[jeffkrol]

Sandra Fluke is an idiot,
Again, not hate,

You just CAN'T see it huh............

[jeffkrol]

Have you completed "war training," as you call it? Maybe that's something you read in a book or something you learned about a foreign military or something from the past, but it's certainly not the case now. I can tell you the capabilities and tactics of our current enemies are very much respected. Why do you think the Marines got absolutely slammed for a video of them urinating on dead bodies? Why do you think the entire Marine Corps, every single Marine, received a Commandant-directed ethics training over the last couple months?

About time...........yet accepting cultural differences IS part of intelligence...You don't have to adopt it yourself just respect it for what it is .. right or wrong .. in your way of thinking..

Can we get back on track about the hypocrisy of donations...

We all know the "system" is BAD.. McCain Feinglod gutted by "citizens United"....

One side is no better than another.. a DRAW if you will.............. so be it.

as to "the bow"

If you point out their hypocrisy they'll only act like they didn't like Bush.
Recent memory show the opposite to be true.
A bow is meant to be respectful, a kiss is both respectful and shows a higher level of friendship.

--------------------

stealthrunner35-The bow was customary and is not returned.
"When in Rome, do as the Romans do."
You should study more about other cultures.
Bowing is not a sign of inferiority-it is a sign of respect. If you would all turn off your T.V.'s for a little while and study other cultures you'd know this.

Interestingly, a columnist in the Saudi-backed Arabic paper Asharq Alawsat also took the gesture as a bow and appreciated the move.

"Obama wished to demonstrate his respect and appreciation of the personality of King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz, who has made one of the most important calls in the modern era, namely the call for inter-faith and inter-cultural dialogue to defuse the hatred, conflict and wars," wrote the columnist, Muhammah Diyab.

White House: No bow to Saudi - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com

As to "dating'... one is reminded of the "ol" CIC

Photobucket | bush kiss saudi Pictures, bush kiss saudi Images, bush kiss saudi Photos





Bit@h all you want of one side being worse than another yet neither cares at this moment where their cash comes from..

[cardinal43]

No, it's not that and it's definitely not a crowd, maybe more like a posse of around 5 or so that seek attention, and there's not many who challenge because most are busy working and making a living and don't have time to read into their constant toxic spew.

That's quite an assumption you made. How do you know the "5 or so" aren't busy working and making a living? jtkratzer posted at 8:40 am, and you posted at 9:01 am. Are both of you busy working and making a living at this time of the day? I'm not one of the 5 or so, but I mostly work from home, and it doesn't matter what hours I work each day as long as I get the job done.

[stevewig]

You just CAN'T see it huh............

I think he probably does "..see it..." because he is not stupid.

The problem is that he feels that he has the right to be scornful, insulting and to categorize (or label) everybody who has a different opinion to himself whereas they most definitely should admire and respect his own contrary, political opinions.

---

Last edited by stevewig; 10-09-2012 at 07:53 AM.

[jeffkrol]

That's quite an assumption you made. How do you know the "5 or so" aren't busy working and making a living?

living in the "Ass-u-me-tion" box so favored by some........... Makes life "easier" in decision making when you ignore facts and use your own personal BELIEFS...........

Onward..............
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9595345/The-illegal-donor-loophole.html

In addition, people around the world are being asked for donations by the campaigns themselves, simply because they signed up for information on campaign websites. The problem: candidate webpages don’t ask visitors from foreign IP addresses to enter a military ID or passport number. Instead, the websites use auto-responder email systems that simply gather up email addresses and automatically spit out solicitations.

The FEC, meanwhile, has taken the position that this sort of passive internet solicitation is not illegal, because the campaigns, presumably, are not intentionally targeting foreign nationals with their online money pleas.

[jtkratzer]

No, it's not that and it's definitely not a crowd, maybe more like a posse of around 5 or so that seek attention, and there's not many who challenge because most are busy working and making a living and don't have time to read into their constant toxic spew.

