Ted Kennedy Dead at 77

[barnesfoto]

"barnesphoto, Your revisionist history is shameless"

Really, Oladub?, is it more shameless than your endless xenophobic rants against illegal immigrants posted between your stuffing your face with food produced by illegal immigrants?

first, a history lesson:

In 1955, the first U.S. military advisers arrived in Vietnam. President Dwight D. Eisenhower justified this decision [[sending "advisors" to Vietnam on the basis of the domino theory--that the loss of a strategic ally in Southeast Asia would result in the loss of others.)

"You have a row of dominoes set up," he said, "you knock the first one, and others will fall.”

President Eisenhower felt that with U.S. help, South Vietnam could maintain its independence.

So we have a very clear origin of US meddling in Southeast Asia, under a Republican President.

source: http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/dat...y.cfm?HHID=517

[[I realize that JFK expanded the war, that's one of the reasons that I never voted for him [[the other was that I wasn't born yet..but this is not a thread about JFK, Our Tourette's of the fingers-inflicted friend is confused, but that's usually the case, just as when he called Mexico a "socialist" nation, when in reality, it is a nation that practices many of the policies that Dr. OCD advocates, e.g. lower taxes and savage free market capitalism with little or no social safety net.)

So I'm sure that Teddy came a bit late to the anti-Vietnam War crowd, but so did most of America.

What is more important to me is his record on civil rights and health care, which Oladub conveniently ignores, but then there are a lot of things that Oladub conveniently ignores...for example, Oladub pretends that only one crop, Lettuce, is harvested by illegal immigrants, and that his own pie hole is not stuffed several times a day with the fruit of illegal immigrant labor.

Perhaps there is some vast overlooked story of how libertarians, black helicopterists, michigan militiaists, internet forum keyboardists and other fringe groups actually made the slightest contribution to the civil rights movement or the health care reform movement or the reform of immigration laws that were clearly racist - if so, I'm all ears)


TK's embrace of "deregulation/Naftism is a serious blot on his record, but the last 8 years have taught me the value of politicians who do a few things that I disagree with, as opposed to the value of politicians who do everything that I disagree with.

Did somebody say "revisionism"?
Calling Afghanistan "Obama's war"...well there's some revisionism.
Who started the war in A-stan again? In what year did it begin?

[gnome]

Guys, Guys!, you do know that Uncle Ho appealed to Truman for aid just after the Japs left.

And I'm sure you know that Ike was responding to the French, who was an ally to the US.

The Vietnam thing is enough of a fuck up for every Party to share in the blame, and to point to a single political party is rather childish and myopic in the extreme. Is Ike to blame yup, and Truman and Kennedy and Johnson and Nixon and Ford.

If Truman would have sat down with Ho and really learned what was going on there. If Stalin hadn't grabbed up Eastern Europe, hadn't backed post-war dust-ups in Greece and Turkey. If Truman hadn't written the Truman Doctrine and if Mao hadn't won in 1949, everything would have been different.
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal...accno=EJ642032
http://www.gmapalumni.org/chapomatic/extras/ho.htm
If North Korea hadn't jumped across the 38th, giving theoretical cred to Kennen's theory, if Stalin had not been slaughtering millions of his own people, if Ho had not turned to the Chinese for arms ...

everything would have been different.

[eriedearie]

Yep. And like my grandma always said, "If the dog hadn't stopped to take a $hit...he'd of caught the rabbit."

"If" is one of the smallest words in English language with the largest meaning. That "if" counts for a lot of supposition.

[oladub]

barnesphoto, The correct legal term is 'illegal aliens' rather than 'illegal immigrants'. 'Alien' just means non-citizen. Aliens come in two flavors; legal and illegal. The determination is supposed to be made by our elected representatives rather than anyone who feels like coming here. We already have a process for allowing in legal immigrants based on our national needs and other factors. I never mentioned lettuce but would gladly pay more to hire Americans. If you got me going, I would mention the good paying union jobs that were eliminated in the meat packing industry and the 30% of construction jobs now largely taken by illegal aliens. They are doing jobs Americans will do but not for illegal alien wages. Illegal aliens should be returned home, their cheating employers should be severely fined, and the on the take politicians like Teddy who tolerate this should be removed from office. Your politicians who support massive immigration, OPIC, NAFTA, importing Chinese cars, and the rest are destroying blue collar Americans.

Regarding health care I will take this theme a step further. It is a plantation mentality that looks to the people who created problems for bandages to put on the problems that were largely caused by those same people in the first place. After decades of Democrats and Republicans doing everything they could to eliminate competition, make their crony contributors rich, and otherwise make health care expensive, they now offer a solution - more of the same and the sheeple cheer. Unbelievable. I did present Teddy's list of top industries contributing to his election campaigns. The top two catagories were lawyers and healthcare interests. Any healthcare plan coming from Teddy was guaranteed to look after their interests. Patients would be "waitress sandwiched' between the two.

