Keith Olbermann Special Comment On Debt Deal

[FlipPro]

http://current.com/shows/countdown/videos/special-comment-the-four-great-hypocrisies-of-the-debt-deal

WOW!

[GideonGono]

I can't say I agree with everything he says but I like the passion. That's the type of shit we need to start a revolution. I'm with whoever wants to take out the bankers.

[JeffK]

He's right, and we should all have been in the streets a long time ago.

There is an overarching sentiment on these forums that the rich deserve every penny that they have, that they earned it.

However, this is it folks. This is what laissez-faire capitalism gets you. Government isn't evil because it is inherently evil, it is evil because we didn't regulate it enough and let a "free market" of sorts take over. This deal, the American economy, and the world as a whole you see today is a direct result of unrestrained capitalism.

[TheGer]

You what I didn't hear the whole time?

Obama

or

Democrat.

Very telling on where the bread is buttered.

[JeffK]

You what I didn't hear the whole time?

Obama

or

Democrat.

Very telling on where the bread is buttered.

He called the president out in particular, noting that he was ineffectual and undeserving of any "praise" he deserves for this.

To be fair, a large portion of this is the Republicans fault, since most of this disaster started with/was exaggerated by Nixon/Reagan and their Republican pals.

[TheGer]

You are stuck in the Matrix my friend.  Republican/Democrat is 2 sides of the same coin owned by the same people.  Where it really counts to the people upstairs you see they always get their way.

Patriot Act and Banker Bailouts to name some of the recent ones.  It goes back way further than that though.

[Bitcoin_Silver_Supply]

You are stuck in the Matrix my friend.  Republican/Democrat is 2 sides of the same coin owned by the same people.  Where it really counts to the people upstairs you see they always get their way.

Patriot Act and Banker Bailouts to name some of the recent ones.  It goes back way further than that though.

This.

Hugely biased commentators always look more objective when you are stuck in the left-right paradigm. Olbermann is the O'Reilly of the left.

[GideonGono]

However, this is it folks. This is what laissez-faire capitalism gets you. Government isn't evil because it is inherently evil, it is evil because we didn't regulate it enough and let a "free market" of sorts take over. This deal, the American economy, and the world as a whole you see today is a direct result of unrestrained capitalism.

It is not laissez-faire capitalism when the govt is running social security ponzi schemes, manipulating interest rates so it can borrow artificially cheaply, guaranteeing loans for just about everything and bailing out industry after industry dating back decades. Please get yourself educated about what you are talking about before you open your mouth.

[cbeast]

Rise.

[JeffK]

However, this is it folks. This is what laissez-faire capitalism gets you. Government isn't evil because it is inherently evil, it is evil because we didn't regulate it enough and let a "free market" of sorts take over. This deal, the American economy, and the world as a whole you see today is a direct result of unrestrained capitalism.

It is not laissez-faire capitalism when the govt is running social security ponzi schemes, manipulating interest rates so it can borrow artificially cheaply, guaranteeing loans for just about everything and bailing out industry after industry dating back decades. Please get yourself educated about what you are talking about before you open your mouth.

The State we have today, bought and paid for by corporations, is exactly the result of a deregulated free market.

[Bitcoin_Silver_Supply]

Jeffk, take a guess as to who founded and elevated the first cartel corporations?

Protip: they had absolutely nothing to do with the free market/

[NghtRppr]

The State we have today, bought and paid for by corporations, is exactly the result of a deregulated free market.

A handful of regulations being removed while leaving the rest in place and calling it "deregulation" is like a few people dying of old age and calling it "depopulation".

[Slab Squathrust]

However, this is it folks. This is what laissez-faire capitalism gets you. Government isn't evil because it is inherently evil, it is evil because we didn't regulate it enough and let a "free market" of sorts take over. This deal, the American economy, and the world as a whole you see today is a direct result of unrestrained capitalism.

It is not laissez-faire capitalism when the govt is running social security ponzi schemes, manipulating interest rates so it can borrow artificially cheaply, guaranteeing loans for just about everything and bailing out industry after industry dating back decades. Please get yourself educated about what you are talking about before you open your mouth.

Exactly.  Plus the government regulating the government is a paradox.  The regulator cannot regulate them self, the regulator.  

I think the best example of our "unregulated" economy is the NLRB currently telling boeing they cannot build a new aircraft plant in SC.  No one lost their job in WA, boeing simply wanted to hire more United States employees, and the US government has a problem with that?  I thought our leaders were concerned about jobs?  I would love to see boeing pack up and open factories in China.  Just drop all US employees.  We deserve it for letting our "leaders" telling companies not to hire us.    

Plus Keith is a goon.  No better than any other commentator (or just as worse) left or right.  I'm just glad I don't have to see him on Sunday Night Football anymore.

