Wednesday, January 21, 2015

The president gets "dark and ugly", and the bread-shoes lady responds.

Obama I won both my elections SOTU Before I start this post I want to apologize to the folks at MMTC who are hosting the Broadband Social Justice Summit , for not making it down to Washington, today. I really wanted to make it but sometimes the judicial system doesn't cooperate with our day to day plans.

Hopefully I will make it down tomorrow. I really want to get a shot at roasting my man David Honig.

So anyway, I caught the president's address to the nation last night. Overall I thought it was decent, but I particularly loved the shot he took at the wingnuts  when they tried to throw him shade by way of some snark.

This is from Politicus USA:

“I have no more campaigns to run.” Insert rude Republican clapping. But Republican thuggery is no match for President Obama’s quick wit and brain. He responded off the cuff (not in his prepared remarks), “I know because I won both of them.”
 
Oh, snap.
 
This response brought down the house with happy Democrats cheering and liberals everywhere breathing a sigh of relief that this President was taking Republican rudeness no more, and in fact reminding them just who won two national elections with a mandate.
 
All of this caused Republicans everywhere to commence whinging, how dare Obama not be nice to them! He said he wanted to be bipartisan and then he had the nerve to defend himself against their unstatesmanlike rudeness. (Let us not forget the unprecedented rudeness and disrespect behind the earlier GOP outburst, “You lie!”)" [Source]
 
Of course wingnuts and their friends were not pleased, and they have been whining about it ever since.
 
Glenn Beck took it a step further by letting his racism flag fly. According to Mr. Beck the president showed his "dark and ugly" side last night by getting all....well, black.
 
It works like this: When you, as a black man, do things that displease some folks, you are pretty much acting black. Which, in their world, is not a good thing.
 
One republican congressman actually dug deep in his history to find a black man that he liked. And who, in his book, is the opposite of the very "divisive" president.
 
"He said he’d thought that once Obama was elected president, “that issue” would be “behind us.”
Gohmert expressed a wish that Obama were more like his black high school basketball coach.

“But unlike my favorite coach in high school, who happened to be black, he has been more divisive — when I had a coach that brought us together as a team like never before,” Gohmert said. “I thought this president would do that. He has divided more than united, so that’s been heartbreaking.” [Source]

No Mr. Gohmert, what's been heartbreaking is that folks like you have no clue that we really do live in two Americas. Closing your eyes and pretending that we can all get along because you had a basketball coach (how convenient) who you thought was very non-threatening is not bringing people together.

I also saw one of the five republican responses as well. I think it was meant to be the main one.

It was delivered by some woman named Joni Ernst. I listened to her for five minutes and found myself nodding off. She had that soothing monotone kind of voice that should only be used by customer service people who work for large corporations.

Anyway, she actually said at one point that she had t cover her shoes with bread wrappers (bags) because she only had one pair and didn't want it to get wet.

I call bullshit.

Embedded image permalinkThis, to me, is just another republican trying to sound a populist tone. I am not sure when it became cool for republicans to try to tell us how poor they were at one point in their lives, but it's getting old.
I wish they would just go back to being real republicans again.

But back to Ms. Ernst's shoes.

My twitter family was making fun of her, but I actually felt bad for the woman.

" Yup, just grab yourself a stick of butter and a pot of jam, and you're all set.
 
 
See? People buying that imported, seeded bread loaf slide with their free money.
 
LOL. It is always good to have a good laugh...and bread shoes that will now sell more than Jordans.
Embedded image permalink
 
21h:
I CAN'T TAKE IT!!! She must have been on the with Farina! RT : "
 
You people are co cold.
 
Bread-shoes lady, I got your back. 

  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 







67 comments:

Anonymous said...

Brother Field, those bread shoes look good. Where can I get a pair of them? Do they come with socks made out of butter?

Anonymous said...

"This response brought down the house with happy Democrats cheering and liberals everywhere breathing a sigh of relief that this President was taking Republican rudeness no more, and in fact reminding them just who won two national elections with a mandate."

Field, don't you know the President's remarks is going to cost the entire black race mightily? Whites don't like that kind of arrogance from a bm. In fact, that's why white cops shoot bm dead.

Field, you should teach your sons not to be like Obama. Obama should have ignored Republican clapping.

Now he won't get ANY cooperation from Congress...what a stupid move. See, this is why the black race can't get ahead.

We really need to pay attention to what Josh, Bill and QLB have been telling us.

We have got to learn how to be respectful.

lilacpr2000 said...

Ahahaha! Those bread shoes made me laugh!

