in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,
In <rbhnp.vp3.19.1@news.alt.net>
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 22:21:54 -0400, Lenny Schwartz said about:
Re: Wheat Gluten from China?!?!

That makes two wild-eyed know-knothing
dittohead parrots and kooks in a row who
cannot respond to a singe point I made.
Typical mindless cowardly sissy hawks.  
You guys are just toothless yap dog parrots.
No wonder you are losers.  

I find your type so confirming.

Thanks!

Rush Limbaugh:
      "Voters who voted yesterday believe that
   Republicans are; "the big government party now."
   How can you blame them?"
       --  Rush Limbaugh November 8, 2006

Poor, sad, bad comedian.

He has de-educated America.  ...made facts and logic
irrelevant.  Made finding Truth impossible for his devotees.
He has ruined them, they now distrust even science itself.
For that, he should be hung.

**    "Fascism should more properly be called
**    corporatism, since it is the merger of state
**    and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

We've ALWAYS been at war with Eastasia!

  Google: Results about 9,420 for
  orwell 1984 "ALWAYS been at war with Eastasia!"

  Google: Results about 69,500 for
  Bush "We've NEVER been Stay the Course!"

 "We don't have an illegal alien problem in the United States.
  We have an illegal employer problem."
       --Thom Hartmann

Fact is, if we started tossing some of those
illegal employers in jail, we'd have to widen our
border ports to let the all the Mexicans rush back.

Repub: But they do jobs Americans won't!

Nonesense.
That's a clear violation of simple economics.  There
is no such thing.  But there are jobs Americans won't
do *at Mexican wages.*

Repub:  OK, but if wages go up by say, 50%, then
       prices will go way up too.

So all the Rich Boy huggers tell us, all the time.  
That seems to make sense, but it just ain't so.  Labor
costs only have a small effect on prices.  Prices are
not determined by labor costs, but rather, by what the market
will bear.  If labor costs go way down, prices do not.
What happens is, profits and fat go up.  For example, look
at $150 Nike shoes made by sweatshops for $3.  Or look
at all our jobs lost to sweatshop nations.  But if salaries
went up by say, 50%, manufacturers would yes, have to
work up a sweat, get off their fat a.ses, and get more
competative, effecient, (and other well known economic
forces,) and prices would only go up a little.

But if salaries went up by say, 50%, what would happen is,
the middle class would grow.  That scares the hell out of
the Rich Boys.  We have just now transitioned from economic
theory, to political theory.

Repub:  OK, let's say that might be true.  If so, what are the  
     three biggest things you claim are currently destroying
     the middle class?

1) Free market ideology like NAFTA; as opposed to fair market;
2) a variety of practices to drive down the cost of labor -- from
destruction of the union movement to encouragement of immigration,
both legal and illegal; and
3) the promotion of the idea that democratic institutions are an
aberration, that vast wealth is the natural order of things in the
human and animal kingdoms.

Teddy Roosevelt was the first in the modern era to identify what
it would mean to have a middle class in a society that wasn't
propped up by slavery and land taken from the Native Americans
(which was largely responsible for the first middle class, in the
1700s).

The Republican Roosevelt realized that without government
intervention clearly defining the rules of business to serve
society as well as capitalism, there couldn't be a middle class.

Roosevelt suggested that the hallmarks of a "living wage" (he was
the first person to use that phrase), were that with an honest
week's work, a single family's wage-earner would be able to
support their family, raise their children, provide education for
those children -- including college, care for all their health
needs -- even in times of sickness (quoting Roosevelt), take an
annual vacation, and set enough aside that retirement and old age
would be comfortable and secure.

Now all that is sytematically being destroyed.

Wanna find out what I'm talking about?  Find out what the
father of conservatism said about ruling the middle class.
That would be Edmund Burke (1729-1797).  He is the brain
of the conservative brains, constantly cited by modern brains
such as Buckley.
He says men are stupid, and so, should be clones of the state:
   "We are afraid to put men to live and trade each on
   his own private stock of reason, because we suspect
   that this stock in each man is small, and that the
   individuals would do better to avail themselves of
   the general bank and capital of nations and ages."

Burke hated the Enlightenment which brought our Jeffersonian
democracy and Constitution, and argued instead for the value of
state and "tradition."

Conservatives distrust and hate the middle class.  
Conservativism is descibed as "the constant need to maintain
political, moral, and economic dikes against the ever-swelling sea
of popular ignorance, cupidity, violence, barbarism, and
fertility."[6] "

Conservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Edmund Burke is often considered the father of conservatism in
Anglo-American circles. In the United Kingdom, Burkean
conservatism continues on, ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism - 74k -

Even today, they play you guys like a tin drum for votes.

Burke's family was, "the only other Gaelic Catholic group managing
to protect its lands from restrictions of the penal laws and
encroachment of growing middle-class interests. The Nagles,
therefore, achieved a position of influence and connection
unequalled by any other Catholic family in Ireland. (4)"

Check it out!  Google "Edmund Burke" "middle class"
(keep the quotes)  

--Doug    

 "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people
 tolerate the growth of private power to a point where
 it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself.
 That in it's essence is fascism: ownership of the
 government by an individual, by a group or any
 controlling private power."
 -- Franklin Delano Roosevelt,  message to congress,
 proposing the "Standard Oil" Monopoly Investigation, 1938

on Tue, 10 Apr 2007 03:04:44 GMT, "Lenny Schwartz" <ls@lsicanxnov.org>
wrote:

No thanks.

<plonk idiot>

"Doug Bashford" <playing@always.edu>   babbled  in a message:
////  snip    /////

Delusional Dougie  babbles on..........

I know... but I'm being a good 'net citizen.  :-D

After listening to 20 or more news reports, I was not sure where I
heard it from!  I reported what I heard!