Jesse LaGreca takes down George Will on ABC News

Run for office Jesse!
siftbotsays...

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Thursday, October 13th, 2011 12:13pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter dystopianfuturetoday.

Thumpersays...

Shit, they're going to use him as the voice and misrepresent. I don't think he's saying anything that is wrong with the message but I find a flaw in the isolation of one street goer. Though, how soft the flavor will taste should it be only one flavor.

quantumushroomsays...

The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government.

The most harm has been done and money wasted in the past 60 years by governments trying to guarantee an equality of outcomes.

EvilDeathBeesays...

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^quantumushroom:
The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government.

Tell me about it.


Look at Joe the Plumber... oh, were you refering to QM?

I find this Jesse LaGreca guy to be very well spoken, quite intelligent and speaks more sense than most politicians. I look forward to hearing more from him

NetRunnersays...

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

I find this Jesse LaGreca guy to be very well spoken, quite intelligent and speaks more sense than most politicians. I look forward to hearing more from him


He's a DailyKos blogger -- he goes by MinistryOfTruth there. And yeah, I hope we get to hear more of him in the MSM in the future.

Winstonfield_Pennypackersays...

DailyKos blogger

That's all anyone needs to know about him, and it should disqualify him from holding public office, being in the media, going out in public, and procreating. KOS is a hotbed of hate, ignorance, and bigotry.

packosays...

>> ^quantumushroom:

The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government.
The most harm has been done and money wasted in the past 60 years by governments trying to guarantee an equality of outcomes.


are you talking about the deregulation of the banking system and Wall Street that led to not just this crash but the previous one? because, yeah... the oh-so-lovable working class were behind that

or the banking bailouts, where instead of using the money to cover the banking losses (see above) wasn't used to get lending going again, but for banks to consolidate and buy each other out... leading to banks that are even more TOO BIG TO FAIL

and how exactly is Trickle-Down Economics, which have been repeated over and over by the rich as reasons not to tax them, not completely horsesh_t considering the last 30yrs?
http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/23/7927178-the-koch-brothers-graph

of course, regarding that link, I assume your first response is... "Well Rachel Maddows, that's all I need to know about that link"

I will say, if you already don't, you should lobby for some rich interests... I'm sure they got a teet for you... because you sure a capable job of touting the rhetoric without providing any concrete details

quantumushroomsays...

are you talking about the deregulation of the banking system and Wall Street that led to not just this crash but the previous one? because, yeah... the oh-so-lovable working class were behind that

Oh, no, more about the Let's-Give-Free-Houses-To-People-We-Know-Can't-Pay-For-Them-But-That's-The-Banks'-Problem-We-Just-Buy-Votes-From-The-Poor-Act.

The left likes to call it 'deregulation' as if that were a dropping of vital safeguards keeping the wealthy in check. It was more like a creating an opportunity for certain parties--not all of them wealthy--to take stupid risks thanks to government offering to cover their butts with taxpayer largesse. Not the same thing.

or the banking bailouts, where instead of using the money to cover the banking losses (see above) wasn't used to get lending going again, but for banks to consolidate and buy each other out... leading to banks that are even more TOO BIG TO FAIL

I was 100% against the failouts, but not much you can do against a leviathan government made that way by worshipers of leviathan government as the solution to every problem. You don't create a Kong then act surprised when Kong does what he wants instead of what you want, do you?

and how exactly is Trickle-Down Economics, which have been repeated over and over by the rich as reasons not to tax them, not completely horsesh_t considering the last 30yrs?
http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/23/7927178-the-koch-brothers-graph


Why do liberals insist on calling 1% paying 40% of all taxes "not being taxed"? They're being taxed plenty already, and if you try to confiscate the rest, they'll just beam it overseas or keep it in tax-free products where it won't get invested or circulate. And that's ignoring the moral issue of why someone gets taxed proportionately higher for the 'crime' of having more?

of course, regarding that link, I assume your first response is... "Well Rachel Maddows, that's all I need to know about that link"

No, but I'm not sure what the point of that link was, really. Due to increasingly efficient software and other tech advances, over time a job that once required a thousand workers can be done with only 300. It's called "creative destruction" and yeah, it requires you to be on the ball.

I will say, if you already don't, you should lobby for some rich interests... I'm sure they got a teet for you... because you sure a capable job of touting the rhetoric without providing any concrete details

I've never been offered a job by a poor man, have you? Unless you're a vote-buying politician, you shouldn't overly concern yourself that someone else has more than you, nor blame them. Economics is not a zero-sum game.