Nice try on the Vietnam War Revisionism. I didn't blame it on Eisenhower or John Kennedy. I pointed out that Teddy was not the anti war guy you made him out to be - at least not when it counted. Fact is that most US deaths occured under Johnson. No more than 2,200 deaths were uder Eisenhower and Kennedy combined. Over 35,000 died under Johnson. 22,000 died under Nixon as he slowly ended the war.

The Afghanistan war is now President Obama's war. Instead of cutting his losses and getting out as John Kennedy did when the Bay of Pigs invasion went wrong or as Reagan did when the Marine barracks in Lebenon was blown up, Obama keeps adding new troops and expanding the bombing. The general there now wants an additional 20,000 troops on top of the 17,000, and 4,000 Obama has already added. I lived through John Kennedy before I could vote and Obama is no John Kennedy. My Grandmothr had John Kennedy's picture on the wall next to the Pope's. So far, in Afghanistan, Obama is tip-toeing down Johnson's slippery slope although I'm gessing that that is one of the few little thing you disagree with him about.

[ccbatson]

JFK was the main reason for the involvement in Vietnam that led to the ultimate debacle and failure there. Arguing that someone else, Eisenhower, advised involvement in 1955 is not relevant.

Obama himself has stated that the war in Afghanistan was neglected prior to his taking office and that he would give it the attention that he believed was proper. He made it "his" war at that point.

[barnesfoto]

Would and should are not actions.
You guys who scream about illegal immigrants always say that you WOULD pay 5 dollars for lettuce
[[what about onions and tomatoes?)

I think that this translates to something like "When I'm not screaming about illegal immigration, I'm stuffing the fruits of illegal immigrant labor into my hypocritical mouth every day).

Fining corporations that use illegal labor is a great idea, it seems to work in Germany pretty well..

As for "they should be returned home" I'm sure that such a scenario WOULD require some sort of big-government door to door search type action..
[[that doesn't sound so libertarian).

You evoke visions of your noble patient ancestors waiting patiently in line at Ellis Island to be admitted via the racist quotas that allowed Europeans in while keeping brown people out.

You always seem to tiptoe around those pre-1964 racist quotas.

Teddy Kennedy helped change that [[See immigration reform act of 1964).
Teddy Kennedy supported immigration reform throughout his career.

And for that he was called a communist.

Feel free to tell us how the Libertarian Party, [[or whatever fringe party that you support) helped reform immigration laws, or pass the Voting Rights act and other civil rights laws.

Teddy Kennedy helped change those things and for that he was called a communist.

The fact that he helped pass NAFTA and other deregulatory scams I think proves that he was no communist.

But here we are in the 21st Century and Hannity is still screaming that he was a communist.


I don't support the occupation of Afghanistan, nor do I support handing billions of dollars to the kleptocracy in Pakistan. As Robert Macnamara's ghost floats over the place, I would like to see us out asap, but to call it "Obama's war" is a bit premature.

[oladub]

Barnesphoto, We are almost on the same note regarding fining cheating employers, the Afghanistan War, and NAFTA. I am not in the same camp as Hannity and the rest of neocon Republicans. Like Democrats, they are big government federalists and statists if that usn't being too redundant.

The numbers I've heard is that supporting a level of pay that would attract a lot of Americans to pick the lettuce you keep mentioning is an additional five to twenty cent range per head. I would be glad to pay that although we already have a huge garden and put up over 200 quarts of organic vegetables per year and have to give a lot away.

If we fine the employers of illegal aliens enough and put some of them in jail, my guess is that they would be employing more unemployed Americans instead. Bill those employers pay for the public schooling and emergency room visits of their illegal alien workers. The illegal alien job market would dry up shortly and many would just head home. Few roundups would be necessary but their employers should be rounded up anyway. We could even give illegal aliens going home presents if they turned in their former employers.

I didn't mention my ancestors. One actually did go through Ellis Island. One was turned away because he couldn't speak English. My father couldn't immigrate, even though he was married to an American, until after he had secured a job in Detroit and his afore mentioned inlaws agreed to financially sponsor him should he need medical care. I would be for re-adopting those standards. Also, the number of immigrants our government accepts in any occupation, should not jeopordize existing Americans' jobs. Teddy never worked a day in his life so how was he to understand the damage he was doing to working Americans? Teddy put on a great act while he greased the skids for corporate America.