But plastic bags on her shoes? Do you know how slippery that must have been? She could've slipped and fell and gotten severely hurt! I mean who can walk on that?

Carazy! But I believe her because she sounds like she was traumatized by it. Like she's still thinking about it ya know...?

I hope they don't plan on making us so poor we all have to wear plastic wrappers on our feet!

Lawd have mercyyy! x*D

Whitey's Conspiracy said...

Well, Iowa off-year republiklanners sure don't translate to to the coasts do they? My granddaughters barbi dolls called her stiff and plastic and wonder why she used bread for socks in the rain. Can someone explain the bread socks? Why in the rain?

Anonymous said...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/ct-united-newsmaxtv-0122-biz-20150121-story.html

Interesting story. I have been noticing Newsmax was the default station on Direct TV and finally somebody called them out. Nothing is accidental.

PX

Anonymous said...

"This, to me, is just another republican trying to sound a populist tone. I am not sure when it became cool for republicans to try to tell us how poor they were at one point in their lives, but it's getting old.
I wish they would just go back to being real republicans again."

Exactly, Mr. 47% now worrying about the poor? Even your trolls here are worried about the income gap, as PC said it is nice to see the gop becoming good socialists. But alas it didn't last long, one of the blonde bimbos accused the prez of waging war against the rich so that lasted all of a few months.

PX

Anonymous said...

I don't know. Maybe she really did have an impoverished childhood and own only one damn pair of shoes and walk around like a hobo wearing bread bags. I very much doubt it, but it is possible. But who gives a damn?

It's just not very relevant, even if she did. Because the real moral of her lame story is still:

Hey, poor people, I feel your pain -- but I'm going to be helping rich people instead of you.

That's what you get from Republicans: At their best, they will pretend they don't despise the poor, even while their actual policies make it very clear that they do. (And most of the time, they won't even bother to pretend.)

So dry your crocodile tears, Joni Ernst. Folksy anecdotes about your bread-bag shoes won't make up for the fact you're in the party of the aristocracy. People who are drowning need life preservers, but Republicans are busy throwing them anchors. Fuck off and die.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr Field, I am writing to you out of concern for Mr Mackie. First, let me say that Mr Mackie works in Hollywood as an actor whenever he can get a job as a character in a movie.

I cannot tell you the stress and difficulty of having to be a black actor in Hollywood. The pressure on black artists in LA is unbelievable. The stress is so high that many like Mr Mackie probably have undiagnosed PTSD.

That is why I am writing to you out of concern for Mr Mackie. I am hoping that out of compassion for Mr Mackie you will remove him from your sidebar as a House Negro and reinstate him as just another Negro who is trying to make a living while depression eats away at his soul.

It's not his fault, Mr Field. That might be somewhat difficult for you to understand, seeing how you are Jamaican. Nevertheless, however, the fact is Mr Mackie meant no harm to his own people and does not deserve to be labelled as a House Negro on FN.

Mr Mackie would probably be devastated to learn that you have 'cast' him in your side bar as a HN without pay. Hell, they paid Samuel L Jackson handsomely for playing Stephen in Django.

Presently, I am in treatment because of your treatment of Mr Mackie. Never before in my life have I encountered such mean-spirited treatment since the KKK.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr Field, I happen to know Joni Ernst and everything she said is absolutely true.

What concerns me is 'why' don't you FN players NOT believe my home girl? There seems to be some 'color barrier bread shoe' thinking here.

I bet if she were Black, you would readily accept her story. Please do not denigrate Joni's story...take it from me who is from her home town: It's ALL true!

Bill said...


The Field Negro said...
This, to me, is just another republican trying to sound a populist tone.


Could very well be.

Got link?

Anonymous said...

Lowlac,

Why don't you dig my rap?

