The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-07-2010, 08:21 AM   #51
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Tea and Crackers: How Corporate Interests and Republican Insiders Built the Tea Party Monster


Tea Party Closely Linked to Religious Right, Poll Finds
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2010, 08:30 AM   #52
epicSocialism4tw
Tebowing the long haul
 
all the way to the title

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: TX, USA
Posts: 36,819

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Champ Bailey
Default

Wow, thats some completely unbiased information there!
epicSocialism4tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2010, 08:54 AM   #53
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by McSkillet View Post
Wow, thats some completely unbiased information there!
I guess that's one way to bypass the question of whether it's factual or not.

We can always count on you to attack the messenger when the message exposes inconvenient facts.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2010, 12:48 PM   #54
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Tea Party Populism RIP: Beck Backs Pro-TARP, Pro-Stimulus Chamber Of Commerce

The Tea Party has long attempted to portray itself as a populist movement -- angry both at Wall Street bailouts and social spending. The notion of government action working to save the private sector from collapse was literally depicted as a giant step towards Nazism, most prominently by unofficial Tea Party leader Glenn Beck.

And it is that Glenn Beck who today wrapped his arms around the U.S. Chamber Of Commerce business lobbyists who, when facing crisis, clamored for that government help -- the fascism known as TARP, and the slavery known as the stimulus.
Today, Beck cut a check for $10,000 to the Chamber of Commerce, and urged his radio listeners to follow his lead. "They are us" said Beck.

What is it that so closely bonds the Chamber with Beck?

Not TARP.

Here's Glenn Beck, talking about TARP in April 2009:
...where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society's economic process through direct state operations of the means of production, fascism sought to control indirectly through the domination of nominally private owners. Would you say that this is what's happening with G.M. right now? And AIG? ...

… We're giving our freedoms away. G.M., AIG, any of these banks, Citigroup — they're all giving their freedom away for security.

A few weeks later, Glenn Beck said TARP was "exactly what happened to the lead-up with Hitler."

Yet here's Glenn Beck's soulmate, the Chamber of Commerce, testifying to Congress about TARP in September 2009, one year after the bailout was enacted:
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce lobbied for the creation of the TARP program and continues to support efforts to improve the program to ensure its success. With banks not lending, businesses lost the liquidity needed to function, while simultaneously, consumer spending, which makes up 70% of our economy, was shrinking at an historic rate. Simply put, the financial crisis had driven the United States to its worst economic predicament since the Great Depression. In order for businesses to function and for an economic recovery to take hold, the financial services sector needed immediate shoring up and that vehicle was TARP.

…The TARP program has had its problems, but a year later we can say that an outright collapse was avoided, the financial sector is stabilizing, and the first signs are appearing that an economic recovery is taking hold.

Is that the United States Chamber of Commerce or the gas chamber of Auschwitz?

Well, maybe Beck and the Chamber come together on the most defining act of Obama presidency: the stimulus.

Not quite.

Glenn Beck equated the stimulus to "slavery":
It is the nanny state. They're going to tell us what we can eat, they're can tell us what our temperature needs to be in our homes, they can tell us what kind of car to drive. They can tell businesses how to run their business. It's slavery. It is slavery.

Meanwhile, the Chamber of Commerce was lobbying for our enslavement:
The global economy is in uncharted and dangerous waters and inaction from Washington is not an option. No package of this size can be perfect but we need a bill that will unlock capital markets, free up credit, and create momentum in the economy...

...Spending on 'shovel-ready' construction projects, expanding broadband access, and modernizing our health care information are major steps toward boosting our nation's infrastructure and creating American jobs...

...We urge both chambers of Congress to swiftly pass the bill.

The marriage of Beck to the Chamber exposes the hypocrisy of both.
Why would Beck embrace an institution that supports the things he claims will end a free America?

Because he is just another conservative hack who wants to defeat Democrats, and will say anything, and give money to anyone who can further that goal.

Why is the Chamber fighting so hard to defeat the President and the Democratic congressional leadership, when in its own words, they saved its bacon?

Because the Chamber is just fine with government help for CEOs, but not for anyone else. They want all the handouts from the public, without any of the responsibility to act in the public interest.

The Chamber already got theirs from the Democrats. Now that new regulations are coming with it, the Chamber can move on.

I am sure there are some actual rank-and-file Tea Partiers who, like many progressives, felt that our government did too much for Wall Street and without doing enough for Main Street.

But the fact is: the current leadership in Washington did something for Main Street -- more jobs, more health care, more consumer protection than if our government stepped aside.