>> ^packo:

>> ^quantumushroom:
The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government.
The most harm has been done and money wasted in the past 60 years by governments trying to guarantee an equality of outcomes.

are you talking about the deregulation of the banking system and Wall Street that led to not just this crash but the previous one? because, yeah... the oh-so-lovable working class were behind that
or the banking bailouts, where instead of using the money to cover the banking losses (see above) wasn't used to get lending going again, but for banks to consolidate and buy each other out... leading to banks that are even more TOO BIG TO FAIL
and how exactly is Trickle-Down Economics, which have been repeated over and over by the rich as reasons not to tax them, not completely horsesh_t considering the last 30yrs?
http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/09/23/7927178-the-k
och-brothers-graph
of course, regarding that link, I assume your first response is... "Well Rachel Maddows, that's all I need to know about that link"
I will say, if you already don't, you should lobby for some rich interests... I'm sure they got a teet for you... because you sure a capable job of touting the rhetoric without providing any concrete details

quantumushroomsays...

Ah, I see what you attempted, so let me elaborate.

The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government, but he's still forgotten more than will ever be known by the self-anointed liberal intelligentsia, whose theories and follies he pays for every day.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^quantumushroom:
The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government.

Tell me about it.

dannym3141says...

>> ^quantumushroom:

Ah, I see what you attempted, so let me elaborate.
The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government, but he's still forgotten more than will ever be known by the self-anointed liberal intelligentsia, whose theories and follies he pays for every day.
>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^quantumushroom:
The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government.

Tell me about it.



Why do you ALWAYS assume everyone is a liberalist? I know you may have spoken with him before, but you say the same thing to anyone who disagrees with you.

MonkeySpanksays...

QM,
There is no need to put labels on these people. Labels are a sign of weakness in any argument. The OWS have repeatedly stated that they are not affiliated with any party. They are mad at the current state of our government; they are not promoting a political agenda - I didn't see a single banner promoting somebody's name on it. I think you, and many others, keep missing the fundamental point that these people are attacking lobbyism and backroom deals that happen in Washington - most of which are triggered by the oil industry, big pharma, and the financial sector. The focal point of their day-to-day transactions is indeed Wall St.

Why not Washington you say? People are mad at the economy (outsourced jobs, bailouts, foreclosures) and the pulse of our economy is measured in Wall St. Why is this a surprise? The medial keeps trying to funnel the OWS people into a political agenda, which in fact, is non-existent. As LaGreca stated so eloquently, this is a "general assembly vs. top-heavy town hall" issue; I think people from all parts of the political should agree with that, regardless of their affiliation. The assumption that people are going to come with a list of demands is based on the fact that this is a political movement with a leadership. Many people at OWS have different conflicting concerns, and there is nothing wrong with that. That's how democracy works. One thing they all agree on is that change is needed (and by change I don't mean replace President A with President B).

I know you are going to attack Obama and Liberals (I despise Obama btw), but you have to understand that this collapsed economy was created by Bush and happened on his watch - the house has been under republican control for quite some time now and the senate has 13 centrist democrats that lean toward republican ideology and vote against their own party consistently. You just can't blame one man or one party. The whole system is rigged. When it comes to the economic policies, it's not who's playing the game that's the problem, it's the rules of the game itself.

So in short, QM, I think you're not always wrong as I tend to agree with some of your posts, but you're not always right either. Neither am I. The truth is somewhere in between.

As my old English teacher used to say, the best argument is the one that sits on the fence...

>> ^quantumushroom:

Ah, I see what you attempted, so let me elaborate.
The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government, but he's still forgotten more than will ever be known by the self-anointed liberal intelligentsia, whose theories and follies he pays for every day.
>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^quantumushroom:
The average oh-so-lovable working class stiff is chock-full of wrongful assumptions about business, law and government.

Tell me about it.


MonkeySpanksays...

Replies within message:

>> ^quantumushroom:

I was 100% against the failouts, but not much you can do against a leviathan government made that way by worshipers of leviathan government as the solution to every problem. You don't create a Kong then act surprised when Kong does what he wants instead of what you want, do you?


If I recall, Bush pushed for the bailout. Here is the Fox News article.


Due to increasingly efficient software and other tech advances, over time a job that once required a thousand workers can be done with only 300. It's called "creative destruction" and yeah, it requires you to be on the ball.


I agree with you. This happened to the TV repairmen in the 80s when the Japanese firms starting making better TVs. It's a problem that we will have to deal with regularly. It happened, and it will happen again. If it wasn't for prescriptions, most General Physicians would be out of the job today as internet self-diagnostics have become extremely popular in the last 10 years. We still subsidize farmers, cotton growers, and steelworkers. I say let's drop them! The same rule should apply to all. If we are willing to support outsourcing, then we should be willing to cut all subsidies to farmers, oil companies, pharmaceuticals, etc. I'm all for that.