I thought you had

A DAMNED virus

ATTACK

ATTACK

But it looks like you're back

'Cause you handed a wad

Over to the Geek Squad

So now you're back in this shack

And pushin' some crap

Through this tiny crack

That Fields calls a blog

Where he shoots his wad

He really makes you think

Like Bill Cosby

Don't let him fix you a drink

'Cause he's your Big Mac Daddy

In a Cadillac

He's black

With a pink pussy fur hat

And some solid gold caps

To chomp on these trolls

Who harass your ass

'Cause you're a lady

'Cause you are shady

'Cause you're a lady

Or a hag with a bag

'Cause you been sellin' some shag

And as you pull out that lighter

Your legs are wider

And you're smokin' your glass pipe

So much smoke

That you forgot to wipe

So we smell that smell that you call a life

Down in Ni**er town

We smell it on the streets

Where you sell it on the streets

Where they're gettin' high

In your neighborhood

At High High High

Where the teachers are all high

Pimp, pimp, pimpin' it out

Almost every night

Hoppin' nine inches of pops

To score a nine gram rock

In a parking lot

Behind the Beauty shop

That survived the last riot

Where you shake it the best

Then you take it to church

Feels so good it hurts

Then you put on your frock

So very tight

Keep the preacher up all night

He forget he has a wife

And you join his flock

And you begin to rock

Still comin' down

From that nine gram rock

You need a pick-me-up

So you testify

About the guy in the sky

And how he saves your soul

Until tomorrow night

When your back on the street

'Cause you're havin' a sell

And actin' like a super freak

And headed for Hell

Six days of the week

Jack said...

The blog was absolutely fantastic! Lots of great information and inspiration, both of which we all
need!b Keep ‘em coming… you all do such a great job at such Concepts… can’t tell you how much I, for one appreciate all you do!
Wish to Get a visit on web development Toronto for more latest tips and news.

anotherbozo said...

"She had that soothing monotone kind of voice that should only be used by customer service people who work for large corporations."

You nailed it, Field. Maybe she's working for the Koch Corporation.

Did everyone read that the Ernst family collected $$ in the hundreds of thousands in farm subsidies while little Joni was growing up? Self-reliance, my ass. Rethugs are such hypocrites.

field negro said...

Anon@11:44, I told u I feel bad for the lady.
What else do u want?

If she was black would she have had corn-bread shoes?.....OK, lame attempt at humor. I take it back.

Bill said...


Federal charges unlikely for Darren Wilson in Ferguson case, officials say
...
Ultimately, the decision will be made by Attorney General Eric Holder, who has said he will announce a decision before he leaves office, which is expected to be by spring.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/21/us/ferguson-darren-wilson-civil-rights-charges/

I wonder why Eric Holder is going to wait to announce.

Josh said...

I'm not saying this woman's story isn't bullshit. It may very well be an outright lie without a grain of truth to it.

However, let's view this with a little more skepticism and apply some critical thinking to it.

Let's say that there's a politician in Washington now who grew up very, very poor. Would it be more likely a Republican or a Democrat?

So, one party has the philosophy of hard work, independence, no handouts, no dependency, and values things like a strong family structure, and religious values.

So, one party has the philosophy of equal outcomes guaranteed, federal government creating fairness, codependency, multiple handouts, and values things like empowering single mothers, setting different standards for people under the guise of "social justice," and insists that government is more important than the individual.

If there's a politician out there who came up dirt poor and actually made a success with their life, I'd think it much more likely that the person in question was a Republican.

Pick yourself up and work! Nobody owes you a living. Go get it!

Vs.

Picket on the sidewalk instead of work! Somebody owes you a living. Go demand it!

Who's more likely to make something of themselves: The person who believes in entrepreneurship and personal responsibility or the person who believes America is unfair and it's government's job to fix it?

Republican in a landslide.

Again, she might be a spoilt-rotten child of privilege. I don't know. But if you were to tell me that there's a politician in office who was incredibly poor but became a success, I would say the odds are great that it's a Republican, 60:1. Unless, of course, a Democrat married in. lol

Anonymous said...

Field, FN's put down of Joni might be FN's 'waterloo'. It's a shame because a little 'thinking' could have saved your blog.

Just think, FN is going down in flames due to a leftist attack on a Republican who came from a poor background...How ironic!

How does it feel? Serves you leftists right.

Bill said...


Fox News Took the Heat, But CNN Talked ‘No-Go Zones,’ Too
http://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/fox-news-took-the-heat-but-cnn-talked-no-go-zones-too/253271

Why didn't Paris want to sue CNN for the lie?

Dumbocrats aren't held to the same standard.

The Field Negro refuses to hold his party he holds the rethug party to.

And we both know why.


Still waiting for the link Ernst lied about being poor.

If past history is an indicator of future behavior, Field Negro will stay crickets.

Bill said...


Sheldon Silver, Speaker of New York Assembly, Is Arrested in Corruption Case
...
Mr. Silver, a Democrat from the Lower East Side of Manhattan who has served as speaker for more than two decades, surrendered to Federal Bureau of Investigation agents early Thursday morning in Lower Manhattan, law enforcement officials said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/23/nyregion/speaker-of-new-york-assembly-sheldon-silver-is-arrested-in-corruption-case.html?smid=pl-share

Another dumbocrat and corruption charges.

Field Negro better write another bread shoes post.