That and most of these people, like terrorists, can't be reasoned with because they are hypocrites and guilty of what they like to accuse everyone else of - intolerance and close mindedness.

You just CAN'T see it huh............

No, it's not hate. The truth is the truth and sometimes, that hurts feelings.

About time...........yet accepting cultural differences IS part of intelligence...You don't have to adopt it yourself just respect it for what it is .. right or wrong .. in your way of thinking..

About time? Who the **** do you think you are? Have you ever put your country first? Have you ever put anyone other than yourself or immediate family first? You have the Constitutional right to say that because the people you despise ensure you have it by writing a blank check to this country cashable for anything and everything including one's life on the line. Look at the oath of office and oath of enlistment. Read the that contract we're sworn to upheld. Show some respect, not to me, but to your country and the reason this country is so great.

Part of why this country is struggling is we bend over backwards to avoid hurting any single person's feelings, like you and Sandra Fluke. America needs a healthy dose of "man the **** up." This country is bigger and greater than any one individual.

Wrong. I do not have to accept the fact that little boys are forced into the role of sex toy in numerous countries. I do not have to accept that a woman is a piece of property and does not have rights. I do not have to accept their culture at all. I'll eat their food, drink their tea, listen to their music, but I will never accept their sexual exploitation of young children and women. I will never accept the concept that the murder of innocent people is acceptable. I will never accept or tolerate religion being used as a recruitment tool to murder people. I will never accept the exploitation of mentally handicapped personnel to be used as mindless couriers of explosives to be detonated by someone else. I will never accept children being used as a decoy in a car to distract US servicemen and women from the explosives contained in that vehicle, which was later detonated with the children in it.

You can call me intolerant and hate filled or whatever you want, but the fact remains, you know nothing of what you speak except for what you read in your twisted media and whatever colored glasses you wear.

And, again, as usual...you chose not to respond to any other part of my post, just like Obama didn't respond to most of what Romney said during the debate. Typical.

That's quite an assumption you made. How do you know the "5 or so" aren't busy working and making a living? jtkratzer posted at 8:40 am, and you posted at 9:01 am. Are both of you busy working and making a living at this time of the day? I'm not one of the 5 or so, but I mostly work from home, and it doesn't matter what hours I work each day as long as I get the job done.

I'm self employed and run my own schedule.

I think he probably does "..see it..." because he is not stupid.

The problem is that he feels that he has the right to be scornful, insulting and to categorize (or label) everybody who has a different opinion to himself whereas they most definitely should admire and respect his own contrary, political opinions.

Kettle, meet pot. Read what you typed, directed at me, and apply it to what you just said. You know nothing about me. You don't know me. Think what you want, but the fact remains, my view of politics is grounded on principles and the Constitution, not a box of tissues and building my views around sob stories and what makes people feel good.

I don't see how the truth is hate speech or racist or sexist. I don't see how actually knowing what I'm talking about rather than basing my view of the world through a biased media is inaccurate or judgmental.

I do throw the term "liberals" around because most of them, especially people on forums that have no accountability to back up what they say, are like lemmings, little cookie cutter patterns of each other.

Everywhere you go, any forum you want, where politics are discussed, you frequently find liberals who will not stay on track on a conversation, they cherry pick what they want to respond to and what they don't, they like to ignore statistical data and facts, and frankly, they're arrogant and esoteric. They think they're smarter or better than everyone else because of their political affiliation..even the name "progressive" they've adopted makes them think they're more advance than the conservative views.

Say what you want, but when you all repeat things like parrots from the press, ignore stats and challenges to your views, think you're smarter than everyone else, and all sound the same, you're going to earn a label. Just like hipsters are everything they can't stand - a classification of people based on conformity in how they dress, their bikes, music, and views. They've earned a label and you can pick a hipster out of a crowd because of how he looks and acts. Liberals are the same way. That's not scornful. If it was, then every person who has ever studied any sort of science that involves cataloging species, chemicals, etc would be scornful for doing the same thing.

