Is fascism coming to America? You be the judge

First topic message reminder :

Santorum’s book doesn’t deal with foreign policy but does set out his approach to domestic policy: an active use of federal power and of the tax code to promote traditional behaviors and to preserve man-woman marriages.

Unlike Tea Party activists, Santorum doesn’t shrink away from the federal government; he wants to use it to nudge people toward more virtuous behavior, which he thinks will be best taught in traditional heterosexual families.

He says, “Liberals believe that the traditional family is neither natural nor vital, that it’s an antiquated social convention which has not only outlived its usefulness, but is now inherently discriminatory and repressive toward legitimate alternative ‘families.’”

Gee, thanks, Mr. Santorum. And while you seem to be in control of my thoughts, how about marching my body into the kitchen and making myself a sandwich? I'm getting kind of hungry. Unless, of course, you would like to relinquish control of my mind.

Link

I am SICK TO DEATH of these hacks. Can't the GOP offer up a single candidate that isn't out to impose their brand of "it's for the best" fascism onto the rest of America?

But of course you have to take in to account the increased risk of dementia in the older world leader and all the problems that will cause.....Would any country want to admit that it's leader is nolonger able to lead due to dementia....I think not......

There is some remarkable evidence to suggest that Reagan was showing signs of Alzheimer's during his presidency. Some have gone so far as to say that America was essentially run by his advisers during the later years of his presidency.

For example, Reagan signed into law a bill that would discontinue paying Social Security benefits to college students. Later, Reagan received a scathing letter from a citizen who could no longer attend school due to losing those benefits. Reagan was outraged and demanded to know, "Who would sign something like this?!?"

One of his advisers replied, "Mr. President ... you did."

Shirina wrote:
There is some remarkable evidence to suggest that Reagan was showing signs of Alzheimer's during his presidency. Some have gone so far as to say that America was essentially run by his advisers during the later years of his presidency.

 
[

LOL! That video was hilarious! That's a nice spin on the "Who's On First" skit by Abbot and Costello.

Most people assume that Reagan was not the only Puppet President - there was another one who declared War on Iraq to no obvious advantage.

"Rick Santorum Tells Sick Kid Market Should Should Set Drug Prices"
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/rick-santorum-tells-sick-kid-market-should-should-set-drug-prices/

"“People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad,” Santorum said, “but paying $900 for a drug they have a problem with — it keeps you alive. Why? Because you’ve been conditioned to think health care is something you can get without having to pay for it.”

The mother said the boy was on the drug Abilify, used to treat schizophrenia, and that, on paper, its costs would exceed $1 million each year.

Santorum said drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs.

“You have that drug, and maybe you’re alive today because people have a profit motive to make that drug,” Santorum said. “There are many people sick today who, 10 years from now, are going to be alive because of some drug invented in the next 10 years. If we say: ‘You drug companies are greedy and bad, you can’t make a return on your money,’ then we will freeze innovation.”

Santorum told a large Tea Party crowd here that he sympathized with the boy’s case, but he also believed in the marketplace."

Note the strawman of people wanting medical care to be free. Also, every poor person has an iPad that they use in their Escalade that has a large screen TV in it. And don't forget the 11th commandment: thou must not have any complaints about the market

Just completed an interesting conversation with a representative from the Ontario Ministry of Finance (OMF). Of the 13% Harmonized Sales Tax paid by Ontarians (effective 1 July 2010), 5% replaces the federal Goods and Services Tax and 8% replaces the Provincial Retail Sales Tax. The HST is administered by the federal Canada Revenue Agency.

The Retail Sales Tax (RST) still applies to taxable insurance premiums and private sales of certain vehicles.

The information received from the conversation confirms that some portion of HST and some portion of federal income tax revenues fund each provinces universal health care. It’s not free health care; everyone Ontarian who earns an income and/or purchase goods and services and/or purchases taxable retail items pays for universal health care.