Anonymous said...

Josh, "Pick yourself up and work! Nobody owes you a living. Go get it!

Vs.

Picket on the sidewalk instead of work! Somebody owes you a living. Go demand it!"

Josh, you are one merciless ass. Has it occurred to you that not everyone has the sharpness to start a business or to get a job? Do you understand the human dilemma?

FYI, during slavery Blacks weren't allowed to read, let alone add. You white evil masters fed slaves simply to make them salable and also stronger to work the fields and build roads, the WH, and the Capitol.

So those genes have been passed down to Blacks which make it twice as hard to get an education due to your evil ways of keeping a group of people in bondage.

And you have the arrogance to criticize and belittle them? You had better pray there is no God and there is no Devil....because if there is, your sorry merciless ass is going straight to hell.

Don't worry. You'll have plenty of company: Kinky, QLB, Frank D, Stormfront, and Bill will be there to keep you company.

Now you think on that.

Bill said...


Coincidentally, the same day it is announced that darren wilson won't be charged, the ferguson police release video of looters asking the public for help identifying them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-ts=1421782837&v=vv6jhXQARz8&x-yt-cl=84359240#t=273


Strange the police had to wait for wilson to not be charged to ask citizens for help cleaning up the community.

Anonymous said...

"Anon@11:44, I told u I feel bad for the lady.
What else do u want?"


Don't feel bad for her. Whether or not she had an impoverished childhood, Joni Ernst is still a demented wackadoodle who doesn't belong anywhere near the levers of power in our national government.

We can only laugh at the fact there are people like her in Washington, because otherwise, we'd have to cry.

I'll feel bad for her only if and when Iowa voters, God willing, wise up and give her -- and her hair helmet, and her weird annoying speech patterns -- the boot in 2020.

Josh said...

"FYI, during slavery Blacks weren't allowed to read, let alone add. You white evil masters fed slaves simply to make them salable and also stronger to work the fields and build roads, the WH, and the Capitol.

So those genes have been passed down to Blacks which make it twice as hard to get an education due to your evil ways of keeping a group of people in bondage."

1) Who am I criticizing in my post? Politicians, if anyone.

2) Show some scientific data which state that genes from the past 200 years have more potency than genes from the past 200,000.

A slave not being allowed to learn has no bearing whatsoever on an individual born in 1980. You don't seem to have much of an understanding of science in this regard. Genes don't work this way. If someone breaks my father's leg, I don't feel the pain. If my mother couldn't do math, that in no way necessarily hinders my ability to learn math.

"Now think on that."

I think that you can't think. At least not on pace with people who actually can think critically. That you read my post as attacking blacks is above and beyond conspiracy fodder. Were you out at Sharpton's emergency meeting for Selma? lol

WTF did anything I said in my post have to do with race? The answer: Zero.

Bill said...


The Field Negro said...
This, to me, is just another republican trying to sound a populist tone.


It's almost as if she was raised in the house and wants people to believe she was raised in the field.

Bill said...


Tough choice for Field Negro...

Video released in attack on concealed gun carrier
http://tbo.com/news/crime/deputies-man-attacks-walmart-customer-carrying-concealed-weapon-20150120/?page=1

Who to defend?

The white dumbocrat gun hater that attacks people legally carrying guns.

Or a black man legally carrying a gun attacked by a white man.

Anonymous said...

"Did everyone read that the Ernst family collected $$ in the hundreds of thousands in farm subsidies while little Joni was growing up? Self-reliance, my ass. Rethugs are such hypocrites."

Yes.

Here are the details:

"Here’s what the GOP rising star omitted from her paean to gritty self-reliance: Hard as her family may have worked, and fierce as Ernst may be in her opposition to big government spending, her family benefited more than $460,000 in federal farm subsidies between 1995 and 2009, per the District Sentinel. Beneficiaries included Ernst’s father, Richard Culver, uncle Dallas Culver, and late grandfather Harold Culver. The Culvers’ subsidies hardly set them apart from their neighbors; as the District Sentinel notes, Iowa ranks second only to Texas in farm subsidies, with the largely rural and agricultural state receiving $24.9 billion in subsidies between 1995 and 2012."

But you know, pull yourself up from your bootstraps, lazy "urban youth." Develop a work ethic and don't depend on the big, bad, gummint. Blah, blah, the usual dishonest, self-righteous bullshit.

People like THEM deserve help, people NOT like them don't. That's what their awful, amoral philosophy boils down to.

