Yeah, straw men are everywhere already.

Mostly I'm referring to McCain's plan to keep tax breaks for oil companies, and other corporate subsidies in place, while promising a shallower tax cut for the middle class than Obama, but a huge one for the top 1%, while Obama raises taxes in that range.

As for taking from the rich to give to the poor...not directly. I think the rich should be responsible for subsidizing better public education, universal healthcare, and unemployment protections, among other things.

What was it Karl Marx said, "from each according to ability, to each according to need"? I think a little of that is a good idea for everyone, rich included (not that they need help).

I think government programs should most benefit those who have the least, and find the revenue primarily from those who're producing the most.

I'm not in favor of some absolute socialist setup, but I think there needs to be a "compressing" pressure on income disparity, and in the last 8 years the Bush policies have been aimed at removing that pressure, and it's driven income disparity to near record highs in less than a decade.

I think there should be a bottom limit to how low we allow people to sink in terms of poverty. I think children born into poverty should have the opportunity to reach their full potential, despite whatever failings their parents had.

I think there's more than enough money in the country, and more than enough money passing through government to do all that, likely without even raising taxes a dime, just by shifting what we use government for.

I think tax cuts aimed at the rich are redistributionary -- in the wrong direction, and that supply-side economics in a nutshell is to say "in order to best help the poor, give more money to the rich" which is on its face insane, and only gets worse as the explanation goes on. It's a policy invented by the rich for the rich, of the rich. The "take more of my money, and give it to big corporations, because they'll spend it better than me!" is what I think 90% of the people voting for Republicans are unknowingly saying with their vote.

That's more than you asked for, and more than I originally intended to write, but I go on a tear sometimes.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Which corporations does McCain propose to give your money to after he takes it away?

Do you believe that the government should increase taxes on the wealthy and redistribute wealth to the poor?

P.S. Just so we're clear, I dislike McCain. I just like to focus on the facts instead of propagating straw man arguements.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
^ It's a metaphor for the other problems with John McCain, such as thinking the economy is just fine, that tax cuts should be largely skewed to the highest income individuals, and that generally speaking we're better off than we were 8 years ago.

If we must boil everything down to money, shouldn't everyone vote for who will give them the biggest tax cut?

For 90% of the country, that's Obama.

A vote for McCain is to say "take more of my money, and give it to big corporations, because they'll spend it better than me!"

A 'bottel' what a 'bottle' becomes when you are posting a video close to bed time. -_-

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
What is a bottel?

http://www.videosift.com/video/Secret-Stash-in-a-Full-Soda-Bottel

Really though, I would love to know the story behind westy. His grammer isn't consistent with someone who's just learning english. It follows too many rules. And it doesn't seem like he's just typing fast either. Sometimes I think he just intentionally designs it that way.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
I know. What business do I have correcting somebody else's grammar when I can't even be consistent with my capitalization in my proof reading notes.

Tsk.


In reply to this comment by Ryjkyj:
I can't help but notice that your first two bracketed comments aren't capitalized and yet the rest are. You fail.

>> ^deedub81:
Nice try. I'm sorry to inform you that your opinion does not matter because your comment has too many spelling and grammatical errors.
>> ^westy:
well [insert coma here] i see nothing wrong with nudity evan sex for kids to look at as its perfectly human and normal . but [began the sentence with a lower case "B" and a conjunction] if you [Insert "are"] going to make it [Poor sentence structure. Specify subject "it"] 18+ to see people having sex ore to look at porn then it folows that same should aply to art that depicts the same things, it [What is it?] only servs to highlight the obserdity of the law and how stupid hamans can be
[Long run-on sentence with improper punctuation]

Thanks!

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
http://www.vimeo.com/1423196

It's mainly the Confederate flag and what I saw as a base level of intelligence. Just a personal opinion gathered after 12 years.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
"Idiot rednecks have always bothered me. These are some of the exaggerated reasons why."

Huh? Why do they bother you? Because the people in this video have a sense of humor?

I promise I wouldn't attempt to deceive you about what I believe. That gets me nowhere. Why would I do that. I'm not shy or ashamed. This video is full of half truths and mixed up facts. It isn't a fair or correct explanation of the Mormon religion by any stretch of the imagination.

(edit: the above quote was from you in my member comments)

I'm an active Mormon and an RM. I'm not speaking out of any kind of ignorance. The video in question was obviously hateful and misleading - but the facts stated were usually either correct with current doctrine, or are at least supported by statements from past church leaders. Have you read Mormon Doctrine, "Answers to Gospel Questions" (by Joseph F Smith), or read much of Brigham Young's discourses?

I'm not exactly anti-Mormon (repeat: I'm an active Mormon), but there's more to the Church than they teach you in Sunday School - and some doctrinal issues are fairly complicated. If you have specific factual objections to the video, please feel free to post them, but I don't think it does anyone any good to say it's all lies when it's mostly true.

It's like the South Park Mormon episode. I had a lot of friends who complained about the stones in the hat. "That's not how it went!!!" they said. Well, yes, it was done like that sometimes. A lot of people were mad at South Park, when instead perhaps they should have been lamenting that they were learning about their religion from it.