I don't think people are idiots for having different views than me. I think there are idiots out there because the foundation of their views is flawed, based on a lie, etc.

[joe.penn]

In typical Liberal fashion, here is something noteworthy to add to this thread [and not really off topic since racism has been brought up and the mention of Liberals across the web channels]:

In his speech to the Republican National Convention earlier this year, actor Clint Eastwood told the assembled crowd that there are more conservatives and moderates in Hollywood than they might think. Such people “play closer to the vest. They do not go around hot dogging it,” Eastwood said.

Unfortunately, actress Stacey Dash is finding out the hard way what happens to those celebrities who are willing to think for themselves: they get attacked by the very people who claim to preach “tolerance” and “peace.” (Note: This blog post is “not safe for work” and certainly not for children.)

The self-proclaimed merchants of tolerance were even more upset at the former Clueless star because she dares to back Mitt Romney even though she, like President Obama, is partially black. And of course, all black Americans must vote for Obama.

Actress Stacey Dash Endorses Romney, Liberals Fling Racist Insults | NewsBusters.org



Yep, don't approve of their views and they band together like roaches and whine like 5-yr old kids. In the end, they will self destruct by their own demise just as they have done many many many times in the past.

[jeffkrol]

SSD..D pick your own word..............

Being a Marine doesn't entitle you to "godhead" btw................andI'm certainly not worried about hurting your feelings.........though I'm sure you'd come
back w/ some knuckle dragging remark...........

Name ONE modern president who didn't either support or cow tow to some tin pot dictator who believed "freedom" was a dirty word.......

SUDDENLY NOW you are outraged.. how convenient.......

FYI:

Activists working against human trafficking in Israel called on Tourism Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch to reconsider a move to scrap visa requirements for visiting Russians, fearing the change could increase the flow of illegal sex workers into the country.

Report notes that the Israeli government still "does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking."

"I understand that it will increase globalization and strengthen Israel's economy," Rita Chaikin, the anti-trafficking project coordinator of the grassroots Isha L'Isha - Haifa Feminist Center, told The Jerusalem Post Tuesday. "I also understand that Russian tourists need to come in and visit, but the minute we open the borders, we have to be prepared [for the possibility] that trafficking will increase."

The abolishment of Russian tourist visas - a move that the Tourism Ministry claims will add tens of millions of dollars in annual revenue to the Israeli economy within the next few years - was approved last month by the cabinet and is now in the final stages of implementation. It will also allow Israelis to visit Russia without visas.

However, Russia is considered a transit destination for trafficking operations, with many men, women and children from neighboring countries arriving there before being transported elsewhere. Egypt has no visa requirements for Russian visitors, and its border with Israel is considered to be a main entry point for human traffickers.

A spokesman for Aharonovitch told the Post zthat the minister was aware of the problems of human trafficking in Israel and that the issue needed to be tackled; however, he added that there was little connection between the trafficking and the cancellation of visa requirements for Russian visitors.

He also said that the number of women arriving from Russia was much lower than those from other countries and that countries with border policies stricter than Israel's still had to contend with women and men being smuggled in for illegal work purposes.

However, Chaikin countered that "a legitimate Russian passport can be obtained quite easily," pointing out that the women are not necessarily from Russia, but coming through Russia from other countries in the Former Soviet Union block and Eastern Europe.

"Its like the [Tourism] Ministry was born yesterday," she continued. "They should really do their research and check the field before making such decisions. They have only thought about the financial benefits."

According to the US State Department's 2007 Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP), which was released last June, Israel has made efforts to prevent such activities, but still "does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking."

“As If I Am Not Human:” Abuses against Asian Domestic Workers in Saudi Arabia.

Click to view this publication.
(Note: the publication is located on another website.)

Human Rights Watch, July 2008.

