (scroll to the bottom of the article to read the embedded report).
According to anonymous U.S. officials, this assessment was reinforced by the 2010 National Intelligence Estimate and it remains the consensus view of Americas 16 intelligence agencies."
We develop our own computers in Russia, including the microchips. Are you claiming otherwise?
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012To be a Conservative is to be lying filth.
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012The blue states have the richest people making the highest salaries and owning and/or running the big corporations while living high on the hog. Red states have the highest amount of poor or working poor. VendiTard should be happy that red states are getting more federal money other than only catering to military bases. When military bases in the northeastern parts of the U.S. were being closed down by the Democrats in the 1960s and 70s, it was the Republicans who insisted that military bases in the South be kept open. Dixiecrats who opposed integration of Blacks in the South agreed with the Republicans over keeping military bases open. For the unaware:
http://en.wikiped...d_States
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012LOL. . .demonize Bush all you want. . .there's another fool in the White House now. Bush made his mistakes and Obamalamadingdong is continuing the tradition but with a retarded Socialist twist. Both Bush and Obama made huge mistakes. Bush sending troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, and Obama leaving troops in Afghanistan while cutting back on their benefits in the interest of saving federal money on their backs. Why hasn't Obamalama abandoned Karzai and his country yet, especially now with Karzai demanding the Koran burners brought to justice? There are no fossil fuels in that country, is there? What is keeping Obama from bringing the troops home NOW? He is reneging on his promises to the Liberal filth to end the war.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012Really? Are you visiting and transmitting via your iPhone?
"Why hasn't Obamalama abandoned Karzai and his country yet"
Probably because he isn't a cut and run Republican.
"There are no fossil fuels in that country, is there?" - RitchieTard
Nope. Just another war that America has lost.
"What is keeping Obama from bringing the troops home NOW? " - RitchieTard
Continuity probably.
Mosques in America nearly double since 9/11
http://campaign20...1/401846
Vendicar_Decarian
4.2 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012You know, like Bushie redefined McDonalds hamburger flippers as part of the Manufacturing sector to hide the offshoring of American manufacturing jobs.
"Could it be that there is such high unemployment in the U.S. that Obama is afraid to bring them home to a country where there are not enough jobs available because of Obama's mishandling of taxpayer money and over regulation of job creating private industry?" - RichieTard
"No one ever anticipated that anyone would use plains as weapons." - George - stoned on Oxycontin - Bush.
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012Nevada 84.5%
Alaska 69.1%
Utah 57.4%
Oregon 53.1%
Idaho 50.2%
Arizona 48.1%
California 45.3%
Wyoming 42.3%
New Mexico 41.8%
Colorado 36.6%
"http://bigthink.c...as/21343
Now the claim that 'red' states have more federal funds could be related to the fact the federal govt owns much of the land in western states. In a city like Tucson, the federal govt has several major organizations but pays no property taxes to the local schools. However, the federal govt does reimburse for some of that property tax loss.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Obama, boyboy. . .it's Obama. That's Barack Hussein Obama. Try to remember that name as it is HE who is president now, not Bush, not Reagan, not LBJ and not John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Your fascination and Bush daydreaming is overpowering your mental processes, whatever they may be.
For richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, you seem to be married to George W. Bush since you cannot hardly make a sentence without invoking his name.
At this rate, you will require a strait-jacket and he will always be on your mind. Pathetic.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012Without Bush's criminal invasion of other nations, America wouldn't have suffered the trillion dollar losses due to the wars and woudn't have military expenditures in those nations to this day.
Without Bush's vast economic failures, America wouldn't have been on the brink of a decades long depression when Obama took power.
Bush is the Liar and Chief who's legacy of incompetence keeps shafting the American people.
Thank Gawad Obama was there to put things back on track.
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012"For richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, you seem to be married to George W. Bush" - RichieTard
America will remain a hated nation as long as he breathes.
Modernmystic
1.7 / 5 (11) Feb 29, 2012Your only "problem" AFAICS is that you're a party man...like Rush, Keith, and a host of others. America's problems are not tied to one man, one policy, or one political party. They are an amalgamation of idiocy by many ideologies.
A wise man once said "The problem is never the problem". This is applicable to us. Our "problem" is that while the "good" decisions and legislation tend to persist, so do the "bad". Unintended consequences rule the day. You can't run a MODERN country from the top down, you can't plan a terribly complex thing like modern economy...basically you can't CONTROL people. Good thing too, otherwise we'd still be living under Egyptian pharaonic rule, the Romans, Persians, or you name it.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012Yes, they are tied to one policy. It is called 'progressivism' or socialism. Or the failure of the state to limit its authority to protecting private property, which leads to intended and unintended consequences.
Bastiat distills this quite well in The Law.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.1 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012When you exist in a system that gives you 2 or 3 choices, the choice is to select the lesser of the two or three evils.
I support those who represent the lesser evil.