No I think all these are creations and manifestations of man, I could claim to receive Gods word now, the only thing stopping you or anyone else taking me serious is how far you are willing to believe this applies to Scientology, Mormonism, Islam, Christianity and all other religons.

At the end of the day all religions are creations of man, not the creation of God. Thus they are wrong. I too am being 100%.

There is no way anyone can convince anyone else that the Bible or any scripture is made by God.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
So, you agree with me that the only similarities have to do with flak from others.

Is that so much more different than the accounts of Moses claiming to part the Red Sea, or Noah building an arc? Why is it okay for some to claim to have received the word of God 2000 years ago, and not okay for them to say they received the word of God yesterday?

I'm being 100% serious.

In reply to this comment by Farhad2000:
L. Ron Hubbard makes shit up about Xenu, DC-10s, thetans and all that good stuff.

Joseph Smith makes shit up about getting golden plates from an Angel. Oh and Jesus visited America, multiple gods and worlds. Oh by the way they also have modern prophets whose official statements become official canon.

I was relating them as two relatively modern belief systems with questionable origins. Not directly.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
What's questionable about Mormonism as it relates to Scientology? I fail to see any similarities, other than the amount of scrutiny the two receive.

Scientology has a known history of abuse, illegal activity, and motives for world domination, for lack of a better term.

Where are the parallels?

In reply to this comment by Farhad2000:
You sound like a nice person whose trying to defend a religion that has questionable origins and backgrounds.

It's like Scientology. Also based on questionable facts, but am sure there are some nice folks who practice it.

I don't really understand what you mean by anti-Mormon propaganda, I would love if you could show me some sources.

Hey dude. I appreciate your willingness to chat, and I'd be happy to discuss topics within the context of the video comment discussions, but I don't want to move the discussion into my profile.

L. Ron Hubbard makes shit up about Xenu, DC-10s, thetans and all that good stuff.

Joseph Smith makes shit up about getting golden plates from an Angel. Oh and Jesus visited America, multiple gods and worlds. Oh by the way they also have modern prophets whose official statements become official canon.

I was relating them as two relatively modern belief systems with questionable origins. Not directly.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
What's questionable about Mormonism as it relates to Scientology? I fail to see any similarities, other than the amount of scrutiny the two receive.

Scientology has a known history of abuse, illegal activity, and motives for world domination, for lack of a better term.

Where are the parallels?

In reply to this comment by Farhad2000:
You sound like a nice person whose trying to defend a religion that has questionable origins and backgrounds.

It's like Scientology. Also based on questionable facts, but am sure there are some nice folks who practice it.

I don't really understand what you mean by anti-Mormon propaganda, I would love if you could show me some sources.

I'm glad you like it!

I also really love this version for different reasons (because the backup singers are better and because it's live. And I like the tempo and especially the tempo changes for dramatic effect.):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLWMvecIoOY

...but I thought that the black and white Paul Robeson version is much more authentic, sincere, musical, and all-around awesome. And the solo vocals are better, obviously.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
This was the song I performed at my first vocal recital!
Watching Paul Robeson brings tears to my eyes. He's so good. You can just feel his emotions through the screen.

I've watched this 3 times now.
Can't you just hear me singing along with it now?

Love it. Good find, thepinky. <3

my mistake.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
You downvoted my comment on this video, and then you elaborated on the same point I was making.

?

In reply to this comment by jwray:
Alienation does not elicit the truthtelling. Unfalsifiable stories are easily fabricated. Torture does not work. A slow process of building rapport does work.

Happy you agree!

And what is Wikipedia?? The World Bible?? LOL
In reply to this comment by deedub81:
From Wikipedia: Pornography or porn is the explicit depiction of sexual subject matter, especially with the sole intention of sexually exciting the viewer.



In reply to this comment by LadyDeath:
fyi dita von teese video is not porn

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
This isn't porn? Hmmm.

Yeah, you're definitely right.

You're not an ignoramous, though. You know what women's suffrage is. If you had never heard the term before, say, you had always heard it called "a woman's right to vote," and someone came up to you with a camera asking you to sign a petition to end it, wouldn't you assume that women's suffrage was something negative? And some people know that it is associated in some way with voting rights, but they think it is the opposite.

And who's to say that those guys didn't meet more girls who knew what suffrage is and just didn't put them in the video? Psh.

The real reason that I hate that video is because by making the video, those guys were trying to make some kind of statement, and I just wonder what statement they were trying to make. I don't think it is a good one.

Oh, yeah, I've seen that one before. It makes me sick. I don't blame those girls, though. I blame their idiotic American educations, parents and teachers who didn't teach them about feminist history, and mean documentary filmmakers who try to trap the poor ignorant things. And you have to admit that "suffrage" sounds a lot like suffering is involved. Haha.

In reply to this comment by deedub81:
Oh, that's good.

Don't forget about this one: http://www.videosift.com/video/Ending-Womens-Suffrage