In saying this…

Mkitty wrote:
[Rick Santorum:] “People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad,” Santorum said, “but paying $900 for a  drug they have a problem with — it keeps you alive. Why? Because you’ve been conditioned to think health care is something you can get without having to pay for it.”

 

… Rick Santorum is correct, as proven by the fact that in our northern neighbor’s most populous province, everyone who earn money and/or buy stuff pay for everyone’s universal health care.

Mkitty wrote:
Santorum said drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs.

 

Rick Santorum is also correct in this statement. Effective, relatively safe drugs (there is always risk; there are always side effects) do in fact take years and substantial research and development costs to develop an manufacture, and drug companies in fact would cease developing and manufacturing drugs if they could not turn a profit.

Those sort of religious people understand that if people die because they can't afford medicine, it's probably God's Will. Anyway, generating new people is a lovely way to spend your time.

oftenwrong wrote:
Those sort of religious people understand that if people die because they can't afford medicine, it's probably God's Will

 

Rick Santorum didn't say that. Rick Santorum said this:

... drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs.

... drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs.

They just want huge profits, like most other companies. Selling drugs that cost $1 million per year is hardly realistic. Drug companies have already stopped manufacturing some life-saving drugs simply because they weren't pulling in enough profits, not because the drug was unprofitable. Why manufacture a drug that can save the life of a premature baby, but with marginal profits, when you can harvest a cash cow making Viagra so men can have longer-lasting erections?

This is what happens when you leave things in the hands of capitalists. The priority is always on making large piles of cash to the exclusion of everything else.

It would seem that the USA is being grossly over charged for Amblify if it is as claimed that the cost is $1 million per year...

According to this data sheet from the UK the monthly cost to the NHS (in 2004) of 15mg per day is only a little over £1200 per year.......

http://www.ukmi.nhs.uk/NewMaterial/html/docs/AripiprazoleNMP0604.pdf

I must check it out in the BNF when I get back to work........

Let all Republcan candidates wives do press up's on TV, the winners husband gets the chance to run against the President. Before anyone ask, they can't borrow Mrs Obama.

Why not settle it with a Drugs Test?

Impressive though it was, naughty Michelle didn't dip as low as would normally be expected for press-ups . Bur she is so pleasant and such a sport that we can , of course, forgive her...

Santorum just won Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado last night. Just when you thought you had this race predicted... I imagine Romney's SuperPac people are scrambling to get new negative Santorum ads, but they won't be as easy as with Gingrich. But Mitt isn't such the heir apparent any more, well at least this week.

Santorum just won Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado last night.

It just goes to show you that stupidity, insensitivity, and authoritarianism are no obstacles to the presidency just as long as you believe in gawd! Hallelujah! In 2016, I'm predicting that the winner of the election will be announced with white smoke puffing from the chimney of the Capitol Building.

Shirina wrote:

Santorum just won Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado last night.

It just goes to show you that stupidity, insensitivity, and authoritarianism are no obstacles to the presidency just as long as you believe in gawd! Hallelujah! In 2016, I'm predicting that the winner of the election will be announced with white smoke puffing from the chimney of the Capitol Building.

 

Thankfully, none of these traits, “stupidity, insensitivity, and authoritarianism”, apply to Rick Santorum. Perhaps he yet can manage to de-rail such negativities, in the persons of the other two remaining Republican candidates, prior to the election that counts in November.

Put a religious fundamentalist in the White House and they'll be invading Iran before you can say, "Watch this, George W Bush and Peanut Presidents!".

It just goes to show you that stupidity, insensitivity, and authoritarianism are no obstacles to the presidency just as long as you believe in gawd! Hallelujah!

I am a bit worried for you all in the US.....There is no difference really between many of you and the radicalised Muslims...You just have bigger guns and a different prophet

Thankfully, none of these traits, “stupidity, insensitivity, and authoritarianism”, apply to Rick Santorum.

When Santorum looked at the mother of a sick child and essentially told her that "the market" was more important than her son's life, all three of the traits I mentioned were applied.

You just have bigger guns and a different prophet

Did you mean "a different profit ... ?"