You can take your bread shoes and shove 'em, Joni.

focusedpurpose said...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2015/01/21/cops-kill-black-man-with-hands-up.html?via=newsletter&source=CSAfternoon

________________

the Black cops wildin' out killing/raping Black folk get nary a mention, much less nationwide protest...

i don't get the logic.

folk are not less dead when it is Black on Black perpetrated.

Blessings all!

Whitey's Conspiracy said...

Farmers are the biggest welfare queens going. Except for ranchers (cough.... Clive Bundy) They're MASSIVE WELFARE QUEENS. I finished High School overseas, but until 16 I went to a Joint-Union high school full of farmers kids. Talk about splurge-spending! 16 year olds driving brand new 4wds, new tractors 100 times bigger than they actually need. Buying their own combines to park 360 days a year. All of it on those "quarterlies" from the Feds.

Yīshēng said...

Josh leave the genetics discussions to experts, if you don't think the "environment" can influence gene expression, then you're a bigger idiot than I originally thought.

Yīshēng said...

Honestly, I don't know why so many racists complain about the habits of some Blacks, traits CAN get passed down through generations. So perhaps if Blacks had been "bred" to be academically inclined rather than having an education be punishable by death, perhaps you wouldn't see the levels illiteracy that exist in lower income Black communities.

You got what "you" wanted, so STFU!!!!

Josh said...

"if you don't think the "environment" can influence gene expression, then you're a bigger idiot than I originally thought."

Straw-man horseshit. When did I even imply that, much less say it? You morons want to malign my intelligence, that's fine by me. But none of you actually get at me with anything I write; you just make shit up.

You're great at talking shit and pretending to be intelligent, but go ahead and show how the environment has influenced anything in genetics or epigenetics that make blacks unable to learn based on this mythical "slave gene."

Until which time you can show some scientific evidence of this, STFU with your fake not-a-doctor ass, pretending to be smart when you probably can't even fucking use Google.

field negro said...

Anon@11:29, u mean this Ernst lady was getting govt benefits and making all kinds of loot from it?
Figures.

Right wingers are the best grifters

Anonymous said...

Blogger Yīshēng said...
Josh leave the genetics discussions to experts, if you don't think the "environment" can influence gene expression, then you're a bigger idiot than I originally thought.

12:49 PM

--------------
Dear Yisheng, thank you for your insightful comment. It's too bad Josh can't relate or maybe he can but refuses to accept the truth.

Josh said...

Anonymous:

If it's fucking "truth," show the science!

If I tell someone that Mars is a planet, I can show empirically why that's the case, that Mars exists, that it's classified as a planet, why it's classified as a planet, and so on.

Instead, here's what we're dealing with on this blog:

Someone makes a claim that blacks today can't learn because slaves were deprived the opportunity. It's being presented as if a slave who can't learn passes down specific genes which, when expressed, make it harder to learn.

So, I disagree with that, say there's no such slavery gene, and I'm being told that I don't know what I'm talking about and I don't understand the "truth."

Show the fucking truth!

If your dumb ass can figure out how to use Google or Bing, browse through the scientific journals and show me the data which support your assertion that there's some slave gene responsible for blacks not learning.

Nothing's "insightful" about Yisheng's comment. You retarded motherfuckers are about as intelligent as creationist Christians -- just asserting something's true, bereft of evidence, and calling other people stupid if they don't subscribe to your conspiracy nonsense.

Are you smart enough to use the Internet? Are you smart enough to search for and post some links which support your assertion? No? Then STFU.

This isn't religion. You don't get to say that something's true because you believe it and expect to be taken seriously. If it's true, it will have data which point to it necessarily being true. Bereft of that, all you have is some bullshit myth -- a cop-out used to suggest blacks are less intelligent because of whites. (Which is insulting to say about black people anyway, and something I've never said -- that blacks are less intelligent. Stop being a fucking racist!)

I never suggested anything about "black" anything, you dumb motherfuckers. My comment was talking about Republicans vs. Democrats. Not blacks vs. whites. You can't even fucking read, yet I'm supposed to believe you know what you're talking about with some slave gene? lol

Anonymous said...

Wow! Ted Nugent called the President of the United States "a subhuman mongrel". Then a GOP from Texas embraced him on stage after Nugent insulted the President.

It's amazing that 'today', in America the racism is at an all-time high. It's more proof that racism is alive and well and will never die.

I wonder what JOSH and BILL has to say about the offensive remark Nugent made about their President? Of course, we already know that QLB is applauding.

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/highlight/everyone-is-offended-by-ted-nugents-obama-insult/530772a778c90a6ea2000329?cps=gravity_3831_3790266327350631119

Anonymous said...