[rainingbitcoins]

The State we have today, bought and paid for by corporations, is exactly the result of a deregulated free market.

A handful of regulations being removed while leaving the rest in place and calling it "deregulation" is like a few people dying of old age and calling it "depopulation".

Numerous abuses led to regulation in the first place. It worked alright until those regulations started getting stripped away, at which point we started seeing more and more abuses.

The conclusion I draw from this is that... wait for it... regulations are bad and if we regulate anything at all in even the smallest way, we clearly can't blame capitalists for their own greed! Also, did you know that the first corporation was chartered by a government in like 1600? Therefore governments are responsible for every corporate abuse of the last four centuries. King James is still screwing us over from beyond the grave!

I think the best example of our "unregulated" economy is the NLRB currently telling boeing they cannot build a new aircraft plant in SC.  No one lost their job in WA, boeing simply wanted to hire more United States employees, and the US government has a problem with that?

Yes, that was exactly what happened and you didn't mischaracterize that situation one bit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/business/21boeing.html

In what may be the strongest signal yet of the new pro-labor orientation of the National Labor Relations Board under President Obama, the agency filed a complaint Wednesday seeking to force Boeing to bring an airplane production line back to its unionized facilities in Washington State instead of moving the work to a nonunion plant in South Carolina.
 
In its complaint, the labor board said that Boeing’s decision to transfer a second production line for its new 787 Dreamliner passenger plane to South Carolina was motivated by an unlawful desire to retaliate against union workers for their past strikes in Washington and to discourage future strikes. The agency’s acting general counsel, Lafe Solomon, said it was illegal for companies to take actions in retaliation against workers for exercising the right to strike.

Although manufacturers have long moved plants to nonunion states, the board noted that Boeing officials had, in internal documents and news interviews, specifically cited the strikes and potential future strikes as a reason for their 2009 decision to expand in South Carolina.

Also, they opened the plant anyway:

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/06/10/boeing-facility-opens-in-south-carolina-despite-opposition-from-nlrb/

“I can’t wait to see those mack-daddy planes come out of here,” said Governor Nikki Haley.

[GideonGono]

we clearly can't blame capitalists for their own greed!

Funny how in your warped worldview, rich people are evil when they are "capitalist" businessmen. But when rich people (many of them fresh from their corporate jobs, ala Hank Paulson) are in govt the are suddenly transformed into benevolent angels.

The whole notion of "Tax the rich" is based on a fallacy. First, one must ask, who are the rich? The rich are the ones who in most all societies hold political power.  Having political power and connections is the easiest way to get and stay rich.

In the USA for example just look at the net worth of senior members of govt who make all the rules:

Barack H. Osama - Net worth $10.5m source

Nancy Pelosi - Net worth $35.2m Source

Harry Reid - Net worth estimated between $3.1 - $6.7 million source

I can go on and on...

After decades of "socially progressive" policies all over the developed world we still see an increasing gap between rich and poor.

I wonder, are people really that stupid to believe this shit? Or is this some kind of sick joke and I'm in the twilight zone?

What will it take for you lefties to realize the plan ain't working?

Bottomline: If you have powerful centralized control, the corporations WILL go after it and corrupt it. That is a FACT you so conveniently ignore.

[GideonGono]

I'm just glad I don't have to see him on Sunday Night Football anymore.

Despite his communist vitriol, I actually liked him as part of the SNF broadcast 

[rainingbitcoins]

Funny how in your warped worldview, rich people are evil when they are "capitalist" businessmen. But when rich people (many of them fresh from their corporate jobs, ala Hank Paulson) are in govt the are suddenly transformed into benevolent angels.

Funny how I never even tried to defend any of those people. Actually if you think I'm under the impression that anyone in a position of power in the U.S. government (except maybe Bernie Sanders) gives a damn about anyone who isn't rich, you're barking up the wrong tree.

The whole notion of "Tax the rich" is based on a fallacy. First, one must ask, who are the rich? The rich are the ones who in most all societies hold political power.  Having political power and connections is the easiest way to get and stay rich.

In the USA for example just look at the net worth of senior members of govt who make all the rules:

Barack H. Osama - Net worth $10.5m source

Nancy Pelosi - Net worth $35.2m Source

Harry Reid - Net worth estimated between $3.1 - $6.7 million source

I can go on and on...

After decades of "socially progressive" policies all over the developed world we still see an increasing gap between rich and poor.

I wonder, are people really that stupid to believe this shit? Or is this some kind of sick joke and I'm in the twilight zone?

What will it take for you lefties to realize the plan ain't working?