The fact that that party is principally Democrats is not relevant to my support.
Modernmystic
2.3 / 5 (15) Feb 29, 2012Wrong. Absolutist theories of private property are easily shown to be flawed. What if an asteroid was heading towards the Earth, and the only thing (let's say a huge laser satellite) that could keep the entire planet from being destroyed was held by a libertarian curmudgeon. He's made it quite clear he want's to die and doesn't care about the rest of the world. He's also made it clear he doesn't approve of anyone using his private property.
You willing to die and let all of humanity die because of an absolutist idiotic theory?
Modernmystic
1.4 / 5 (11) Feb 29, 2012I gave you a 2 for this post when I should have given it a 4. I was rating Ryg not you.
In essence you're correct. However I don't subscribe to the lesser of two evils. If I don't SIGNIFICANTLY agree with who I'm voting for I withhold my vote. If I did not I'd be pointing a gun at my fellow citizens and saying "I'm forcing you to agree with all this bullshit I don't agree with for the sake of some of it that I do"...I simply don't do that...though reasonable people can disagree on this point...
FTR: I agree with legalization of drugs, abortion, civil unions, and a HOST of other things not considered conservative...yet I constantly get the label. It pisses me off. I'm not a "conservative"...I'm not a label.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012""You forget that Ronald Reagan redefined U.S. military personnel as "employed" so that he could artificially reduce unemployment rates.
You know, like Bushie redefined McDonalds hamburger flippers as part of the Manufacturing sector to hide the offshoring of American manufacturing jobs.""
Oh there he goes again. .VendiTardboyboy bringing up Presidential mistakes from the past. Presidential hits from the past still only amounts to the same old tune, VendiTardboyboy. Notice that VendiTard never invokes the hallowed name of Barack Hussein Obama regarding Obama's big political crapouts of recent fame. Reagan inherited another Tardboy's crapouts named JJJJJimmy Carter, whose racist mother, Miss Lilly I think her name was, used to say that infamous "N" word when referring to Black people. Funny thing is, Old Jimmy never caught flak from the Democrats for his mama's racist indiscretions. But she WAS from the old South, AND a staunch Democrat Dixiecrat to boot.
Modernmystic
2.1 / 5 (15) Feb 29, 2012FTR: Ronald Regan was a mostly good President. Jimmuh wasn't, he was IMVHO the worst President, and the worst Ex-President in modern times. Kennedy saved the world from nuclear annihilation, and were I president during the Cuban Missile Crisis I'd have turned the world into a pile of glowing rocks...not very impressive.
It is wise to consider ALL sides of any situation. Kennedy saved the entire world...Regan simply destroyed the Soviet Union. Regan's accomplishment is dubious considering the current political situation in Russia. Kennedy's is undeniable....
kochevnik
2 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012Then voila when the coast was clear they flipped to the repubs, which they were ideologically all along.
ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Easily?
The US Constitution has the fifth amendment which limits the authority of the state (which I said should be done) to protect private property.
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. "
'Progressive'/socialist don't like this part of the 5th amendment as the govt would have to compensate property owners when they enact regulations restricting private property rights.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012Unless you are a single issue voter, then you do. You just don't realize it.
To be clear, I see numerous problems in the Democrat camp. The principle failure is a lack of cohesiveness which leads to some drift in the defense of policies like the opposition to the fiscal madness of Reagan in the 1980's that put America on the path to financial collapse.
Republicans on the other hand are wrong on virtually every issue, as their various campaigns of anti-science illustrate.
Modernmystic
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012You didn't answer the point I made...or if you did I missed it...
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012You missed it.
Modernmystic
1.4 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012Oh they're not anti-science on military issues...as ominous as that sounds it is what it is. Martial problems and conflicts have significantly driven science forward historically. I'd like to see a different paradigm. Sad fact is that I don't.
I agree that Regan's defense spending sent us in a downward spiral, but don't discount the "benefits" that came out of it. Not having thousands of Russian nuclear tipped ICBMS pointed at us is significant IMO.
What you have to ask yourself honestly is has the rampant public spending after the housing collapse done us any good under the recent democratic control.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012We are all well aware of the Republican desire to push America into an economic depression through the Republican policy called "Starve the Beast" that has been in the works for decades.
"Notice that VendiTard never invokes the hallowed name of Barack Hussein Obama regarding Obama's big political crapouts of recent fame." - RichieTard
Consider the words of Jeb Bush. "We need to manufacture an (economic) crisis in order to assure that there are no alternatives to a smaller government" - Imprimus magazine 1995.
Modernmystic
2 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012Pray enlighten me...would you use the satellite against private property rules or not?
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012Again, national defense (protecting private property) is a legitimate, limited function of the govt.
It sent the USSR and communism into a downward spiral.
Who is 'us' in your downward spiral?
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012""Without Bush's criminal invasion of other nations, America wouldn't have suffered the trillion dollar losses due to the wars and woudn't have military expenditures in those nations to this day.""