Thought so.

Shirina wrote:

Thankfully, none of these traits, “stupidity, insensitivity, and authoritarianism”, apply to Rick Santorum.

When Santorum looked at the mother of a sick child and essentially told her that "the market" was more important than her son's life, all three of the traits I mentioned were applied.

 

Rick Santorum didn't say "that 'the market' was more important than her son's life." Rick Santorum said that "drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs."

The counter to that argument is that destruction of the world's Rain Forests may have coincidentally destroyed healing herbs. Though we may never know the true depth of our stupidity.

Rick Santorum said that "drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs."

No, Rock. Rick Santorum said that in addition to what I reported. In fact, he used that as an excuse to justify why the market is more important than her son's life. When major pharmaceuticals pull life-saving drugs off the market to focus on making erection-enhancers simply because the latter generates more profit, well, that's where capitalism goes very, very, VERY wrong. In fact, the shortage of some of these much-needed drugs has reached crisis levels to the point where Congress is frantically trying to pass legislation to help control it. Yes, they need to make a profit to stay in business. I get that. But does it always have to be MAXIMUM profits? When this comes at the expense of children, I draw the line.

And comparing a million-dollar-a-year treatment to a $900 iPad is just frankly stupid ... which is why insensitivity AND stupidity are both applicable traits.

Not only that, iPads cost $499.99, not $900 so Santorum couldn't even get THAT much right.

RockOnBrother wrote:
Rick Santorum said that “drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs.”

 

Shirina wrote:
No, Rock. Rick Santorum said that in addition to what I reported. In fact, he used that as an excuse to justify why the market is more important than her son's life.

 

According to this text (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/rick-santorum-tells-sick-kid-market-should-should-set-drug-prices/), Rick Santorum said the following. As these are exact quotes, they are encompassed by quotation marks.

“People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad, but paying $900 for a  drug they have a problem with - it keeps you alive. Why? Because you’ve been conditioned to think health care is something you can get without having to pay for it.”

“You have that drug, and maybe you’re alive today because people have a profit motive to make that drug, There are many people sick today who, 10 years from now, are going to be alive because of some drug invented in the next 10 years. If we say: ‘You drug companies are greedy and bad, you can’t make a return on your money,’ then we will freeze innovation.”

“He’s alive today because drug companies provide care. And if they didn’t think they could make money providing that drug, that drug wouldn’t be here. I sympathize with these compassionate cases. … I want your son to stay alive on much-needed drugs. Fact is, we need companies to have incentives to make drugs. If they don’t have incentives, they won’t make those drugs. We either believe in markets or we don’t.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/rick-santorum-tells-sick-kid-market-should-should-set-drug-prices/

Feel free to reduce the number of lines due to copyright concerns. I think this is under the number permitted.

According to the words attributed to Rick Santorum in the text at the link provided (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/rick-santorum-tells-sick-kid-market-should-should-set-drug-prices/), Mr. Santorum did not use anything as an excuse to justify why the market is more important than her son's life.

Santorum told a large Tea Party crowd here that he sympathized with the boy’s case, but he also believed in the marketplace.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/rick-santorum-tells-sick-kid-market-should-should-set-drug-prices/

 

I agree. This also has personal meaning, which I'll share via private message with anyone who is interested.

Shirina wrote:[iI am SICK TO DEATH of these hacks. Can't the GOP offer up a single candidate that isn't out to impose their brand of "it's for the best" fascism onto the rest of America?

 
 
No, and neither can the Democrats.  Each party has embraced its own style of social engineering, and both have abandoned liberty in the process.  
 
Although America still ranks fairly high in some measures of freedom compared to other countries, we have frittered much of our freedom away in exchange for the illusion of security (both social and physical).  Rather a shame.  It is still a nice place to live, but seemingly with less promise than before.

“People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad, but paying $900 for a drug they have a problem with - it keeps you alive.