Last Thanksgiving, we had guests from Indonesia, Taiwan, China, Holland, and India spend Thankgiving with us. Our sons are computer guys and our guests were some of their co-workers. These are the brightest people in the world. I don't care where they are from regarding your pre-1964 question. They are all here legally. Pre-1964 immigration would have been impossible to maintain today anyway because Europeans don't have enough babies to even keep up their own population.

Regarding libertarianism: Libertarians are on the forefront of fighting to keep the civil rights that mainstream Democrats and Republicans have been assaulting with Patriot Acts, wire tapping legislation, proposed speech legislation, increased government regulations and spending, internet controls, and other issues which reduce our civil rights. If you are referring instead to the civil right struggles of a half a century ago, give Eisenhower some credit too.

I would never refer to Teddy Kennedy as a Communist. He had too many yaughts and living compounds. 'Limousine liberal' would be more apt.

[ccbatson]

Federalists are the opposite of Statists. The former advocates for State governance over central governance, and the latter is about big central government. Some Republicans and conservatives are slightly statist when it comes to social controls [[ie anti drug, anti abortion...in the extreme), but rarely on economic controls. Democrats/liberals are for economic controls, and, indirectly, for social controls...2 out of 2.

Indirect social controls meaning that under the guise of altruism and compassion, create entitlements that create a dependency class limiting said group's liberty.

[barnesfoto]

Oladub, you are contradicting yourself again.

Libertarians are for less regulations? Then you must be for NAFTA? What was NAFTA but a loosening of regulations [[for corporations, not for people, unless you see being able to purchase Pan Bimbo instead of Tastee Bread as some kind of improved freedom).

Civil Rights laws were increased regulations...So wouldn't the Libertarian perspective be that the government has no authority to tell a business person that he can't keep black people out of his restaurant?

Not that it matters; no Libertarian lawmaker did anything to ever pass civil rights laws, because, well, libertarians are a fringe party.

Limousine liberal is kind of a cliche, a hollow term designed by propagandists like Peggy Noonan to incite the working class against people who might actually support them once in a while...or perhaps only conservocrites should ride in big American-made cars?? What exactly would that change?

As for you ideas about immigration, you mindset seems to be "It was hard for my ancestors to get in, so it should be hard for everybody"...But streamlining immigration laws would reduce the number of scapegoats for people like you, so I'm guessing that you are against that. And guess what! It would be a loosening of the "regulations" that you claim that libertarians are against. Furthermore, it would be a loosening of regulations for individuals, rather than corporations.

The picture you paint of your family gathering sounds beautiful...Next time you have your son's friends over, drink a toast to Ted Kennedy and the other lawmakers [[none of them were members of the Libertarian Party),
who helped change the law in 1964, allowing nonwhites like Indonesians to actually immigrate here.

[gnome]

oladub, thanks for those posts. calm . reasoned. sober.

[ccbatson]

It is not that libertarians condone racism, it is that they don't think that government should be the arbiter of all behavior

[oladub]

Oladub, you are contradicting yourself again.

Libertarians are for less regulations? Then you must be for NAFTA? What was NAFTA but a loosening of regulations [[for corporations, not for people, unless you see being able to purchase Pan Bimbo instead of Tastee Bread as some kind of improved freedom).

Your are partly right. There are some libertarians who border on being anarchists and don't want to recognize borders for instance. However, other less pure libertarians ground themselves in the Constitution which severly restricts federal powers. The Constitution does allow treaties but doesn't require bad treaties like NAFTA which Teddy voted for. Your guy, your bill. The Constitution protects us from government or at least it would if observed.

Civil Rights laws were increased regulations...So wouldn't the Libertarian perspective be that the government has no authority to tell a business person that he can't keep black people out of his restaurant?

Not that it matters; no Libertarian lawmaker did anything to ever pass civil rights laws, because, well, libertarians are a fringe party.

Libertarians [[capital L) are a small fringe party. Libertarians [[small l) are the opposite of authoritarians. Some Democrats, such as Dennis Kucinich are avid social libertarians. Kucinich carries a copy of the Constitution in his pocket by the way. Some Republicans are economic libertarians. Most are the opposite. It is rarer to combine both aspects of libertarianism. e.g. Ron Paul although some of the anarch-libertarians don't think he is libertarian enough.

You ignored my mention of all the civil rights violations that libertarians are now opposing. Violations created by mainstream Republicans and Democrats. The ACLU has been taking up many of the same causes as libertarians. I don't know of any libertarians who would keep Blacks out of their restaurants or anything else because libertarians, by definition, do not divide people into groups. Way to individualistic for that. I'll leave dividing people into groups to bigots and Democrats.

My only libertarian joke.
At a libertarian gathering, the Chairperson hammered a gavel and called the meeting to order. Someone in the audience responded, "Who the hell made you God?"