While Tea Party leaders and financiers, like Glenn Beck, Dick Armey and the Koch brothers have, in Beck's own words today, put their money where their mouth is. And that's on Wall Street.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 10:58 AM   #55
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

LABF has put his thumb on one of the biggest problems -- the fact that so many people are confused about what is happening -- and therefor confused about who the actual enemy is.
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 11:00 AM   #56
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,995
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
LABF has put his thumb on one of the biggest problems -- the fact that so many people are confused about what is happening -- and therefor confused about who the actual enemy is.
Funny how a "peace activist" tosses around "enemy" all the time.

The real enemy is "banksters" (gaff-o talk for "Jews"), right?
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 11:01 AM   #57
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

Much of the seed $$$ for the tea party came from the third richest men in America- - the Koch brothers who of course support the Wall Street bail out.

So why would any true anti globalist have anything to do with such a movement -- which is in fact a facade -- a front for continuing and INCREASING Wall Street control over our lives?

Good question. Time to wake up, America.
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 11:03 AM   #58
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default another excellent op ed by William Sullivan, who nails it.

America's False Consciousness

By Charles Sullivan

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle26648.htm

October 20, 2010 "Information Clearing House" -- An essay authored by Patrick Martin, and published at the World Socialist Web Site on October 13, 2010, revealed some interesting findings regarding the approval ratings of Democratic and Republican members of Congress. Martin’s piece was titled Demagogy and Duplicity: The Democrats in the 2010 Elections. He cites data from a Zogby International Poll of independent voters which found that “only 13% gave a favorable rating to congressional Democrats and only 5% to Congressional Republicans.” Considering that the U.S. is the most conservative developed nation on earth, these are astonishing revelations.

Poll after poll indicates that voters have lost faith in the Democratic and Republican Parties, whose respective approval ratings have fallen to historical lows. The Zogby findings indicate a repudiation of right-wing politics by those who are not wed to either of the major political parties.

No one associates liberalism with the Republicans; however, it is equally clear that the Democrats do not have a functioning left-wing either. The electoral choices are between right-wing candidates in the Democrat and Republican parties, despite the offerings of political parties and organizations operating outside of the mainstream. As a result, all of the contests are between pro-corporate candidates who occupy the extreme right of the political spectrum. The only message that reaches the public ear is that of the ruling class. Thus the continuity of results is assured.

The paradox is that while independent working class people have overwhelmingly rejected right-wing policies, the country nevertheless continues to lurch further to the right. This happens when people mistake people like Obama for a liberal or a Socialist. Conservative and liberal working class people should be philosophically and ethically opposed to any political party that undermines their social and economic interests.

Almost inexplicably, conservatives continue to identify themselves with Republicans and liberals with Democrats. Traditional conservatives and traditional liberals, while still in existence, are politically extinct. Neither conservatives nor liberals are organized into a viable political force. They are fighting one another while the super-rich are looting the public treasure and privatizing the public domain. Traditional conservatives and traditional liberals were replaced by neoconservatives and neoliberals, which are entirely different animals. We behave as if the terms ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ and the parties they were traditionally associated with continue to exist and function the way they did in the past.

Liberalism no longer finds articulation in the Democratic Party. Cynthia McKinney may have been the last truly liberal Democrat. McKinney, like the liberal wing of the party itself, was abandoned when the party sold out its liberal base to pursue corporate bribes in order to compete with the Republicans. As a result, the left continues to ineffectually grope for political expression.

The trouble is that the people do not comprehend who or what the real enemy is. Let me clarify it for them: The enemy is the ruling class, its social, financial, and political institutions, and the capitalist system that spawned them. Its enemy is the corporate state and the commercial media in its various forms of expression.

It is irrational, if not delusional, for working class people to support candidates and polices to which they are philosophically opposed. And yet that is what they are doing. As recent polls make clear, neither conservatives nor progressives want to have their social security benefits cut. They do not want to see their retirement benefits reduced, or their Medicare and Medicaid payments slashed. The unemployed do not want their unemployment checks cut or eliminated, as some Republican members of Congress advocate. Workers do not want the retirement age raised. They do not want to see college tuition priced out of reach to all but the wealthy.

The working class consists of liberals and conservatives. It encompasses the devoted followers of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh. However, Beck, Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, and all of the other right-wing crackpots support such policies, as do most Democrats, including President Obama. Why would any working class person, Democrat or Republican, support any of these charlatans?

Why would they support a social and economic system that exploits and subjugates them? Clearly they do not understand that system or the alternatives that are available to it.

The answer is that Americans are too indoctrinated to see clearly. The majority exists in a media-induced state of false consciousness. To them, up is down and down is up. Brown is white and white is brown. The people are confused and disoriented. They are misled and lied to. They are looking for quick and easy fixes to complex problems that were long in the making. For the reasons outlined above, voting cannot cure what ails America. The game is fixed. The appearance of choice is an illusion, an utter hoax.