JOSH, "If your dumb ass can figure out how to use Google or Bing, browse through the scientific journals and show me the data which support your assertion that there's some slave gene responsible for blacks not learning."

My goodness! insulting racist Whites are out in full force today.

Josh, fyi I don't own a computer because I am poor, thanks to white folks like you. I have to use someone's else's for a brief period. Other times I try to get on a computer at a public library. It can be a hassle and there is a time-limit on using computers so having time to google is difficult.

BTW, what do you want me to google anyway?

The Purple Cow said...

"So, one party has the philosophy of equal outcomes guaranteed..."

Really Josh?

Are you sure?

Yīshēng said...

Do tell, are Josh's knickers in a bunch LOL??

BTW Josh you do realize that when I "check you" on your racists nonsense, I don't read your responses, right?

Carry on chap!

Yīshēng said...

Looks like Pres Obama is giving Netanyahu his ass to kiss, LOL!!!

Anonymous said...

Damn, another brother shot with his hands up by the police. This time it was in NJ.

Bm are being killed at high rates by the police.

Josh and stormfront should be elated.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/video/news/video-shows-man-shot-by-nj-police-with-hands-up/vi-AA8szAC

Anonymous said...

Fields, I especially enjoy your cornedbeef hash.

Josh said...

TPC: If ever you want to elaborate on your nonsense beyond a simple sentence, I'm game.

And, yes, part of--a main part of--the Democrats' core philosophy is that people should have guaranteed outcomes. A right to have a job, a "living wage," and equality in lifestyles. Hence this whole "fair share" argument pushed by Obama for the past three years.

Yisgeng: You're not fooling anyone. Obviously you read what I write. But since you cannot provide any evidence for your assertions, you'll just pretend that you're glossing over it, handling these "racists," and Field might even come in and give you a big, "You go, girl!" for your idiocy.

If ever any of you can provide evidence for this mythical slave gene, I'll be here waiting.

The Purple Cow said...

"And, yes, part of--a main part of--the Democrats' core philosophy is that people should have guaranteed outcomes. A right to have a job, a "living wage," and equality in lifestyles. Hence this whole "fair share" argument pushed by Obama for the past three years."

Well not being a Democrat I can't speak for them, but I think you are confusing 'outcomes' with 'opportunity'.

I think the "fair share" that Obama is referring to concerns the death of the American dream. Time was (from about 1945 to 1980) when if an American worked hard and studied hard he or she could get on. That was the dream, now it's dead.

Yīshēng said...

IMHO, the "American dream" died after the election of America's first Black president.

Too many racists to count, don't want another person of color to "bootstrap" their way into the WH EVER again.

California Girl said...

The SOTU was spirited and aggressive and showed the intent I wish he'd shown before the 2014 mid-terms. This is the guy I originally voted for and have been looking for the past few years. I felt, dare I say, "hope"ful.

Joni Ernst in her poor little shoes. Je-sus, my MIL was born truly poor in the backwoods of PA & she wore dresses & skirts made of flour & potato sacks. She was put in an institution because her family couldn't feed all 6 kids. She had a truly shitty childhood and then I hear Joni Ernst and her "one good pair of shoes". My husband and I laughed.

At least it wasn't Sarah Palin.

Josh said...

Well, TPC, your guess of what "fair share" actually means is as good as mine or as good as anyone's, because Obama has yet to define what exactly it means. He just throws it out there, his cohorts give it some arbitrary number, and the citizens are to believe that this is some deep philosophical stance taken by a politician, when in reality it's just another way to say "tax and spend."

And I disagree with opportunities vs. outcomes. If that were the case, I'd expect more initiative taken by Obama and his ilk to actually make it easier to start a business -- which would include lowering the tax rates and rolling back regulations. But they're doing the exact opposite. They're increasing tax rates, adding more regulations, and are attempting to force employers to not only pay more but actually give paid leave now. That seems much more like an outcome initiative--read: make sure working people get the same lifestyles--than it is an opportunity initiative, which would read: let's make it easier to innovate and grow.

The Purple Cow said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Purple Cow said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Purple Cow said...

Josh, you fundamentally do not understand economics.

From the end of WW2 until the end of the 1970’s wealth grew for pretty much everyone in the USA. This was the so-called American dream. If you worked hard and studied hard you got on. The American dream died with the election of Ronald Reagan. He (or at least his puppet-masters) convinced the American people that the wealthy create jobs and wealth therefor the wealthier needed to get richer.

