there is no such thing as the national interest.

necessary, but not sufficient.

so according to this sort of analysis Nixon was a liberal.

isn't it a federal crime to say "no"?

No wonder labor unions are so emaciated these days.  People want to hand over their responsibilities to governments.  Just imagine how strong labor unions would be if things like "firing only for just cause", "the eight hour work day", etc., were protections one obtained via membership in a labor union.

I'm picking up that this is supposed to be acerbically sarcastic in some way but I have no idea what it means.

In the sentence "capitalism needs growth in order to survive" I do not understand the words "capitalism", "needs", and "survive". We are, also, probably, not on the same page as far as the word "growth" is concerned. Care to elablorate?

something ideologically sensitive and the econ. professor suddenly loses half of his vocabulary.  fascinating tactic but I'm not about to get drawn into a pedantic dissection on your territory this early on.  go with your intuition and impression.

Why not Burris? I'd love to have him run.

There's nothing I'd like more than to wake up on November 9th and see this:

he'd win at least 5 or 6 states.

Wellstone/Feingold might be the greatest ticket ever!

perhaps the best major-party ticket in memory, but I'd be obliged to pull any Jello Biafra level I laid eyes on.

the real absurdity is that the state 'carves out' exceptions to the employer right of spontaneous termination: cannot be due to race, homosexuality, or even in on-the-books fantasy-land, for attempting to organize a union.

[>implying that employees/employers are in anyway equals]

>implying that employees/employers are in anyway equals

cool story, bro

that the individual confronts the mass of concentrated capital as an equal in the marketplace is of 19th Century mythology.  Ernest is smart enough to know and understand this, whether he actually does is a separate question.

perhaps the capitalists here can answer this question, I've never seen it properly answered, or answered at all, for that matter.  capitalism needs growth in order to survive.  this shouldn't be controversial.  from recall about 2% growth is needed to stave off deflation, job loss, and the other nasty stuff. 

yet the Earth is finite, and here we run into a problem, a 'contradiction'.  unless the esteemed capitalist innovation can overcome the first law of thermodynamics, or locate other Earth-like planets to transport people to and extract resources from, we eventually hit a wall of sorts.  the use of nature as an infinite source of raw material and dumping ground for externalized costs is necessarily finite.

when exactly this needs to be addressed could constitute a different conversation, which we can leave off for the time being.

should give the UKIP a little bump?

I was probably in the low 20s in August 2004.

December 1941?

I mean post-1945 obviously.

The Rob Ford fund is going to be tight. They're at $110,000 with 6 days left.

They're at $135,000 with 4 1/2 days left.  Definitely on pace they just have to keep it going.

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rob-ford-crackstarter

Well, it'll likely slow down as they get closer to the deadline. That's why I think it's going to be tight.

hopefully they'd have the dignity to contribute $20k or so to their own fund if it is close.  since they're socializing cost and privatizing profit.

I'm no master of European politics or political history, but it does seem that a significant number of countries have seen the rise of credible far-right parties: Jobbik, Golden Dawn, UKIP if that counts, Sweden Democrats, of course the National Front, Danish People's Party..  is this historically novel?

the reaction on Stormfront seems to paint this as further evidence of the existence of a Zionist Occupation Government.

$37,080 / year

Dave makes $37,000 a year from this site?  Then why are we moderators toiling away as unpaid help?  Time to organize a labor action.

the Forum's managerial bourgeoisie showing cracks, may abandon the regime?

probably about 4000.

today I hit the decade mark on uselectionatlas.org.

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/leip/ikonboard//profile.cgi?action=show&member=Miamiu1027


from 12 to 22, 7th grade to a year post-college graduation, 140 pounds to 205, no facial hair to all of it.  from a five-month masturbation career to a 10 1/2 year masturbation career.  all of it, here!  thanks to all of you, even the worst of you, particularly the worst of you.

examples of the "yes": Alyosha Karimazov, Nathan

examples of the "no": the Underground Man, George Carlin, opebo

ambiguous: Dostoevsky, jmfcst

it wouldn't even exist in its current form.

And this is why I don't believe any side has a monopoly on truth... I am willing to accept that I may very well be wrong, and if I am, I will take full responsibility for it no matter who's right in the end. 

isn't this a bit of a contradiction?  if the truth can only be approximated, surely you can't be too much to blame if you get it wrong?

good thread and idea.  I've long advocated for a move towards more 'gonzo' or subjective, narrative style posting as opposed to the dispassionate, objective, even academic style of post that has long been the rage.  this isn't an academic journal!  sorting the idea out in its own right has its place, but what does it mean to you?

Newark would be funny.