My Teabagging "Friend" Bids Me A Fond Farewell

[Kennah]

Here is an Email exchange with a Teabagger "friend", and I use that term friend very, very, very loosely. We worked together at two previous gigs, I found him entertaining, and like a horny dog he has been humping my leg, figuratively speaking, for several years now with his "bunker broadcasts".

I've changed his name to Fred to protect the guilty. I know someone is going to cry foul and say I've doctored his posts. As Gaia as my witness, I just copied and pasted what he sent.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Fred
Sent: Wed, July 20, 2011 7:28:33 AM
Subject: Debt ceiling

I apologize for sending this. I really hate politics.

The Congress is intent on pushing more debt on your kids and your grandkids - whether they are on this planet or yet to be born.

By doing this, they show their intentions: to destroy the USA. They (your congress critter) really doesn't give a damn about you.

Nonetheless, there is one person who is speaking the truth.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/07/19/ron_paul_we_will_default_because_the_debt_is_unsustainable.html

And by the way - this guy is running for President.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kennah
To: Fred
Sent: Wed, July 20, 2011 12:21:44 PM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

Non-issue. Debt Ceiling was raised 7 times under Bush, and hardly anyone said a thing. Oh, the usual politics gesturing, but nothing the bullshit today out of the GOP.

14th Amendment might very well make the Debt Ceiling issue a non-issue, as in an unConstitutional Issue, if the GOP is so stupid as to push it--even more.

"Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void."

The Confederates weren't to be paid, nor were those who supplied them arms, but all other debts authorized by Congress are legit. If Congress proposes it, then it "shall not be questioned."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kennah
To: Fred
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 2:47:15 AM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

Also, Reagan raised the debt ceiling 18 times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt#Historical_debt_ceiling_levels

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Fred
To: Kennah
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 8:51:08 AM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

In my beginning email, I did not use the word 'ceiling' - not once. In the video, Dr. Paul uses the word 'ceiling' in passing; but he uses the word 'debt' many times.

It is not the debt ceiling that is the problem; rather, it is the debt that our kids and grandkids will inherit.

A debtor is a slave to his creditor; and that is the point of my discussion - further enslavement of our kids and grandkids through the debt we are now taking on.

Dr. Paul says, "... if the debt is the problem, then how can more debt be the solution?"

Dr. Paul further states that the U.S. will default by paying with devalued money - so that (for example) people on social security will receive their check but it won't buy anything. This will be quite devastating to old people who's sole income is social security.

And yet, Congress, the mainstream media, are all pushing for more debt.

You need look no further than Germany, circa 1921 or Argentina circa 2000 to see what can happen. Only this time, the dollar is held by most central banks around the world as their 'reserve currency'. So, world-wide, central banks' reserves will be substantially devalued. The effects of this are predictable and are already being seen in the Middle East, North Africa, and China.

I suggest that you listen to the video again - maybe several times, even. There are important messages that no one else is putting forth.

Take Care,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kennah
To: Fred
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 10:21:59 AM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

Read your subject line, Fred.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Fred
To: Kennah
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 10:39:01 AM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

Yep. You got me. I guess everything else in here is false too. :-)

Take Care,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kennah
To: Fred
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 1:48:20 PM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

Fred, if YOU don't even read the B.S. you write, why would you expect ANYONE ELSE to read it?

I'm rather enjoying the bloodsport of the Teabaggers and the Neocons fighting one another in the GOP. The field of candidates thus far is laughable, at best.

My prediction for 2012? Obama wins re-election, but the margin of victory could be a little smaller than in 2008. Dems retake the House with about 230 seats overall, and hold onto the Senate and probably gain a few, but still won't have 60 votes. Perhaps they'll have the guts to eliminate the silly filibuster rule in the Senate.

Then, and only then, will we perhaps start to see real recovery, and maybe Obama will find some inspiration in FDR and Truman, rather than reading about Reagan.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Fred
To: Kennah
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 2:10:13 PM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

"Fred, if YOU don't even read the B.S. you write, why would you expect ANYONE ELSE to read it?"

Kennah,

It is your choice to read it. I have no expectation that you will; nor do I care.

I have no interest in arguing with you. After all, who am I to suggest that your reality is different than your own experience? It is your life - you should enjoy it and not let others tell you differently.

(You should ignore this if you don't want my opinion) ... In my opinion, there is no recovery, because: 1) government is working for the benefit of large corporations (inhibiting small-business formation); and 2) because government is taking an ever-increasing amount of wealth from 'producers' and giving it to 'consumers'. This transfer of wealth reduces one's incentive to be productive.

I don't have a clue what the elections will yield. I tend to think they're rigged; so nothing will surprise me.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kennah
To: Fred
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 3:20:52 PM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

#1 - Agreed. Corporate personhood started it all. So I take it then that you agree with me, and other Progressives, that we can end this nonsense now with a simple Amendment to the Constitution--all because of the hijacking of our old friend the 14th Amendment.

Perhaps words to the effect of:

"Nothing shall be construed to bestow personhood on any corporation, entity, group, or organization. A person is an individual natural person, and nothing else."