Again, Santorum is being a first class, grade-A moron. People have a problem paying $900 for a drug because THEY CAN'T AFFORD IT! So what happens? They DIE! They DIE because they aren't rich enough, and by default "worthy" enough, to be allowed to live. That's what it comes down to, Rock.

I don't know how many times I have to make a clearly defined distinction between an iPad, which you buy ONCE and a drug you have to pay $900 for EVERY MONTH! A lot of people can afford to make a rare $900 purchase. I just bought a new computer for even more money ... but could I afford to buy this computer every month? NO!

This is why Santorum doesn't know his ass from his brain.

Because you’ve been conditioned to think health care is something you can get without having to pay for it.”

And this line ... what the hell? And you don't find that to be insensitive? Are you kidding me? This guy is an ass. What this mother wanted to hear Santorum say was, "We're going to try our hardest to bring costs under control and enact legislation to help people afford life-saving drugs." But no ... instead she received the Almighty Dollar speech that I've come to expect from right-wing hacks like Santorum.

You have that drug

Does she "have" it? Are you certain of that, Mr. Santorum? We also have Maseratis and 300 room mansions. Who gives a damn if you can't afford either? Simply saying the drug exists is no consolation to a family that can't afford $900 per month or the $15,000 per year that the average family has to spend on health insurance. There are many people who don't even MAKE $15,000 per year.

‘You drug companies are greedy and bad, you can’t make a return on your money,’ then we will freeze innovation.”

Bullshit. These companies aren't looking for a "return" on their money. They're looking for the maximum amount of profit they can possibly squeeze out of these drugs, and they'll still charge ridiculous amounts of money for them even decades after the R&D costs have been paid for in spadefuls.

How much money do you think Jonas Salk made on his polio vaccine? That's right ... NOTHING. He actually said that the money he made as a doctor allowed him a comfortable life and he needed nothing more.

Within minutes of Francis's declaration that the vaccine was safe and effective, the news of the event was carried coast to coast by wire services and radio and television newscasts. According to Debbie Bookchin, "across the nation there were spontaneous celebrations... business came to a halt as the news spread. The mayor of New York City interrupted a city council meeting to announce the news, adding, 'I think we are all quite proud that Dr. Salk is a graduate of City College.'"[7]:46 "By the next morning", writes Bookchin, "politicians around the country were falling over themselves trying to figure out ways they could congratulate Salk, with several suggesting special medals and honors be awarded.... In the Eisenhower White House, plans were already afoot to present Salk a special presidential medal designating him "a benefactor of mankind" in a Rose Garden ceremony.

It was also declared "a victory for the whole nation." Jonas Salk became "world famous overnight and was showered with awards", writes O'Neill. The governor of Pennsylvania had a medal struck, and the state legislature gave him a chaired professorship. However, New York City could not get him to accept a ticker tape parade. Instead New York created eight "Jonas Salk Scholarships" for future medical students. He received a Presidential Citation, the nation's first Congressional Medal for Distinguished Civilian Service, and a large number of honorary degrees and related honors.[18]:138

According to O'Neill, "April 12th had almost become a national holiday: people observed moments of silence, rang bells, honked horns, blew factory whistles, fired salutes, kept their red lights red in brief periods of tribute, took the rest of the day off, closed their schools or convoked fervid assemblies therein, drank toasts, hugged children, attended church, smiled at strangers, and forgave enemies."

Holy shit, Rock! Did you read what I just posted up there? THAT is America ... and Jonas Salk is a true American. Not these blood-sucking Pharma Corporations that wouldn't save all of humanity if there wasn't a big profit involved. In the last 55 years since the Polio vaccine, how many celebrations have there been for anything these Pharma conglomerates came out with? How many CEOs of these megacorps have been given a presidential citation or had a ticker tape parade thrown in their honor? Jonas Salk is an American hero ... and part of that is because he GAVE the cure to all Mankind instead of making himself a billionaire.

Santorum doesn't even understand what made America great, and he CERTAINLY doesn't understand why it's in decline.

And if they didn’t think they could make money providing that drug, that drug wouldn’t be here.