Limousine liberal is kind of a cliche, a hollow term designed by propagandists like Peggy Noonan to incite the working class against people who might actually support them once in a while...or perhaps only conservocrites should ride in big American-made cars?? What exactly would that change?

Wrong, Teddy Kennedy is the poster boy of limousine liberals. The term was coined for people like him. Would you prefer calling Teddy a "1967 Oldsmobile Delmont 88 liberal" . That's what he drove off the bridge. It just doesn't have the same ring. No, wait, that's a bubble noise...bubble...bubble...
[[ http://autone.files.wordpress.com/20...lds-diver1.jpg )

As for you ideas about immigration, you mindset seems to be "It was hard for my ancestors to get in, so it should be hard for everybody"...But streamlining immigration laws would reduce the number of scapegoats for people like you, so I'm guessing that you are against that. And guess what! It would be a loosening of the "regulations" that you claim that libertarians are against. Furthermore, it would be a loosening of regulations for individuals, rather than corporations.

The picture you paint of your family gathering sounds beautiful...Next time you have your son's friends over, drink a toast to Ted Kennedy and the other lawmakers [[none of them were members of the Libertarian Party),
who helped change the law in 1964, allowing nonwhites like Indonesians to actually immigrate here.

What can I say? I'm against illegal immigration and legal immigration that puts Americans out of work. See above regarding your confusion about different libertarian positions. Teddy's flabby immigration policies and tolerance of illegal aliens greatly contributed to the economic suppresion of working Americans. As mentioned in my previous post, demographics would have forced some changes in immigration law. Perhaps if necessity, instead of political correctness, guided the changes, American workers would have been able to better themselves since 1964. Next time all my kid's foreign friends are here I will toast the surviving capitalism that brought them here. Whether any of them choose to become US citizens, as you seem to presume, I don't know. They are here on visas. One has since returned to the Holland office.

[barnesfoto]

" I'm against illegal immigration and legal immigration that puts Americans out of work"

Was it immigration or economic policy [[i.e. a lack of regulation) that caused the Great Depression?

There are valid individual liberties that we should all be working towards, and freedom of movement is just one of them.

So you are a libertarian who wants less regulation and more regulation at the same time.
Thanks for sorting that out. Thanks also for the product placement on the Oldsmobile, but that hardly seems like a limousine. Hell, my grandfather drove one. Perhaps you could entertain us with what his next vehicle was after that? At what point did he acquire the limousine? Was it Lincoln or a Caddy?

Teddy Kennedy worked with other politicians and changed unjust laws.

Libertarians argued with other libertarians and changed their socks.

I'll tip my hat to the very real accomplishments of Mr K, and bid you good night.

[oladub]

barnesphoto, It was government policies that led to the Depression and kept us in it. The Federal Reserve had created an economic bubble, not to be confused with the air bubbles that rose from Teddy's Olds. Hoover and Roosevelt responded by doing everything possible to prevent the economy from correcting itself as it had so dramatically done in 1921 under similar circumstances. Federal Reserve/Bush/Obama responses will also fail until the economy is allowed to self correct or there is some huge external demand for our goods and services.

If you believe in freedom of movement, try leaving all your doors unlocked when you go on vacation but please don't apply that policy to our country. In 1968, Teddy pushed through some legistation that would make citizens of the 1.8 million illegal aliens here at the time. He promised that, from then on, there would be enforcement. Teddy was a liar. When you subsidize something , you get more of it.

Teddy may have been working with other politicians to replace unjust laws. It is unfortunate that he created economic problems that had such a devestating effect on the budgets of working class Americans.

Limousine liberal [[also limousine leftist, latte liberal, lakefront liberal, Learjet liberal, Lexus liberal, Gucci Marxist, MasterCard Marxist, parlor pink, silk stocking socialist, or white wine socialist) is a pejorative North American political term used to illustrate perceived hypocrisy by a political liberal of upper class or upper middle class status, such as calling for the use of mass transit while frequently using limousines or private jets [[ergo 'learjet liberal'), claiming to be highly environmentally conscious but driving a gas-hungry sports car or SUV, or ostensibly supporting public education while actually sending their children to private schools. [[Teddy even gets mentioned in this article but not for opposing wind generators in his yaughting viewscape)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limousine_liberal

[gnome]

seems the Smoking Gun has landed the documents of the Mass. Inquest into the Chappaquiddick accident. It is a 20 pg transcript of Ted's testimony.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...3091chap1.html

You can read for yourself, come to your own conclusions on the harshness of the questions asked.

[ccbatson]

Negligent homicide is the allegation [[and probable crime he is guilty of, but got off by using influence).

What "harsh questioning" could possibly be too harsh under the circumstances?