OK. . .l'll give you an A for effort on that one. Bush'43, as the story goes, was incensed over his daddy Bush being threatened with death by Saddam Hussein and that MAY have had some bearing on his propensity for sending in the warriors to Iraq, then Afghanistan. Iraq because of his daddy, I am able to get that, however a foolish reason. But Afghanistan makes no sense at all. The Russian Army, along with unwilling conscripts from the Soviet bloc were never able to conquer the Afghans, just like the Chechens never surrendered to the Russians. Bushie's bad decision on Afghanistan was and is having bad repercussions, and I fear we will reap the whirlwind on that one.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012The Al Gore who is a near hero in the scientific community for his film and book "An inconvenient truth".
The Al Gore who's airport security improvements that would have prevented 911 and which were denied by a Repubican Congress that insisted that hijackings were a thing of the past?
"Bushie'43, if he hadn't been elected in y2K, why. .we would've been saddled with a complete incompetent name AlGore" - RichieTard
You mean that Al Gore?
ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012"Yes, they are tied to one policy. It is called 'progressivism' or socialism. Or the failure of the state to limit its authority to protecting private property, which leads to intended and unintended consequences.
Bastiat distills this quite well in The Law."
The US Constitution has the fifth amendment. Read it.
Modernmystic
1.9 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012I allude to my previous post. I don't think that any leader sits at the white house and twists their black mustache and says "How can I screw the country further"....
I think that the country gets there via their (mostly) honest worldview. The problem is that NO ONE has an infallible worldview, and even if they did they'd have to shift it minute to minute, second to second to accommodate the ACTUAL world...
RE Ryg: I don't want a bunch of idotbabble...a simple yes or no will suffice...
Do you agree the satellite should be used or not? Yes or no. Be honest for once...
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012Consider the words of Jeb Bush. "We need to manufacture an (economic) crisis in order to assure that there are no alternatives to a smaller government" - Imprimus magazine 1995.
LOL. . .somehow that sounds like and is in keeping with Obamalama's right hand man, presently mayor of Chicago, ol' raccoon eyes himself, Rahm Emanuel who once or twice said, "Never let a good crisis go to waste"
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012I view that as a double negative.
"Not having thousands of Russian nuclear tipped ICBMS pointed at us is significant IMO." - Modern
Easily achieved via negotiations. Neither side want's the burden of maintaining them nor the threat of being eradicated by them.
Reagan had little to do with anything in Russia. Gorbachev did.
"What you have to ask yourself honestly is has the rampant public spending after the housing collapse done us any good under the recent democratic control." - Modern
Clearly it has kept America from entering a grand economic depression, with the resulting loss of tens of trillions of dollars in productivity.
I think it has only postponed the inevitable though. As long as Republican Treason continues there is no hope for long term economic recovery.
Libertarian economic policies like those promised by Ron Paul guarantee an immediate depression.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012http://en.wikiped...conflict
I have always been sympathetic toward the indigenous Mayan population of the Chiapas region of southern Mexico. They have been marginalized due to previous Mexican governmental intervention of their rights to land ownership and social welfare of their communities. Their property rights were stolen by MexicanWhites with the approval of government.
Modernmystic
1 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012Clearly? Keeping trillions out of the hands of private industry has done what exaclty?
Did the government invent electricity, flight, internal combustion, assembly lines? The government doesn't and shouldn't drive the economy. It should protect the conditions that allow innovation, it doesn't, shouldn't, and CAN'T be the prime mover of such.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012I agree, and point out that the Republican world view with it's non-existent WMD, and it's anti-science views, and it's strong association with magical thinking (religion), puts it dramatically out of synch with reality.
Consider the economic world view of Libertarian Ron Paul, who has promised to cut 1 trillion in federal spending over his first year in office.
1 trillion represents 20 million jobs as a first order effect, and another 20 million in secondary effects. So while he certainly means well, his ideology will immediately increase America's unemployment rate to 40 percent if not more.
There are consequences to idiocy when idiocy has the power to do stupid things.
I have noticed that Republicans tend to damage or destroy virtually everything they get their hands on.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012Modernmystic
2.4 / 5 (15) Feb 29, 2012First of all we have freedom of religion in this country, it's the reason we have this country. Are you suggesting we jail people for their religious beliefs? I doubt you're suggesting that, but your statement is so strong I have to ask for clarification. We have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM it.
Secondly we KNOW Saddam had WMD...he used them on his own people. It's historical FACT. When he moved them or got rid of them is up for debate, as is the invasion of Iraq.
Moreover do you think that because someone disagrees with your view of reality they should be legislated out of existence or do you think we should allow for a diversity of beliefs, cultures, and creeds in society?
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012I'm not sure what you think you are referring to. But the exact opposite is the case of course. The FED printing trillions has provided trillions to corporations.
Has your bank account increased substantially? If not, then where do you think the money resides?
It didn't just vanish.