I rest my effing case. Fortunately, Jonas Salk felt differently. Funny how we haven't had a single cure for a major disease since Big Pharma edged out the independent doctor who invents medicine because it's the right thing to do ... and not just to make a buck.

I sympathize with these compassionate cases. … I want your son to stay alive on much-needed drugs.

Are you telling me you didn't hear the big unspoken "BUT" in that sentence, Rock? C'mon ...!

We either believe in markets or we don’t.”

And there it is. The one-two knock out blow to human decency and morality.

If I sound angry, it's because I am - I am sick to death of living in the ONLY goddamned "advanced" nation on the planet without nationalized health care. And I am angry and furious that this clown Santorum is even being CONSIDERED for the presidency. And I'm sick of the American people ... like those in Colorado and the other two states he won ... who keep supporting this self-destructive ideology that Santorum represents.

Nothing personal against you, Rock, but damn it for defending him. You're better than that.

Shirina wrote:
Nothing personal against you, Rock, but damn it for defending him. You're better than that.

 

Nothing personal taken, Shirina. Your heart is good. I respect you, and I love you like a (far) younger sister.

Shirina wrote:-
I am sick to death of living in the ONLY goddamned "advanced" nation on the planet without nationalized health care.

There will be a second one soon, if the Tories get their way and asset-strip our NHS in order to reward some of the donors to their vile party. One minister, Oliver Letwin, assured us that the NHS would no longer exist if the Tories stayed in power for five years:-
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/10/letwin-cut-ideas-exist-20bn

Shirina wrote:-
And I am angry and furious that this clown Santorum is even being CONSIDERED for the presidency. And I'm sick of the American people ...

Is that spelt Santorum - or Sanatorium (for sick people).

Heavens above! I thought British politics was/politicians were, bad enough.
Why is it that millionaires spend millions to get into the Oval Office and then spend the next 2 years wondering what to do, and a further 3 years realising they were wrong.
Why do they want to be hated by millions, rub shoulders with foreign rulers they would normally shun, ride in armour plated cars hoping their luck doesn't run out. At the end of it all, for some special Presidents, some people will look back at their efforts and give them credit. In the main most will be vilified by many and remembered, except by name, by few.
On second thoughts that last applies to British politicians

There will be a second one soon, if the Tories get their way and asset-strip our NHS in order to reward some of the donors to their vile party.

Greed and corporatism has become a religion to these people. Seriously ... a true religion.

Why is it that millionaires spend millions to get into the Oval Office and then spend the next 2 years wondering what to do, and a further 3 years realising they were wrong.

If I could, I would gladly become the president. So many times I've watched debates and speeches, and I was almost flexing my fingers wanting to get my hands on that microphone for just a few minutes.

While watching the debate about gay marriage legislation in Washington State the other night, I was chomping at the bit listening to Christian blow-hards preaching - literally preaching - in a government building during an official government meeting to vote on official government legislation.

I just wanted to grab that microphone and say, "Can anyone here make a secular argument against gay marriage that isn't a logical fallacy? This is NOT a church and that lectern is NOT a pulpit. If you can't logically defend your position without mentioning God or quoting from the Bible, then you are in violation of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. This debate is now OVER!" *slam microphone down - hopefully getting dramatic feedback noise*

Oh, how I wanted to say that. I wonder how well that would go over with an American public far too religious for its own good. I'd be a smash hit with the liberals though. If they think Obama is liberal, try putting ME in office!

It is a convenience for media reporters to embody the entire policy and principles of a Political Party in the name of its Leader. Thus "Bush invades Iraq". We know that there were a few other neo-cons involved in that decision, but a moment's thought tells you that a lot of people are always involved in such matters.

Whoever is President of the United States at the end of this year will have incurred obligations by virtue of the enormous sums of money donated by "supporters" whose motives may not always be totally altruistic. Apparently the most powerful Nation in the World needs to remind its President where that power originates - from Business.

If Mr. Santorum becomes the front runner, there will be many obligations which he has to discharge subsequently.