I've never been offered a job by a poor man, have you? Unless you're a vote-buying politician, you shouldn't overly concern yourself that someone else has more than you, nor blame them. Economics is not a zero-sum game.

I don't see your point at all here. People do not want to tax the rich more, they just want repeal the tax breaks that Bush implemented. Unless you know otherwise, over the ENTIRE lifespan of these tax breaks, the economy has been on a downhill. How can you justify them then? Remember this is tax breaks over income only, if the rich invest their money into their businesses, they are never taxed on that money anyways.

quantumushroomsays...

So in short, QM, I think you're not always wrong as I tend to agree with some of your posts, but you're not always right either. Neither am I. The truth is somewhere in between.

As my old English teacher used to say, the best argument is the one that sits on the fence...


I appreciate the work that went into your response and I read all of it. "Leaderless" movement? Don't believe it.

I would like a true accounting as much as the next guy. I want to know where the failout money went, every last penny. I want arguments with real facts and figures, and we don't have them. (Example: Outsourcing. Is it really a problem? How many jobs were actually outsourced? In what fields)?

Everything is political. Everything. When the cleverer politicos "respond" to these mobs, the "solutions" will be far worse than the original problems. That's government in action.



>> ^MonkeySpank:

QM,
There is no need to put labels on these people. Labels are a sign of weakness in any argument. The OWS have repeatedly stated that they are not affiliated with any party.. >>

quantumushroomsays...

If I recall, Bush pushed for the bailout. Here is the Fox News article.

Yes, I am aware of this. It's a disgrace, more so than if a Democrat president initiated it. Bush was a liberal with a few conservative tendencies.

I've never been offered a job by a poor man, have you? Unless you're a vote-buying politician, you shouldn't overly concern yourself that someone else has more than you, nor blame them. Economics is not a zero-sum game.

I don't see your point at all here. People do not want to tax the rich more, they just want repeal the tax breaks that Bush implemented.

You may not want to tax the rich more, the socialists dream of nothing else. And raising taxes on the middle class and poor too. I'm here to tell you that repealing the rather modest Bush tax cuts will do nothing--NOTHING--to help the economy nor fill government coffers.


Unless you know otherwise, over the ENTIRE lifespan of these tax breaks, the economy has been on a downhill. How can you justify them then?


The problem goes back to spending more than we have, always will. I don't see how you can single out the tax breaks as being the single source for economic woes.


Remember this is tax breaks over income only, if the rich invest their money into their businesses, they are never taxed on that money anyways.

The profits are taxed. What I mean by 'zero-sum game' is this: socialists believe in order for someone to win at economics, someone else must lose. It's balderdash. Wealth is created not when the slices of pie are "more balanced" but when the pie itself grows larger.

MonkeySpanksays...


I would like a true accounting as much as the next guy. I want to know where the failout money went, every last penny. I want arguments with real facts and figures, and we don't have them. (Example: Outsourcing. Is it really a problem? How many jobs were actually outsourced? In what fields)?


I agree with you 100%, and I think most people would too. It's my money too dang nab it; true capitalism has no bailouts. The problem today is that we have a corporate-socialist-capitalist government. In other words, the banks got a bailout and the people didn't. I speak for myself here when I say that any amount of money spent on somebody else's greed (whether it's personal buying a house, or corporate buying toxic mortgages) was a waste of money. People talked about the real-estate bubble bursting since 2004; everyone had 3 years to get their act together (capital gains on homes is 2 years, so they had plenty of time to refinance or sell), yet some actually paid attention and limited their losses, and others believed that during recession (2001) it still made sense that house prices were on the rise.


Everything is political. Everything. When the cleverer politicos "respond" to these mobs, the "solutions" will be far worse than the original problems. That's government in action.


I agree with you here as well. I like the practice of democracy and I don't have an issue with these people voicing their concerns, and like I said before, I don't see this problem solved by any existing politician today. I have no faith in the federal government, Democrat or Republican. So far I am liking the movement, I am giving them the benefit of the doubt, like I did with the Tea Party. The moment I see the OWS people align with an existing corrupt party (choose your flavor), then I'll polarize against it.

Good day to you.

>> ^quantumushroom:

I appreciate the work that went into your response and I read all of it. "Leaderless" movement? Don't believe it.

I would like a true accounting as much as the next guy. I want to know where the failout money went, every last penny. I want arguments with real facts and figures, and we don't have them. (Example: Outsourcing. Is it really a problem? How many jobs were actually outsourced? In what fields)?

Everything is political. Everything. When the cleverer politicos "respond" to these mobs, the "solutions" will be far worse than the original problems. That's government in action.



>> MonkeySpank:[snip]

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More