And we have consistent reports that American Corporations are sitting on 2 trillion in cash reserves.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.2 / 5 (10) Feb 29, 2012Magical thinking (religion) is evidence of mental illness and should serve as a point of disqualification for those seeking political office.
"Secondly we KNOW Saddam had WMD...he used them on his own people." - Modern
I remember Republican Donald Rumsfeld being sent to Iraq by Republican Ronald Reagan to shake Saddam's hand and tell the world that he didn't do it.
Just a few months later Ronnie would explain to the world how the Evil Ruskies were using Chemical Weapons on the Taliban in Afghanistan and how the "Taliban were the moral equivalent of America's founding fathers."
It turned out that those comments about chemical weapons were just more Republican lies, and the deposits claimed to be chemical weapons were in fact bee feces.
Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies. All Republican.
Modernmystic
1.5 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012Printing money doesn't create wealth. If nothing exists to exchange green paper with only means the green paper is worth less. The Fed produced NOTHING and hence the corporations hold nothing more than they did before unless they produced goods for the notes.
Mmmmmkay....
So you agree with Rumsfeld? All those Kurds died of natural causes...even the 3 year old kids...
kochevnik
2.1 / 5 (14) Feb 29, 2012ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012After all, it is in his self interest to keep the earth intact.
To continue with this absurd example, a good govt charged with protecting private property, would have already created an asteroid defense system.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Modernmystic
2.3 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012Yes or no. I already outlined that he WOULD NOT use the satellite. Shit or get off the pot...
If you have evidence that Saddam didn't use the weapons I'm glad to hear it...otherwise I fail to see your point.
Unless you subscribe to the idiotic idea that killing 5000 people somehow is made because Americans sold them the weapons??
Vendicar_Decarian
4.6 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012There is no debate at all. For more than a decade the U.N. had inspectors in Iraq looking for WMD, and in the last half decade, finding nothing.
There simply was none in the country. Neither were there mobile production facilities that the U.S. lied to the world about during Colon Powells laughable U.N. presentation.
And when Bush went on American TV to tell the American People that Saddam wouldn't allow U.N. inspectors in, the U.N. inspectors were in fact in Iraq doing their job.
And finally when U.N. inspectors claimed that the President was a liar, trumped up charges of child molestation were directed at at least one of them. Charges that were of course false.
And then there are the Forged Niger documents.
Republican Lies. Lies. Lies. Lies.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.2 / 5 (5) Feb 29, 2012Correct. It transferred wealth from everyone holding American dollars to the U.S. treasury which then used that value to stimulate the U.S. economy to keep it out of a grand economic depression.
That value is not reflected in a gain in your bank account, and it hasn't yet gone away. So it reflects in large part the gain in the bank accounts of corporations who are sitting on the cash rather than spending it to create jobs.
ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Your example is logically inconsistent and absurd.
Modernmystic
2.1 / 5 (14) Feb 29, 2012I'm sure they didn't. They were only allowed to search the places he didn't have them. All he had to do was open the entire country up for inspection, but he didn't...hence the invasion. Read a history book...
You still don't answer...coward. I take that as you concede the point. People ARE NOT always logical or consistent. HENCE MY POINT...idiot.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.6 / 5 (9) Feb 29, 2012No, and I take it from your question that we are both in agreement that Republican Rumsfeld and the Reagan Administration, and Republican Bush and the Bush Administration were liars in claiming that it was so, and then claiming after the U.N. investigators (including Americans) had concluded that Iraq had none.
And how about those baby incubators that Bush Sr. told Americans had been stolen by Iraq from Kuwait.
More Republican Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Feb 29, 2012LOL. . .good joke, Komrade. But actually, the historical fact was that a lot of deaths occurred from Saddam Hussein using poison chemicals on the Kurds and others. I think the definition is. . .ah yes, it's "genocide". Saddam invaded Kuwait also and burned the oil fields amongst other things and attempted to lay waste the country. I recall almost feeling sorry for the Iraqi troops who were buried in the sands of Iraq or Kuwait by American bulldozers as those troops sat in their "foxholes".
Modernmystic
2.2 / 5 (13) Feb 29, 2012Indeed...we are in agreement.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012comprehending the subtle difference between atheist and extreme agnostic.
A an atheist I can not rule out the existence of the giant spaghetti monster. But this should provide no solace for Pastafarians since I deem the probability to be smaller than 1e(minus 1000).
"Speaking of religion, has anyone read up on the latest on Richard Dawkins, whose interview with a clergyman revealed that Dawkins is NOT a dyedinthewool atheist." - RichieTard
Modernmystic
1.4 / 5 (12) Feb 29, 2012Is that evidence of mental illness? Should he be disqualified from holding political office? All that's missing IMO is a tinfoil hat...
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012Lying is pure evil, and since as I have illustrated, the Republican party is a party of congenital liars, I will support the party of lesser evil - which at this time is the Democrats.