Political and media demagogues portray liberals (progressives & Socialists), which continue to be miscast as democrats, as the enemy of the working class. Working people do not comprehend that the benefits they are fighting to preserve were the result of progressive policies, many of them stemming from Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. Conservatives, neoconservatives, and neoliberals have always opposed these policies and have fought to end them since the day of their inception. Let us not forget that FDR was accused by one of his adversaries of being “a traitor to his class.”

It would be a mistake, however, to confuse FDR for a genuine progressive. Certainly he was no socialist. It was his Secretary of Labor, Frances Perkins, a Democratic Socialist, not FDR, who was the principal architect of The New Deal. It should be noted, too, that The New Deal excluded most blacks. It was essentially affirmative action for whites. Spooked by the social unrest engendered by The Great Depression, FDR, an avowed capitalist, perceived these policies as the only way to save capitalism from the socialist threat of his time. Roosevelt was correct in his assessment. It would have been better for the nation in the long run if FDR did not enact The New Deal. If he had not, it is likely that massive social upheaval would have ensued, and Socialism may well have supplanted capitalism as the dominant paradigm.

Before any of my readers point out the failure of Soviet Socialism, particularly under the murderous Stalin regime, let me state that this was not Socialism as Marx, Engels, and Trotsky envisioned it; it was state capitalism.

Similarly, if President Obama did not bail out America’s financial institutions with public funds, global capitalism would have collapsed. Predicated upon greed and exploitation, these institutions should have been allowed to fail, bringing down the global capitalist economy. If Adam Smith’s much ballyhooed, ‘invisible hand of the market’ actually existed, the world today would look very different than it did a few short years ago. We might actually be in recovery. Now we are waiting for the next onslaught.

History demonstrates that free (deregulated) markets, the Holy Grail of Milton Friedman’s capitalism, do not actually exist. They never have. Free market capitalism is an ideological myth that is reified in our culture. Markets are always manipulated by elites for the sole benefit of elites. Otherwise the global economy would have fallen like a row of dominoes two years ago. What we witnessed was Socialism (public funds) propping up capitalism (privately owned financial institutions). All of the benefit, to the tune of $13.8 trillion, went to the financial institutions and to the elite. Working people were rewarded with government-imposed austerity. This has occurred not only in the U.S. but elsewhere in the world.

The international financial aristocracy is laying the foundation for global governance. The public domain is being privatized. The poor are no longer part of the social and political discourse.

As a result of these policies, there is social turmoil in every capitalist nation on earth, except the U.S. Compared to the rest of the world, Americans are comatose, which is the result of so many people being informed by Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and other wealthy demagogues working the airwaves on behalf of the ruling class. Most Americans are informed by ideology, not by facts.

This is what Friedrich Nietzsche meant by conviction. Reality pales before the shadow of belief and false hope. Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave” comes to mind. Fantasy becomes the norm. Capitalism would not long endure in the presence of collective true consciousness. It exists by deceit.

Charles Sullivan is a naturalist and free-lance writer residing in the hinterlands of geopolitical West Virginia.

Last edited by mhgaffney; 10-21-2010 at 11:08 AM..
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 11:23 AM   #59
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,131

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Can't really disagree with any of that. Sad to say.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 11:33 AM   #60
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

Here's a good piece about the Koch financial empire -- and its support of the tea party phenom:

The Koch Empire and Americans for Prosperity

By PAM MARTENS


http://www.counterpunch.org/martens10192010.html
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 11:55 AM   #61
Obushma
Ring of Famer
 
Obushma's Avatar
 
Bring your lunch pail

Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SLC Utah
Posts: 2,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Much of the seed $$$ for the tea party came from the third richest men in America- - the Koch brothers who of course support the Wall Street bail out.

So why would any true anti globalist have anything to do with such a movement -- which is in fact a facade -- a front for continuing and INCREASING Wall Street control over our lives?

Good question. Time to wake up, America.
While I don't disagree that there has been money donated by the Koch brothers to back Neocons trying to hijack the Tea Party, most people understand what the true Tea Party is about. We don't need the MSM's interpretation of what it is for us. We welcome with open arms, true conservatives, who realize authoritarian Neocons had the wool pulled over their eyes. We also welcome Liberals who realize there is no way to stop the endless wars, unless we get people who are non-interventionists into office.

Time to wake up Gaffney, put down the Chomsky, there was one man who fueled this whole movement...and he ain't done yet!!!
Obushma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 12:49 PM   #62
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThyNatural View Post
While I don't disagree that there has been money donated by the Koch brothers to back Neocons trying to hijack the Tea Party....