This report concludes two years of research and is based on 142 interviews with domestic workers, senior government officials, and labor recruiters in Saudi Arabia and labor-sending countries. Saudi households employ an estimated 1.5 million domestic workers, primarily from Indonesia, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, and Nepal. Smaller numbers come from other countries in Africa and Asia. While no reliable statistics exist on the exact number of abuse cases, the Saudi Ministry of Social Affairs and the embassies of labor-sending countries shelter thousands of domestic workers with complaints against their employers or recruiters each year.

Available Downloads

You can start w/ Bush's bromance w/ the Saudis.. who BTW have an abysmal record on human trafficking..........and if you REALLY LOOK Israel isn't that far behind ..oh and the US..

Save your rage for the uneducated.. since they are the ones who will buy your "shtick"

Ohh "evil people" inhabit the world.. tell me something I don't know and technically they are "everywhere"...some friend.. some foe..

More evil people...........

Destination
Japan is recognized as having one of the most severe human trafficking problems among the major industrialized democracies.4 Japan is a destination country for women and children from East Asia, Southeast Asia, and to a lesser extent, Eastern Europe, Russia, and Latin America who are subjected to sexual and labor exploitation.5 Recruitment techniques are often based on false promises of employment as waitresses, hotel staff, entertainers, or models.6 Traffickers also use fraudulent marriages between foreign women and Japanese men to facilitate entry of victims into Japan for forced prostitution.7

Further, Japan continues to be an international hub for the production and trafficking of child pornography.8 Japan is home to an immense sex industry that includes a wide variety of commercial sex operation models, including themed-brothels, hostess clubs, escort agencies, ‘snack’ clubs, strip theatres, and street prostitution. Many are owned, controlled, or ‘taxed’ by the Japanese organized crime network, the Yakuza, or increasingly by foreign-based groups such as Korean or Colombian crime networks.9 Japanese men continue to be a significant source of demand for child sex tourism in Southeast Asia.10

Male and female migrant workers from China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, and other Asian countries are also sometimes subjected to conditions of forced labor.11 While not as widespread as sex trafficking, labor trafficking is believed to take place in construction, factory work, and domestic servitude situations.12

Although the Government of Japan has not officially recognized the existence of forced labor within the Industrial Trainee and Technical Internship Program (the “foreign trainee program”), the media and NGOs continue to report abuses including debt bondage, restrictions on movement, unpaid wages and overtime, fraud, and contracting workers out to different employers. The majority of trainees are Chinese nationals who pay high fees to Chinese brokers to apply for the program.13

[snostorm]

Bain did outsource jobs, no different than GE and the auto industry because the choice was to close the business and lose all American jobs or outsource some to save a portion of the company and work to fix their issues and bring the jobs back.

So you're comfortable with calling anyone at Bain Capital an "outsourcer" because the company was responsible for outsourcing some jobs, but you excuse them because they did it for supposedly noble purposes. I think they did whatever was necessary to make money from the deal, but Why are the Bain execs who donated to the Dems cast only in the evil "outsourcer" light in this supposed scandal? If all Bain Capital execs can be lumped together as "outsourcers", then it follows that Romney is the "outsourcer in chief" since he founded the company. BTW, once these companies had Bain "fix their issues", just how many of these jobs that were sent overseas actually returned to the US?

It's still the principle of accepting donations from someone who vehemently disagree with. Would you say the same thing about Obama accepting donations from a neo-nazi or KKK organization?

Because a person works for Bain C does not automatically make his beliefs diametrically opposed to any particular candidate. People support a given candidate for different reasons, and sometimes these make no real sense. The concepts of you = where you work and vice-versa don't play.

Are you seriously comparing Bain Capital with neo-nazis and the KKK? In any case, your suggested analogy doesn't work. The neo-nazis and KKK are both extreme political/ideological organizations. People join political/ideological organizations because they believe in their philosophies, there is no other reason. Bain Capital is a business, and the execs that donated to the Dems were individuals who worked for the business. People join businesses because of the opportunity to make money and to promote their careers, sometimes despite political or ideological affiliation or image that the company might present. Accepting contributions from a political/ideological organization implies acceptance of their position. Accepting contributions from individuals implies nothing.