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012Here is a video of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand after the gassing of the Kurds, for a job well done.
http://www.youtub...oejmpkgw
"But actually, the historical fact was that a lot of deaths occurred from Saddam Hussein using poison chemicals on the Kurds and others" - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012Lies and half-truths from atheists are worse even than those from creationists.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012"It was a stroke of genius from whomever thought up the idea to use bulldozers" - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Rumsfeld, like many Jews in many administrations, was still climbing the ladder of success. He might have run for President if he could.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012"They were only allowed to search the places he didn't have them. All he had to do was open the entire country up for inspection, but he didn't...hence the invasion." - Modern
The U.N. inspectors had nearly unfettered access to all of Iraq. But since the Iraqi's had caught American inspectors funneling classified information to U.S. spy agencies - a charge confirmed by the U.N. inspectors themselves, Americans were correctly barred from inspecting certain facilities. Inspectors from other nations were however permitted in those facilities.
If you have a different view of recent history it is false.
You have fallen for Republican lies sold to you in the form of Propaganda.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012But we do know that both mass murderers, Stalin and George Bush Sr. used the same bury them alive technique.
And you say. It was genius.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012"How about the video of Gaddafy calling Obama his "son". - RichieTard
In the above case Gaddafy was lying not Obama.
In the case of Rumsfeld, it was Repubican Rumsfeld that was lying along withthe Republican Reagan Administration.
In no case were any Democrats lying.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012Without Gore's vision, the net as you know it today would not exist.
"AlGore INVENTED the computer, don't you remember him admitting that?" - RichieTard
Do you intend to be an idiot for the rest of your life Tard Boy?
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (16) Feb 29, 2012I was right. . .Bush Sr. had nothing to do with Stalin
http://en.wikiped...a_Summit
They may have employed the same methods, but Stalin was a murderer and Bush was a Commander in Chief during a war that was caused by the Iraqi dictator. I wasn't referring to Bush Sr. as the genius who thought up burial by earth movers in the desert. That would be a strictly military decision.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012Nope. But Government funding has paid for the development of virtually all science and technology since then, either entirely or in terms of the underlying science.
Without government funding, the transistors currently managing your compute session would not exist as they were produced to replace bulky and unreliable tubes that could not be used in the space program.
The GUI interface you are undoubtedly using was produced through government funding at MIT's media lab.
The teflon in your frying pan also comes from government funding of the space program, as do the air bags in your car, the refrigerant used in your refrigerator, freezer, air conditioners etc.
Look around you. Virtually everything you see is the result of government funding, from the paint on the walls to the plastics coating everything in sight. Even the light bulb above your head.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 29, 2012"Bush was invited by the Kuwaiti gov't in a plea for help after Saddam invaded their country." - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012You seem to conveniently forget where that government funding money comes from, Tardboy. ALL moneys in government hands only uses the government AS A CONDUIT to spread out the appropriate payments to the funded FROM taxpayer money. There is NO funding anywhere without that taxpayer money that is forcibly wrested from the taxpayers' wallets through federal income tax
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012"...the treasonous policies of the Democrat corps of pseudo-intellectuals who brainwash American children grades K-12 and on through college with these Communist professors and teachers spouting hatred..." - Richie
As long as the above kind of Lunacy is epidemic in the Republican Party of Treason, the collapse of America will continue.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012"I am a taxpayer and it is MY money as well as the money of millions of other American citizens that PAID for all those discoveries." - RichieTard
Government is organization.
You don't have the intellectual capacity for that either.
If you had the capacity, and a billion life times you could have made those discoveries yourself.
But you aren't smart enough... and clearly never will be.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012but the government does not have the ability to exist without the taxpayers.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012LOL not if I can help it, it won't. America will go on long after you and people like you are dead and buried.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 29, 2012"LOL not if I can help it, it won't." - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Feb 29, 2012LOL. . .Bush Sr. was Navy pilot during WW2, I hardly think that he, his father or his sons would have been in the cheering section for Hitler. . .financially or otherwise
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Feb 29, 2012They are typically the most retarded of them all.
Self styled Conservatives are kinda like self styled Christians with their magic underpants and invisible glasses and demons from the planet Mongo.
"do not equate the Republican Party with Conservatism" - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.4 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012LOL. . .is that all you can come up, VendiTardo? That's not terribly intellectual of you. It figures you're a fan of the 3 stooges. . . .shiiiiiit
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (19) Feb 29, 2012How many loyal Americans have you confessed to as being an enemy of their country? I'll bet you're scared $hitless to admit to that. You'd wind up as dogmeat. LOL
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012George W. Bush's Grandfather Traded
with Nazis - Even After Pearl Harbor
http://presidentb...ary.org/
How the Bush Family Financed Hitler and Nazism
http://theamerica...and.html
The Bush - Nazi Connection
http://www.brassc...ion.html
How the Bush family made
its fortune from the Nazis
http://www.tetrah...zis.html
"Documents: Bush's Grandfather Directed Bank Tied to Man Who Funded Hitler" - Fox News
http://www.foxnew...,00.html
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Mar 01, 2012But you see. Unlike you, I am not a coward.