#2 - Disagree. The tax burden has been shifting from the elite to the poor and the middle class, so much so that the middle class is at risk of disappearing completely within say 10 years of unrestricted Neocon rule. The tax burden has not been this low in decades. Under Bill Clinton, the time of greatest prosperity since the start of Reagan's disastrous policies, the tax burden was the HIGHEST. Under Dubya, we had some of the lowest tax burdens and the least prosperity. The myth that higher taxes equals lower prosperity has been busted, Fred. Please do try to keep up.

Cheers,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Fred
To: Kennah
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 4:10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

If you read Black's Law Dictionary, you will note that "person" is defined as an artificial entity; a corporation is also an artificial entity.

We are working on a Food Freedom Ordinance here in Stevens county. I will forward a copy of our position paper on the notion of a natural human being vs. and artificial entity. I am attaching this to show what the law says and the conclusions thereof - for your education (if you are interested). I am willing to discuss it; but I am not willing to argue about it.

You cite the tax burden as the means of wealth transfer. While this is significant, the largest part of the wealth transfer mechanism is via inflation of the money supply. Note that the wealthy get first use of all newly created money - and then when the money later filters down to the peons, price inflation has occurred and the peon must pay more for goods/services. The wealthy, of course had use of the money before prices rose.

It is the nature of paper money and inflation of the money supply that has killed the middle class in other countries - as it is currently doing here. This has been going on since 1913; which is why were feel like we're more and more behind the eight-ball.

The Fed's program of loaning money to domestic and foreign banks (at zero interest) has the effect of inflating the money supply (debasing yours' and mine money) while transferring wealth to the banksters. Over the last three years, estimates of this transfer range around $25 Trillion (not a misprint). Again, I urge you to look at Germany, circa 1921 and Argentina, circa 2000.

Still another way the government confiscates wealth is through the zero interest rate program of the Fed. In essence, people's capital is being drawn down because they cannot obtain a fair rate of interest. And further, government regulation is now so onerous that there are few small business investment opportunities - leading to the draining of capital from the U.S. We pay for this, of course, by lower rate of job creation. Capital drives job creation - no capital, then no jobs.

I think the left/right paradigm is a distraction. Note how democrats have voted to fund these undeclared wars just as republicans do. I see no active anti-war activism on the progressive side. Thus, when it comes to war left == right. Only libertarians view this differently.

As for social-spending. I have a core belief that stealing is wrong and not be condoned. Stealing via the force of government coercion is also wrong - as it is nothing by indirect theft. So, I think that socialized medicine is wrong because it is implemented with stolen funds.

Likewise, I believe that government has an obligation to treat each human being the same under the law. Under the Constitution, the federal government is required to enforce private contracts - government has an obligation to do this. IMO, government has no right to favor one corporation over another; nor to give corporations any form of special treatment. Nor does have government have any right to transfer any of its powers to private corporations. Most of the rules and regulations promulgated by government are not authorized by Congress - this is a travesty of our Constitution and our rule of law.

I have studied economics for many years: Keynesian, Monetarist, and Austrian. In my opinion, the Keynesian model has shown to be seriously flawed. Paul Krugman is an adherent of the Keynesian model - need I say more?

If you respond, please try to refrain from calling me names or critisizing me. These are my views; and at my age, it is hard for anyone to change my views.

With Best Regards,
- Fred

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kennah
To: Fred
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 10:16:52 PM
Subject: Re: Debt ceiling

Fred, if you can't stand for your views to be critiqued, then go away. I'll neither coddle nor cuddle you.

[sakabatou]

1. Typical

[provis99]

2. the guy read Austrian "economics:"

Austrian economics is freakish fiction. Taking Austrian economics seriously is like taking Ayn Rand seriously. His warped ideology probably started with "economics".

[ProfessorGAC]

6. Boy Have You Nailed It

That is von Hayek on parade, right there. And there are members of Cato who still swear by it despite the mountain of evidence that it doesn't work the way it's described.

[Ruby the Liberal]

3. I applaud your efforts, but you are arguing with a Randian

as in Ayn. Utopian societal model that does not take into account GREED.

Even Randian advocate Alan Greenspan finally admitted that his life-long held 'free market' views were 'flawed' and 'wrong'. Happy to look up the video of him admitting this in a Congressional inquiry if you haven't seen it and/or need to reference it.

I am just sorry that she never lived long enough to see her legacy proven a fallacy.

Maybe, just maybe, the Randian 'Libertarians' will get their broken-clock-is-right-twice-a-day heads out of their collective asses and wake up to reality.

[Beartracks]

4. Nicely argu... er, discussed, Kennah!

I like Fred's statement: "This transfer of wealth reduces one's incentive to be productive." That is so Limbaughian.

Listen, Fred: transferring wealth to CONSUMERS increases DEMAND for things to be PRODUCED and thus consumed.


And, wow -- do all Randians and Tea Baggers take the position that when they present their own views it is a "discussion" but when others present THEIR views, it is an "argument"?? Completely insufferable.