Of course it did not work, as this graph shows the wealthier have got fabulously rich and the poor and middle classes have not become wealthier at all. Despite the fact that they are working many more hours than they were in the past. So they are having to run faster just to stand still.

http://tinyurl.com/5tglmv8

The rich do not by and large invest or spend the bulk of their vast wealth, according to the OECD between $23tn and $32tn were held in off-shore tax-avoidance schemes as of 2012.

Neither do the rich create jobs. Employing a person is a capitalist’s last resort. Hiring people increases labour costs and reduces profits. It’s the demand for products and services by the middle and working classes that creates jobs. After 40 years of making the rich richer, where are the jobs? As Hanauer pointed out in his famous ‘banned’ TED talk, if making the rich richer created jobs we should be drowning in jobs by now.

To create jobs you need to create demand for jobs and services. If the average American family earned today the same share of income they got in 1980, they would earn about 25% more than they do now, and have $13,000 more a year to spend. Just imagine the extra demand that would create. So if you want to create wealth and jobs make the poor and the middle classes richer, and get the rich to pay for it.

America's billionaires have managed to persuade entire sections of the proletariat to campaign for the interests of the rich and against their own class interests. It's a remarkable trick.

The rich declared class warfare on the American middle-classes and the poor when they elected Reagan. They’ve had it their all their own way ever since, adopting a system of wealth distribution on a massive scale never seen before in human history. America’s poor and middle-classes have handed over a Trillion dollars to America’s rich in the last forty years.

Using the compliant corporate media, a supine Democratic Party scared of its own shadow, and the useful idiots of the far Right they have destroyed the American dream in the name of the American way.

The people were told that making the rich fabulously rich would benefit all. Nearly forty years later we can see that is a bitter joke. American families are no better off then they were in 1980 despite the fact they are having to work many more hours per week than they were then. Some families working a hundred hours a week just to keep their heads above water.

This graph has been described as the most important graph in America. It shows median family income against productivity.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/what-happened-to-the-wage-and-productivity-link/

Notice how the wealth of American families grew at the same rate as productivity from WW@ to the late 70’s. Then a gap started to appear in the late 70’s before exploding almost exponentially in the 1980’s.

Conservative commentators look at this state of affairs and say, ”Ahhhh but, Americans are still aspirational people, so they will not revolt as long as there is hope that they can improve their lives.” Well that is probably true, but when people working full time cannot afford to feed their own kids they will start to wonder what it is all for.

And remember, every single country in the world is only three square meals away from a revolution.

Yīshēng said...

What a succinct way to put US ecomonics, PC!!

Too bad it's wasted on Josh, who expresses homozygous dominant genes for being stupid, ROTFL!!

The Purple Cow said...

WW@ is obviously WW2,I can't be arsed to change it.

Josh said...

Nice rant, but how does any of that pertain to what I'm speaking about whatsoever?

No secret the racist Yingling likes it. She's giving props to anyone who argues with white people at Field's. Predictable. But I'm not sure how any of what you wrote sorts out whether Obama's tactics are to create equal opportunities or equal outcomes.

Of course, they don't have to mutually exclusive. One could argue that equal opportunities won't arise until equal outcomes are reached; e.g. more children born into privileged circumstances.

Thanks for the lesson on economics, I guess. But it's basically a reply to the ether -- it can't even be called a straw-man. It's more like a mis-post.

If we were talking about the idea of the American Dream, then I can see what you're saying. But we were talking about whether the Democrats believed in equal outcomes or equal opportunities. Nothing you wrote seems to address it on either side.

However, if I can glean from what you're saying that something needs to be done for families who are struggling even while working, then that leans much more toward equal outcomes; e.g. a burger flipper and CEO being considered to have the same worth.

That's a little too communist for me, but that's a key position Democrats take today. And by Democrats, I obviously mean progressive liberal Democrats, not blue-dogs or moderates. The PLDs, we'll call 'em for short, literally want McDonald's workers to earn living wages, so one person working as a damn fry cook can afford to live a middle-class life.

IMO, that position isn't worth that much. Anyone with even a year's worth of engineering can build a robot to do that job. But PLDs seem intent on equal outcomes and jobs guaranteed as a right that will instantly provide a living. They don't seem to be encouraging innovation; they seem to be demanding those on top lift everyone else up to their level with artificially boosted salaries.

Look, I'm all for the touchy-feely notion of NO poor people, NO homeless, NO hungry, NOBODY having to slave away at work for little money. But politicians can't just invent this shit out of thin air. Nor can they force it by strong-arming employers into paying more for jobs which don't require intelligence of innovation or hard labor.