"How many loyal Americans have you confessed to as being an enemy of their country?" - RichieTard
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012You don't seem to be capable of rational thought.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012You clearly have a dramatic detachment from reality, and are living in a ConservaTard fantasy land.
"Wear rags and no shoes, since clothing and shoes are the products of private industry in America." - RichieTard
kochevnik
2.7 / 5 (12) Mar 01, 2012RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012So? What does this all mean? Lots of people collaborated with despots and dictators. Does that mean that Bush was a despot or a dictator himself? Did that make him greedy and disloyal to his own country? Americans buy shares of foreign stocks and bonds. Does that make them less loyal to their own? Would you say that Churchill and FDR were bad people for meeting up with Stalin at Yalta?
What does any of it mean? Did Bush's grampa become a monster for liking Hitler? No. Hitler probably put his best face on to hide the fact that HE was the monster. It's all in the past, just like Jimmy Carter. . .only J.C. is still trying to grab attention by going to north Korea, et al. . .to relive his glory days.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012"Bush Sr. was Navy pilot during WW2, I hardly think that he, his father or his sons would have been in the cheering section for Hitler. . .financially or otherwise" - RichieTard
and then when presented with overwhelming evidnence that Daddy Bush was a financer and fan of Hitler, RichieTard responds...
"Lots of people collaborated with despots and dictators." - RichieTard
I find it interesting that Daddy Bush was still dealing with the Nazi's after Pearl Harbour.
Don't you?
Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Mar 01, 2012I don't think a ConservaTard has ever said any more in a single sentence.
Well done Richie.
Remember. Greed is the ultimate good, and money the only true God.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012The antidote to that would be to deregulate, at least partially, all the companies who wish to come back to the U.S. and give them a break for once. Give them incentives to hire American workers by lower taxes, fees and charges. And get rid of the union thugs who incite violence so that workers are afraid to go to work. Private industry admins understand the value of good workers and are not going to let go of the good ones, but may want to get rid of the bad workers who don't want to do their fair share. Unions don't allow bad workers to be fired and that's not right.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012A little bit of greed is good as I've said already several pages back.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 01, 2012To assuage my greed since you have none, and the fact that money is my god. . .kindly send me that money or I will have to burglarize your home because I am finding out that you are greedy after all.
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 01, 2012RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 01, 2012kochevnik
2.5 / 5 (13) Mar 01, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012"If you don't have that certain healthy amount of greed. . .then kindly send me a check for half the amount you have in your checking or savings account" - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 01, 2012"I'll just have to mug you in a dark alley and steal your wallet and all the money in it." - RichieTard
kochevnik
2.1 / 5 (14) Mar 01, 2012Ethelred
3.4 / 5 (10) Mar 01, 2012Would you please go on another honeymoon. And stay on it this time.
You make Marjon seem intelligent and truthful.
This thread has had two intelligent posters with either some ideology issues or a total lack of a sense of proportion and two blithering idiots that lie when they aren't brain damaged chiming in with stupefying idiocy. And for once Marjon isn't the bigger lying idiot of the two.
That is quite an achievement. Even Geokster hasn't managed it for so many posts.
If you go away, and take Marjon with you, the average IQ here will go up at least 10 points. Just seeing this nonsense from you two is depressing that America could have produced such a distillation of so much idiocy and mendacity in any two people that think they belong on a science site.
Why aren't you blessing Yahoo with your posts where there are plenty of like minds willing to admire your fool posts.
Ethelred
ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 01, 2012Should it be used? Sure.
How do you plan to 'persuade' the owner to use it?
How will you prevent the owner from defending it from attack or destroying it?
rah
2.5 / 5 (15) Mar 01, 2012Ferky
1.7 / 5 (11) Mar 01, 2012There used to be a time when the rich were expected to show class and behave in a higher manner than the lower classes. Today, money alone gives entrance into the "upper class". That's too bad.
deepsand
2.9 / 5 (15) Mar 01, 2012If money grants entrance into the "upper class," then the "wealthy" are upper class.
In the US, just how many "high social class" persons are those that are not also wealthy?
lologagalitho
1 / 5 (10) Mar 02, 2012ryggesogn2
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 02, 2012Are you censoring me, Red? Are you a Communist now?
RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (17) Mar 02, 2012KKK. . .have you forgotten how to read English or do you only read the most recent posts and disregard what had been said earlier as my answer to Vendicar/Cardacian?
kochevnik
2.8 / 5 (11) Mar 02, 2012RitchieGuy
1.2 / 5 (18) Mar 03, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.5 / 5 (8) Mar 03, 2012Ethelred
3.5 / 5 (13) Mar 03, 2012Sorry that you felt the need to lie again.