Sorry, Kennah. Fred's a tool.

:)

=======================================

[Kennah]

5. He wasn't done

Not sure if he'll respond or not. Perhaps I got a stake in him.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Fred
To: Kennah
Sent: Thu, July 21, 2011 11:51:35 PM
Subject: RE: Re: Debt ceiling

Frequently, you are critical of me (the person) rather than my views. For example, one of your statements in this line of email says: "Fred. Please do try to keep up" is insulting to me. It is this kind of drive-by slam that prompts the reply I sent.

Now. Do you want to discuss these issues; or do you want to continue trying to make me wrong for objecting to your insults?

This thread began when I sent out a video - noting that Congress would push our kids and grandkids further into debt.

This is indisputable fact: our borrowing is on a trajectory whereby interest on the debt will soon consume all government income. We will be like Greece. And both the Dems and the Reps are promoting this.

Doesn't this seem irrational (or destructive of the U.S.) to you?

What will the world be like when Treasury securities are rated as junk (or below)? Or, do you believe that this just won't happen?

Before you answer, please remember that I correctly called the October 2008 collapse. (Paul Krugman and Ben Bernanke missed it)

Take Care,
- Fred

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kennah
To: Fred
Sent: Fri, July 22, 2011 1:36:08 AM
Subject: Re: Re: Debt ceiling

You wrote "Debt ceiling" in the subject line, I pointed out to you that it's a non-issue, and you said you never used the word ceiling even once. It's hard to take you seriously, Fred.

I once called you out on the 14th Amendment, and you were certain of what it said. When I showed you that you were wrong, you conceded and said the Constitution was long and that you hadn't read the whole thing. My thought at the time was, "Seriously?" Anyone with a high school diploma should be able to read the entire thing, including all the Amendments, in under an hour even if they take breaks. As such, I cannot take seriously any claims by you about your reading of Black's Law, Adam Smith, etc.

In the past, you cited movies ("Enemy of the State" and "The Matrix" come to mind) in defense of your beliefs, along with twits like Glenn Beck. It appears you get most of your information from entertainment sources, and in the case of Beck insane ones.

The Debt Ceiling is being discussed in the news, and the date approacheth. I really couldn't care less about Ron Paul's bullshit and thoroughly disproved ideology. Ayn Rand, the hypocrite, didn't live up to her professed ideals because she took Social Security and Medicare benefits when smacked with reality. Her writings were complete and utter crap. I read "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" years ago in high school, and I think "The Great Gatsby" and "Heart Of Darkness" were less painful reads.

Debt as a percentage of GDP isn't even close to the highest of the highs after WWII--and we're there thanks to Dubya, the GOP, and unfunded wars and mandates--but we got out of the debt of WWII just fine by building stuff and taxing the wealthy. Our economy works when people buy stuff, not when they're selling pencils and apples on the street, and it doesn't matter one damn bit about the tax rates of the wealthy. Top tax rates of 74 to 91 percent were accompanied by some of the greatest prosperity of the last century. Low tax rates, low tariffs, and crap from China ain't gonna buy us anything except servitude to The Dragon. That's way scarier than debt. BTW, do you have any kids?

Clinton came into office inheriting a budget deficit, he raised taxes, there was prosperity, and when he left office there was a budget surplus. Granted, he waged war on workers (NAFTA and GATT) and the poor (war on welfare). Nevertheless, the idea that we need to cut taxes to reduce the debt does not hold up.

Dubya managed to reverse the trend and turn a surplus into a deficit, but he's also the guy who somehow managed to go bust running an oil company. This nonsensical argument that we need to embrace austerity doesn't stand up very well if one looks to the times it's been tried. You may recall hearing about a guy named Hoover, and given that we're in a depression we don't need more austerity induced Hoovervilles. Sadly though, Obama appears to be embracing Hoover and the discredited Austrian model rather than FDR, Truman, Galbraith, and the proven Keynesian model.

At times, nihilism gets the better of me in agreeing with those who say, "Don't raise the Debt Ceiling. Just let the banks and the U.S. credit rating all come crashing down." I would be inclined to agree, if I thought Obama would pursue the path of FDR or Truman in the aftermath. Instead, I fear, he'll become Hoover, serve only one term, and the next President out of the GOP will champion fascism. Michele Bachmann might be the scariest of the GOP hopefuls.

You didn't call shit on October 2008. Some of the names I've heard credited with calling it are Michael Panzner, Nouriel Roubini, Gary Shilling, Robert Prechter, Peter Schiff, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Marc Faber, Stephen Roach, Meredith Whitney, David Rosenberg, Jeremy Grantham, James Grant, Antal E. Fekete, Darryl Schoon, Med Jones, Steve Keen, Dean Baker. There are also plenty of critiques of many of them saying the same thing: they didn't call shit.

In declaring that you can't take anyone challenging you on your views, and that you aren't going to change your mind, what you're really saying is, "Shut up and listen to me." You have no interest in discussing the issues, so FOAD.