Yes that's a lovely chain email - I love when people get all of their political beliefs from those.  Or was that a Yahoo News comment you copy/pasted that from? I know I've seen it or something really close to it some place that nobody should ever go looking for facts. One actual fact that it ignores, however, is that we've been cutting the crap out of socially progressive programs for the last three decades. With that in mind, it only succeeds in proving the opposite of its claim.

Also I'm not a Democrat. And suggesting that getting elected president is the "easiest way to get and stay rich" is probably not exactly accurate.

[GideonGono]

Funny how in your warped worldview, rich people are evil when they are "capitalist" businessmen. But when rich people (many of them fresh from their corporate jobs, ala Hank Paulson) are in govt the are suddenly transformed into benevolent angels.

Funny how I never even tried to defend any of those people. Actually if you think I'm under the impression that anyone in a position of power in the U.S. government (except maybe Bernie Sanders) gives a damn about anyone who isn't rich, you're barking up the wrong tree.

The whole notion of "Tax the rich" is based on a fallacy. First, one must ask, who are the rich? The rich are the ones who in most all societies hold political power.  Having political power and connections is the easiest way to get and stay rich.

In the USA for example just look at the net worth of senior members of govt who make all the rules:

Barack H. Osama - Net worth $10.5m source

Nancy Pelosi - Net worth $35.2m Source

Harry Reid - Net worth estimated between $3.1 - $6.7 million source

I can go on and on...

After decades of "socially progressive" policies all over the developed world we still see an increasing gap between rich and poor.

I wonder, are people really that stupid to believe this shit? Or is this some kind of sick joke and I'm in the twilight zone?

What will it take for you lefties to realize the plan ain't working?

Yes that's a lovely chain email - I love when people get all of their political beliefs from those.  Or was that a Yahoo News comment you copy/pasted that from? I know I've seen it or something really close to it some place that nobody should ever go looking for facts. One actual fact that it ignores, however, is that we've been cutting the crap out of socially progressive programs for the last three decades. With that in mind, it only succeeds in proving the opposite of its claim.

Also I'm not a Democrat. And suggesting that getting elected president is the "easiest way to get and stay rich" is probably not exactly accurate.

In your post you were defending government in general (which specific type is irrelevant) and regulations. I pointed out that the corporations you so condemn will always have an incentive to take over that govt and abuse its regulatory power for their own benefit. You don't need to be president, you just need to have your buddies in the govt to make lost of money and to protect that money. eg Goldman Sachs and it's buddies at the FED & US Treasury. This is just an example to illustrate the point. Being a democrat or not is irrelevant. I am showing that govt power is the problem. You can have all the "checks and balance" & "constitutions" you want. IT WILL NEVER WORK!

[rainingbitcoins]

In your post you were defending government in general (which specific type is irrelevant) and regulations. I pointed out that the corporations you so condemn will always have an incentive to take over that govt and abuse its regulatory power for their own benefit. Being a democrat or not is irrelevant. I am showing that govt IS the problem and it's power should be neutralized.

Specific type of government is never irrelevant. I'd never sit here and defend feudalism or Italian fascism or whatever loony system you can come up with.

But the interesting thing about your post is that if I remove the very last line, it sounds like a potent argument for socialism. If your claim is that entities whose sole goal is money will eventually consolidate, gain power, and negatively affect government and therefore society, how is that an argument against government? Even in the complete absence of government, they'd still do whatever the hell they wanted to make money, and their actions would still negatively affect society. History has shown that companies can get away with all kinds of horrible stuff and people will still happily buy their products, so I doubt I'd rely too much on the free market running offenders out of business.

Basically, if you neutralize the government's power, who do you think is going to take it? Unless you think that power vacuum is just going to sit there chilling with nobody stepping in and every person and every corporation always acting unselfishly and in the best interests of society. 

e: looks like you edited your post after I quoted it

[JBDive]

Geeze what a liberal hypocrite!

Bush's wars? Let's see, Obama said the troops would come home, they haven't and in fact he has expanded the war in Afghanistan so it now includes Pakistan, has started a war with Libya, admitted we have troops in Yemen, deployed the Navy to the South China Sea and who knows how many other places that the media won't cover.

As to the "Super Congress" I don't think Olbermann would like to be told he sounds like Pail but he does. I would remind him it was his Liberal Democrats that agreed to this because they want to hide their own votes on needed cuts from their own voters. Shall we remind Olbermann that it is his Liberal buddies that have not presented and voted on a budget in almost two years?

Lastly I would remind Oblermann he worked for the corrupt mass media he now attacks. Where was that voice when he was at MSNBC which has shown they are more Liberal than CNN?

I can't wait to see some Tea Party website cut parts of this rant out and post on their own web pages to support the Tea Party movement, that will serve him right.