Was it hypocritical for Obama to accept the endorsement of Colin Powell in '08, or for that matter, for Sec. Powell to endorse Obama? This is politics, not war. . .

I'm not seeing anything in the media about this? Shocking, really, that the media doesn't cover this (sarcasm), just like altitude sickness was the reason Obama belly flopped on the debate. Of the fact that they're saying nothing now about the debate that Romney is a liar.

"The media", I assume includes Fox News. I don't watch it, but I wouldn't be surprised if even they would touch this. . .Bringing up Bain as an outsourcer is just not politically expedient for the Rs, and this charge of hypocrisy would just be answered by highlighting Romney's multiple conflicting political viewpoints and the whole Etch-A Sketch thing -- a lose/lose as I said.

Nice try deflecting to the debate. . . Obama lost, no argument, but Romney didn't win as big as was originally thought. The documented misrepresentations are catching up.

Obama is a hypocrite no matter how you look at it. He said he was going to change Washington, bring the country together, and get the political process to the point where we can disagree without rhetoric, name calling, and insults. He said that shortly after being inaugurated. Look at him now. Obama said he was going to work with both parties and end the partisan politics - we've probably been more divided over the last 4 years since the Civil War.

The reality of politics in Washington makes all Presidents hypocrites, the loftier their goals, the further they're likely to fall. No President can change Washington by himself, he would need Congress to work against itself to do that, and that's just not going to happen. Fault Obama for this because it's convenient, but Congress and the Republicans played a major role. Partisanship increased during Obama's first term, and no doubt some of this was because of Obama's style, but Republican Congressional strategies to block or obstruct any Obama victories were even more responsible, IMO.

The overuse of the filibuster and misuse of Senatorial Holds cannot be disputed. It's now commonplace to see 60 votes in the Senate as the bar that needs to be crossed to pass a bill. This isn't the way it's supposed to work -- the minority is not supposed to be able to block the majority from governing. The filibuster was created to allow a minority view to be heard in cases where any Senator is passionately opposed to a piece of legislation, and it took effort to exercise this, but now they only have to announce a filibuster and walk away to take a nap -- the current assumption that virtually all legislation will have to pass Cloture in the Senate with a super majority to even be considered is a travesty, but now is just considered political reality. Presidential appointments that require Senate Confirmation (especially to the Federal Bench) are at an all time low because of Holds, and the filibuster has been used at an all-time high. Republicans in both Houses regularly vote against legislation that they originally supported, or even originated with bipartisan support. The Minority Leader in the Senate stated publicly that his first priority was to limit Obama to one term. All of this in a period of economic crisis. It's hard for me to see this all as Obama's failure.

While we're on the subject of hypocrisy. . . Mitt Romney. . . really?

Scott

[jeffkrol]

LA Times sums it up nicely;

Perhaps only a man of elastic convictions like Mitt Romney can successfully navigate the polarized and paranoid battlefield of contemporary American politics. It is no longer merely a contest of Republicans versus Democrats or red states versus blue states, it is now a confrontation between two versions of reality.

Welch offered no proof, and people who actually know how the process works said it is pretty much impossible to twist the statistics one way or another, yet Welch’s absurd contention got plenty of traction among conservatives who are predisposed to believe that President Obama is an illegitimate usurper who hates America and will do anything to retain power so he can continue his relentless drive toward socialism.

The weirdness in the Republican ranks gets even more stark at lower echelons of politics. The chairman of the Arkansas GOP recently had to rebuke two Republican legislative candidates for outrageous remarks. In a self-published book, one candidate, Rep. Jon Hubbard, argued that slavery was a “blessing in disguise” for African Americans. The other candidate, Charlie Fuqua, also authored a book. In it he said all Muslims should be expelled from the United States.