You still haven't answered the fundamental question "why would Koch, et al, feel the Tea Party was a movement it would be to their advantage to co-opt?"
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 02:58 PM   #63
Obushma
Ring of Famer
 
Obushma's Avatar
 
Bring your lunch pail

Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SLC Utah
Posts: 2,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN View Post
You still haven't answered the fundamental question "why would Koch, et al, feel the Tea Party was a movement it would be to their advantage to co-opt?"
That's a question you'd have to ask the Koch brothers. Personally, I believe the Neocons/Social Repubs are clinging to the Tea Party as their only hope for the future. They saw the grassroots movement taking place at a local level and knew this wasn't something they could stop. It works the same way as when Liberals became Neocons and embedded themselves in the GOP, those same Neocons are now trying to shed their old skin and put on another. It's quite easy too see if you've followed the history behind Neoconservativism, bunch of Authoritarian bastards just like their brothers, the Democrats.
Obushma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 03:04 PM   #64
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThyNatural View Post
It works the same way as when Liberals became Neocons...
Huh?
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 03:11 PM   #65
Obushma
Ring of Famer
 
Obushma's Avatar
 
Bring your lunch pail

Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SLC Utah
Posts: 2,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN View Post
Huh?
Look up Leo Strauss and Irving Krystol, both Troykists, both Liberal, both founders of Neoconservitism.
Obushma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 03:27 PM   #66
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThyNatural View Post
Look up Leo Strauss and Irving Krystol, both Troykists, both Liberal, both founders of Neoconservitism.
What's a "Troykist?"
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 03:30 PM   #67
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThyNatural View Post
Look up Leo Strauss and Irving Krystol, both Troykists, both Liberal, both founders of Neoconservitism.
You're trying to claim Leo Strauss was a liberal?

The guy was about as anti-liberal as it gets!

He basically believed that liberalism was responsible for all of the world's evils.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 03:53 PM   #68
Obushma
Ring of Famer
 
Obushma's Avatar
 
Bring your lunch pail

Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SLC Utah
Posts: 2,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN View Post
You're trying to claim Leo Strauss was a liberal?

He basically believed that liberalism was responsible for all of the world's evils.
He was a Troykist, and he believed liberals "lost their way".

Trotskyism -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trotskyism

Quote:
The guy was about as anti-liberal as it gets!
I don't know, do you consider Marxism liberal?

Last edited by Obushma; 10-21-2010 at 04:00 PM..
Obushma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 04:43 PM   #69
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThyNatural View Post
He was a Troykist, and he believed liberals "lost their way".

Trotskyism -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trotskyism
Again - what is a "Troykist?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThyNatural View Post

I don't know, do you consider Marxism liberal?
You're trying to claim that Strauss was a Marxist?

Where is your evidence for this?

At any rate...

Quote:
Finally, responding to charges that Strauss's teachings fostered the neoconservative foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration, such as "unrealistic hopes for the spread of liberal democracy through military conquest," Professor Nathan Tarcov, Director of the Leo Strauss Center at the University of Chicago, in an article published in The American Interest asserts that Strauss as a political philosopher was essentially non-political. After an exegesis of the very limited practical political views to be gleaned from Strauss's writings, Tarkov concludes that "Strauss can remind us of the permanent problems, but we have only ourselves to blame for our faulty solutions to the problems of today."[32]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Strauss
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 04:55 PM   #70
Obushma
Ring of Famer
 
Obushma's Avatar
 
Bring your lunch pail

Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SLC Utah
Posts: 2,127
Default

again...

Obushma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 06:14 PM   #71
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,244
Default

Look guys, the important point was made by William Sullivan in the above posted piece.

To wit --

neo conservatives are extremists -- not true conservatives.

neo liberals are their kissing cousins -- far far from true liberals.

Orwell nailed it when he wrote that eastern totalitarianism and western predatory capitalism meet in the middle.

We are seeing this now. Can someone please explain the difference between a neo conservative and a neo liberal?

(This ought to be good.)
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 06:25 PM   #72
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Look guys, the important point was made by William Sullivan in the above posted piece.

To wit --

neo conservatives are extremists -- not true conservatives.

neo liberals are their kissing cousins -- far far from true liberals.

Orwell nailed it when he wrote that eastern totalitarianism and western predatory capitalism meet in the middle.

We are seeing this now. Can someone please explain the difference between a neo conservative and a neo liberal?

(This ought to be good.)
The term "neoliberal" can be rather misleading.

It has nothing to do with liberalism (which might be the source of ThyNatural's confusion.)
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 07:23 PM   #73
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,895
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug View Post
What is an "Obama movement"?
Anytime you take a crap.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 08:00 PM   #74
Obushma
Ring of Famer
 
Obushma's Avatar
 
Bring your lunch pail

Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SLC Utah
Posts: 2,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN View Post
The term "neoliberal" can be rather misleading.

It has nothing to do with liberalism (which might be the source of ThyNatural's confusion.)
Do you consider Obama a neoliberal?
Obushma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2010, 08:16 PM   #75
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 54,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThyNatural View Post
Do you consider Obama a neoliberal?
Ideologically, no - but as a matter of record, his response, as president, to the neoliberals has been one of appeasement.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:48 PM.


Denver Broncos