Apparently the most powerful Nation in the World needs to remind its President where that power originates - from Business.

There's a video somewhere showing Ronald Reagan giving a speech. Standing next to him, rocking impatiently on his heels, is the CEO of Goldman Sachs. Why he is there next to the president, I do not know. Yet this CEO had the temerity to lean toward the president and, interrupting Reagan's speech, clearly says, "We need to hurry this along." Reagan obediently responds, "Oh ... yes." The microphone clearly picks up this little exchange. I think we all know who is calling the shots.

Too often, what a president SAYS is for the people. What a president DOES is for the "managerial aristocracy" (as Citibank Corp. calls it).

Re: Yet another right-wing fascist on the rise ...
by Shirina Yesterday at 5:14 pm

.Why is it that millionaires spend millions to get into the Oval Office and then spend the next 2 years wondering what to do, and a further 3 years realising they were wrong.
If I could, I would gladly become the president. So many times I've watched debates and speeches, and I was almost flexing my fingers wanting to get my hands on that microphone for just a few minutes.
Shirina.
Since joining cuttingedge I have read and respected your views and obvious intelligence. However, since reading 'If I could, I would gladly become president', I'm beginning to wonder.

However, since reading 'If I could, I would gladly become president', I'm beginning to wonder.

Heh heh, well ... I wouldn't be like other politicians. I would come from "common" stock, a lowborn family. I would not enter the political arena with a financial empire to protect nor would I be beholden to anyone who helped me earn a fortune in the years before becoming president. I would have no loyalties to corporations nor would be bribed with campaign contributions. While I'm certain my opposition would try to put my life under a microscope trying to find some mud to sling, they would quickly get bored. There's nothing there to find - unless they're interested in high school drama. I have no connections to any agencies, organizations, political movements (not even OWS), or secret societies. There are no compromising photographs of me to turn up, I haven't attended protests, I've never burned a flag, or sympathized with terrorists. Aside from my forum posts, which I would stand behind anyway (and use many ideas contained therein as part of my politics), I'm as clean as a whistle.

While I may not truly make a good president, per se, I wonder how a candidate like myself would be received by the American people? I mean a real candidate, not myself.

Shirina wrote:

However, since reading 'If I could, I would gladly become president', I'm beginning to wonder.

While I may not truly make a good president, per se, I wonder how a candidate like myself would be received by the American people? I mean a real candidate, not myself.

If I were an American I might even vote for you.
I guess your 'real candidate' would not go down too well. People don't want to hear the truth, only what they want to hear. The only thing I 'admire' about politicians is their ability to be all things to all men during election time - and their own man after election.

Cleaning the pulpit, a caretaker found the typescript of the previous Sunday's sermon.
He was intrigued to see that the preacher had pencilled notes to himself in the margin: 'Pause here for effect', and further down 'Wipe brow, sigh', and half-way down the next page, 'Lift hands to heaven'.
After this there was a long piece of sermon which the caretaker couldn't understand at all. Against this the preacher had written, 'Argument woolly and confused. Theology weak. Shout loudly and thump the pulpit'.

Now if you substitute politician in place of preacher?

An astonishing number of quite routine occupations involve a large element of Show-biz.

We expect people to play the part of thejob they do.

trevorw's post reminds me of an incident at school where we lads had the opportunity to sneak a quick look at the master's notes when he was called from the room unexpectedly. At one point in his 'script' we noted that the teacher in question had written: ' Pause here for laughter'.

The poor deluded fellow clearly knew very little about his prospects for generating mirth amongst his unappreciative charges...

........ but presumably went on to work for the BBC as an audience animator. It's so obvious on some radio comedy programmes that a banal remark has been accompanied by someone holding up a sign facing the studio audience "applause" or "laughter, please".

Commercial Radio doesn't make such mistakes. They don't make comedy programmes.

Oftenwrong.

'The end is nigh''.

Reminds me of the council who built a estate of old peoples bungalows and named it 'St. Peters Close', hastily changed when someone pointed out it was probably not the best choice of name for an OAP estate.