There is abundant evidence that at least half of those who call themselves Republicans believe things that are either far out of the American mainstream or are patently false (Obama is a Muslim, Obama was born in Kenya, Obama is conspiring to confiscate everyone’s guns, etc.). The question is whether Romney will resist the loonies in his party should he become president, or whether he will go along with the crazier impulses of the right-wingers in Congress.

The answer to that depends on what Romney really believes and, given that he has been on all sides of most issues in his political career, it is nearly impossible to know what that may be.

Mitt Romney leads a party packed with paranoids and fabulists - latimes.com

EVEN more fantasy...........

It’s hardly surprising to see Romney repeating the wisdom- of-markets mantra. His chief economic adviser is R. Glenn Hubbard, dean of the Columbia University Graduate School of Business. Eight years ago, Hubbard co-wrote a paper -- paid for by Goldman Sachs (GS) -- proclaiming the arrival of a veritable heaven on Earth through market expansion and deregulation.

“By providing immediate feedback to policymakers, the capital markets have increased the benefits of following good policies and increased the cost of following bad ones,” he and a co-author wrote. Good policies result in “higher financial asset prices. Investors are supportive. Bad policies lead to bad financial market performance, which increases investor pressure on policymakers to amend their policy choices.”

The result: “The quality of economic policymaking has improved over the past two decades, which has helped improve economic performance and macroeconomic stability.”

Given the central role such thinking played in the financial crisis, it’s a wonder that Romney can support it and poll at more than 15 percent. Where did such fantasy-based policies come from, and why are they so alluring?

WHAT WORLD does he live in????

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-07/romney-is-unwise-to-believe-in-wisd...tml?cmpid=hpbv

Oligarchs fight back...........
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/09/david-siegel-email_n_1951801.html?u...ef=mostpopular

The super-rich guy who claims he’s the one who got George W. Bush elected is doing everything he can to make sure Mitt Romney wins in November too.

David Siegel, the founder and CEO of giant timeshare company Westgate resorts, sent an opus-like email to his workers, railing against one-percent bashing and arguing that the president’s reelection would “threaten your job.” In the email, obtained by Gawker, Siegel goes on to write:

If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company.

Siegel has a history of injecting himself in to critical political events. In the “The Queen of Versailles,” the documentary chronicling Siegel’s quest to obnoxiously build the biggest house in America, the Florida real estate mogul claims he was “personally responsible” for George W. Bush’s 2000 presidential victory. He also goes on to say that his tactics for helping Bush win “may not necessarily have been legal.”

Siegel isn’t the first CEO to push his political preferences on his employees. Bob Murray, CEO of coal company Murray Energy, allegedly pressured his workers to donate money to the Romney campaign. Murray energy workers have also accused the company of forcing them to participate in a pro-Romney rally, give up a day’s worth of pay and face the possibility of getting fired if they didn’t.

Welcome to "their" America......

1. Republicans want to win, period
The most obvious explanation for the lack of hand-wringing on the Right is that the new Romney is beating President Obama, while the old version was getting creamed. "I am certainly a partisan and certainly a committed activist, but getting rid of Obama overwhelms everything," former Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) tells Politico. "We can't worry now about the nettlesome aspects of Romney's positions on some things." Tancredo supported more-conservative Rick Santorum in the primaries, he notes, "but now, who cares?"

ehhh??????

At heart, "Romney isn't an ideological moderate," says The Washington Post's Klein. "He's a pragmatic executive," and even if he wanted to govern from the center, the Republican Congress wouldn't let him. "We've seen what Romney does when he fears the Right: He folds." Yes, for all the speculation over who the real Romney is, at least we know today's Republicans, says Andrew Rosenthal at The New York Times, and "there's no reason to think they would tolerate Moderate Mitt in the Oval Office, or that Mr. Romney would even ask them to." We saw this game in 2000 — George W. Bush also got a "winking two-month pass from the far Right" during his run toward the center — and once he was in office we got "huge deficits and a pointless, expensive, and bloody war in Iraq."