You blinded yourself to reality long ago. But the reality is that you are a detriment to this site BECAUSE you have blinded yourself. You live in a fantasy world.
Ethelred
Isaacsname
5 / 5 (1) Mar 03, 2012Tell me how much enlightenment costs ?
Vendicar_Decarian
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 03, 2012Well according to American corporations, all Americans have to do to become enlightened is bend over and drop their pants.
"I ask for so little. Just fear me, love me, do as I say and I will be your slave." - Joe Corporation
Buy now and save.
StarGazer2011
1.6 / 5 (14) Mar 03, 2012Ferky
1.6 / 5 (14) Mar 03, 2012deepsand,
You have a serious problem with reading comprehension. There's "is", and there's "ought", and my comment was very clear as to what is and what ought to be.
Leigh_Pierce
2.3 / 5 (14) Mar 04, 2012_nigmatic10
2 / 5 (12) Mar 04, 2012leDendrite
3.6 / 5 (7) Mar 04, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Mar 04, 2012Only fools play that game.
The proper course of action is to redefine success to mean something other than wealth, and this has never been easier to do as a lack of wealth (in first world Capitalist nations) no longer provides a significant impediment to having a good or even great life.
Work less. Live more.
Acquire less junk. Be happier as a result.
"The system is rigged so that success is largely determined by ones willingness to screw others over." - ieDendrite
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (7) Mar 04, 2012"It should be noted that at a certain point, the terminology for cheating redefines itself to those at the class level and simply becomes a tactical advantage." - nigmatic
That is the true corruption, and over the last 40 years it has been facilitated almost exclusively by Republican and Libertarian interests.
Know the enemy.
ryggesogn2
1.4 / 5 (20) Mar 04, 2012That is the 'progressive' way. It started over 100 years ago in the US when the large meat packers in Chicago supported the creation of the FDA and expensive regulation to screw over their competitors.
That is the intent of most regulation promoted and supported by industries, use govt coercion to screw their competition.
That happened to Microsoft a few years ago when the US sued MS on behalf of a politically connected competitor.
"Its a vast protection racket, practiced by politicians and political operatives of both parties. Nice little software company youve got here. Too bad if we have to regulate it or if Big Government programs force us to raise its taxes. Your archrival just wrote a big check to the Washington Bureaucrats Benevolent Society. Are you sure you wouldnt like to do the same?"
http://www.politi...483.html
TabulaMentis
2 / 5 (12) Mar 04, 2012Illegal eavesdropping (spying) is becoming the biggest threat to humankind and people will probably figure that out until it is too late. But guess who will gain the most from illegal spying? The rich!
Vendicar_Decarian
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 04, 2012It has been doing this by paying Conservative groups in Europe to purchase it's own newspapers.
Fraud seems to be the standard way of operating for Conservative Companies like NewsCorp.
"The Murdoch's are a good example of illegal eavesdropping." - Tabula
Vendicar_Decarian
3.9 / 5 (7) Mar 04, 2012They believe that anyone should have the right to call themselves a police office, or a lawyer or a medical doctor.
They believe that all commercial standards of weights and measure are invalid, and that the policing of commercial scales is tyranny.
They believe that there should be no standards of quality, efficacy, or purity in any foods or drugs sold to the public.
Neither do they believe that laws can compel any business to honestly tell consumers what is in their products.
This is the "Paradise" that Libertarians plan for the world.
"the large meat packers in Chicago supported the creation of the FDA and expensive regulation to screw over their competitors." - RyggTard
Vendicar_Decarian
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 05, 2012http://hot-topic....roversy/
I have never encountered a Libertarian/Conservative who wasn't a scumbag liar.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (15) Mar 05, 2012You do know the NSA is spying on everyone? It is called Echelon and is 100% supported by the govt.
http://www.fas.or...elon.htm
TabulaMentis
1 / 5 (9) Mar 05, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (4) Mar 06, 2012Your collection is perfectly legal under Libertarian law.
"You do know the NSA is spying on everyone?" - RyggTard
Excalibur
2.4 / 5 (14) Mar 11, 2012Seems to me that the problem just be yours. If your writing is misread, look first to the writer.
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (12) Mar 11, 2012It's a well known fact that Socialist AGWites are completely lacking in social more's and the values that would uphold morality. Thus, it is the role of these completely immoral Socialist AGWites to falsely accuse and condemn those with whom they disagree to prevent those same judgements of immorality to be justifiably leveled at the accuser. Not much can be done to alleviate or eliminate this problem, as it is the accuser of immorality whose supposed righteous indignation draws into his camp those whose bent is similar to the accuser, and thus retains a great retinue of followers.
:-P
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (11) Mar 11, 2012The insane laws that prevent law enforcement agencies from profiling members of certain ethnicities and religions as to their potential for terrorism and other crimes, also gives permission to TSA workers to physically grope the private parts of blue eyed, white haired grandmothers in wheelchairs, amongst other victims of such invasion of privacy.
It was a long-held belief that in order to command and gain complete control over a population, it is necessary to subdue them by giving them a false sense of security even while their freedoms are slowly removed. The necessity of that process being done slowly but surely is necessary to lull the population into believing that it is being done. .
RitchieGuy
1 / 5 (11) Mar 11, 2012for their own good. A population's idea of what is relevant can be skewed by a resourceful and clever dictatorship using tyrannical methods, but with kid gloves.
In truth, class envy is what motivates those whose wish it is is to bring down those who have success and wealth down to their own level of poverty in order to justify their laziness and lack of justification for being lazy, indolent and subservient to their own greed. The masses are greedy and wish to level everyone else to their own level of incompetence and immorality. The so-called 99% want desperately to be a part of the 1% but are not willing to be educated and work hard to achieve those goals. So they have to disrupt and destroy all the good things that made America a great country. What will be left after the 99% are done disrupting and destroying? It will be a Utopia only in their minds but for those in power in an expanded Socialist or Communist government, it will be their dream come true.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (3) Mar 11, 2012Do you honestly think that we should speak politely to the heads in the bascket?
"It's a well known fact that Socialist AGWites are completely lacking in social more's and the values.." - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (3) Mar 11, 2012Yup. American Liberty has always declined under Republican Presidents.
"Preservation of the "Invasion of privacy" laws are broken every day for the sake of "security" and the nation's gullible applaud the move by U.S. government officials, the same appointed officials whose Liberal/Socialist bent coincide with the tyrannical Socialist motives of the Obama White House." - RichieTard
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (14) Mar 11, 2012Continue reading on Examiner.com Operation Echelon: Will Obama resurrect Clinton's spy program? - National Law Enforcement | Examiner.com http://www.examin...orPLF0gv
"
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (3) Mar 11, 2012After a life of being trained to be suckers and trained "consumers", is it any wonder why people like Richie Tard fall for the lies told to him by the Heritage Foundation and the other pro-corporate propaganda groups poisoning America?
Thinking people are capable of seeing through their anti-intellectual nonsense. But those of low intellect like RichieTard don't have a chance.
"A population's idea of what is relevant can be skewed by a resourceful and clever dictatorship using tyrannical methods, but with kid gloves." - RichieTard
Vendicar_Decarian
4 / 5 (4) Mar 11, 2012The Information Awareness Office (IAO) was established by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in January 2002 to bring together several DARPA projects focused on applying surveillance and information technology to track and monitor terrorists and other asymmetric threats to national security, by achieving Total Information Awareness (TIA).
"the Clinton Administration and the National Security Agency employed a global spy system, code named Echelon" - RyggTard
Ethelred
2.3 / 5 (6) Mar 12, 2012Bush taps phones throughout the US and lies that he didn't need a search warrant and you lie that it was Obama that stole our rights.
It was that vile, incompetent, economy destroying, draft dodging MORON President DUMBASS that did those things. And instead of learning that your are on the wrong side you LIE and just keep going down the path of the RightWingNutRetainerClip as if you hadn't been complaining about things that BUSH did.
The only real questions about you is
Are you really this dishonest or are you just that stupid?
Where you born this way or is it brain damage from the RetainerClip?
Ethelred The Appalled
Ethelred
2.3 / 5 (6) Mar 12, 2012Ethelred
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (13) Mar 12, 2012Recall the Clinton's FBI files and politically motivated IRS audits?
Obama has an enemy list and uses the IRS for politically motivated audits.
"In the 1990s Bill Clinton had an enemies list too. The Clinton administration targeted for IRS audit the National Rifle Association, the Heritage Foundation, the National Review, the American Spectator, Citizens Against Government Waste, Citizens for Honest Government, Concerned Women for America and the San Diego Chapter of Christian Coalition.
Today, Obama has an enemies list. The IRS is investigating conservative political groups including the Tea Party who oppose Obama's agenda."
http://www.humane...id=49908
And then we have a tax exempt org, Media Matters, campaigning for Obama along with several regulated TV networks. No conflict of interest there?!
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 12, 2012"Are you really this dishonest or are you just that stupid?" - Ethel
Vendicar_Decarian
5 / 5 (1) Mar 12, 2012http://en.wikiped...ies_List
"'Progresssives' are quite eager to establish enemy lists and use their political power to crush their enemies." - RyggTard
Ethelred
2.6 / 5 (5) Mar 12, 2012Thus speaks the liar that has this 'progressive' on his enemies list.
How does lying so much make things better Marjon?
All were groups not people, much like that attacks on Acorn.
Recall Reagan sending a legal hit squad out to California to damage the Democrats? Actual people not corporations.
A hit squad that only caught Republicans taking bribes?
I didn't think you would remember that.
Ethelred
Ethelred
3 / 5 (4) Mar 13, 2012Tit for tat doggy. One each and it goes geometric for any after this warning.
Now is you show that I was wrong that will be different. Reagan did exactly what I said.
Ethelred