Bravery of conviction???
http://theweek.com/article/index/234528/5-reasons-why-conservatives-are-chee...-moderate-mitt

[stevewig]

..........Kettle, meet pot. Read what you typed, directed at me, and apply it to what you just said. You know nothing about me. You don't know me. Think what you want, but the fact remains, my view of politics is grounded on principles and the Constitution, not a box of tissues and building my views around sob stories and what makes people feel good.

I don't see how the truth is hate speech or racist or sexist. I don't see how actually knowing what I'm talking about rather than basing my view of the world through a biased media is inaccurate or judgmental.

I do throw the term "liberals" around because most of them, especially people on forums that have no accountability to back up what they say, are like lemmings, little cookie cutter patterns of each other.

Everywhere you go, any forum you want, where politics are discussed, you frequently find liberals who will not stay on track on a conversation, they cherry pick what they want to respond to and what they don't, they like to ignore statistical data and facts, and frankly, they're arrogant and esoteric. They think they're smarter or better than everyone else because of their political affiliation..even the name "progressive" they've adopted makes them think they're more advance than the conservative views.

Say what you want, but when you all repeat things like parrots from the press, ignore stats and challenges to your views, think you're smarter than everyone else, and all sound the same, you're going to earn a label. Just like hipsters are everything they can't stand - a classification of people based on conformity in how they dress, their bikes, music, and views. They've earned a label and you can pick a hipster out of a crowd because of how he looks and acts. Liberals are the same way. That's not scornful. If it was, then every person who has ever studied any sort of science that involves cataloging species, chemicals, etc would be scornful for doing the same thing.

I don't think people are idiots for having different views than me. I think there are idiots out there because the foundation of their views is flawed, based on a lie, etc.

Sir - you just don't get it!

Everything you wrote here (with the exception of the word "liberals") applies equally to yourself and like minded people. You have said nothing unique here and nothing conceptually different (except for your own verbiage, maybe), from that which may be found on any right wing forum.

Slogans, labels, catch phrases, tired out rhetoric and personal invective are the tools of ALL political parties including Republicans - because they work. Boring but true and you are using exactly the same tactics yourself!

Take a look at yourself a little bit more objectively. Your "opinions" are not FACT any more than are mine - what is more, given time and self maturity, even your own opinions may well change!

(Incidentally, I also have spent 5 years in the military but I would not dream of using this fact to reinforce the extra value or worth that should be placed on my political opinions)

[jeffkrol]

Mitchell finds Siegel.................

–The most astounding “rich guy” letter you ever have read

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/55058770-79/siegel-employees-park-company.html.csp

Admittedly on one level, the Siegels’ story is as familiar as they come: Florida real-estate mogul David got rich fast in the early Noughties thanks to the credit-spiking success of his timeshare company – fittingly, a company that provided people with the opportunity to live in homes they could never afford outright – but got hit with equal force by the credit crunch.

Jackie Siegel with five of her children.What sets this family apart from the average recession-stricken American household is their aspirations. When the 2008 crisis came, the Siegels were midway through building their dream home from the ground up – a 90,000 square foot monstrosity made in the image of the Palace of Versailles. It was to have 30 bedrooms, 10 kitchens, a bowling alley, an ice rink, a beauty salon, multiple tennis courts and its own baseball field. It remains, even now as it languishes in a purgatorial state of semi-completion, the largest house in America.

“Is this going to be your bedroom?” a guileless friend asks Siegel's bubbly, intermittently vacant Jackie as they stand inside one of Versailles’ cavernous would-be rooms.

“No, it’s my closet,” she replies blithely.

To describe the Siegels as people with more money than sense would be a gross understatement, and it’s easy to imagine a documentary such as Greenfield’s – which explores their excesses in methodical, intimate and often gory detail – emerging as little more than a wickedly entertaining exercise in schadenfreude. But what’s clear is that Greenfield, for better or worse, genuinely likes her subjects, which doesn’t detract from her clear-eyed and frequently sharp-edged dissection of their blinkered lifestyle.

http://www.theartsdesk.com/film/queen-versailles