If you're a 40-something working in a minimum wage job, it might be tough to hear and mean to say, but you don't have much worth as a worker in the world. If you haven't figured out how to bolster your portfolio, why should someone uplift you to the levels of people who have?

Why am I considered the same as someone who doesn't try? I educated myself. I worked my way up the ladder. I've worked unpaid apprenticeships to learn. I've put in long hours at thankless jobs, hurt myself working, and did all the things one is supposed to do to achieve. And some schmuck who's uneducated and didn't do any of those things automatically deserves a "living wage" for the simple act of trying to provide for themselves?

For any economy to function properly, a person is worth what they're worth based on what they're able to provide someone else. Artificially inflating a worker's worth is going to lead to the whole of America becoming Detroit. Yeah; way to go, auto unions! You wanted basic workers to be treated like kings and paid like CEOs. Now look at you.

The Purple Cow said...

"That's a little too communist for me, but that's a key position Democrats take today."

They absolutely do not. I wish they did, but they do not.

"For any economy to function properly, a person is worth what they're worth based on what they're able to provide someone else."

Yes, I kind of figured that's what you think, to me that's a hateful way to run a society. You value human beings entirely on their ability to generate profit. But there is more to human endeavour than simply creating wealth for others. How do you value art? How do you value artists? How do you value people who work in making sick people better? How do you value mothers?

You are a capitalist, then you should know Inequality will kill capitalism. For capitalism to work it needs a strong middle class, the middle class creates demand that fuels job growth. As we have seen in the graphs above, the middle classes are dying out, they have handed $1 trillion to the super-rich since the 1970's. If making the rich richer created wealth there would be no poverty in the world today.

As the suburbs grew in the 50's 60's and 70's there was a huge movement of wealth form the rich to the middle classes due to the rise of home ownership. However since 2003 the number of people owning their home has stalled and is now in decline. Society is becoming massively more unequal. That will be the death of capitalism.

"Why am I considered the same as someone who doesn't try?"

Supposing you are born to a single mother in a working class neighbourhood. You go to school in a grim Victorian slum, where getting one single kid a year to university is seen as a major triumph. Are you an inferior human being? Are you of less value than a child born to wealthy parents? I think not, but that's why I'm a Socialist.

Josh said...

Well, let's offer this some broader context, since we seem to be conversing politely and not trolling one another.

I don't feel a human being's worth is only what they're able to provide. Their worth may well exceed that. They may be fantastic people, very charitable, great parents, great teachers, etc. However, when we're talking about a business setting, I cannot afford to pay you based on how good of a person you are. If you can't run the stringer machine at the stair plant, I must pay you what I pay a laborer. If all you do is swing a hammer, I'm sorry, but you are not as valuable as the person who designs the lifters and risers and templates all the stairs. You are not as valuable as the person who can meticulously run the dremel and create ornate designs which lead to our stairs being big sellers.

There are thousands upon thousands of people I can pull in off the streets to swing a hammer. There are very few people I can get to run the stringer and create artistic designs. Thus the latter are exponentially more valuable to the production and success of the company.

That doesn't mean they're less valuable human beings; but it does mean they're less valuable workers. They're interchangeable. They offer menial work of subjective value.

"Supposing you are born to a single mother in a working class neighborhood...et al."

There's a great quote from Larry Elison: "I've had all the disadvantages necessary for success." He was adopted, his mother died, he was in foster care, hungry, poorly educated, etc, but rather than letting this get him down, he grew a chip on his shoulder.

In a society where we're simply uplifting people to the level of others based on their circumstances, what incentive is there to grow that chip on the shoulder?

Besides, at some point we also have to stop treating the children of these people as victims and look at the parents as perpetrators. Why do you keep bringing children into this world when you can barely care for yourself!?

Look what we do in America to fathers. Oh, you can't pay child support? You're going to jail!

Look what we do in America to mothers. Oh, you can't afford your child? You're now receiving a dozen entitlements, and probably child support.

A father is considered neglectful if he can't financially support a child. A mother, on the other hand, is allowed to keep having children, and to keep having them, and to keep having them. No matter if she can afford them or not, we don't call this neglect. These mothers are the ones disadvantaging their children, not society, yet we ignore it and don't hold them responsible.

Now, that child's worth no less as a human being. But we live in a world where you need to barter or trade for possessions. A roof over your head, food in your belly, an iPhone in your pocket, Jordans on your feet -- these are things to be earned. There are no sky fairies handing this stuff out. We exist in an objective reality, not a subjective socialist theory thesis. When it comes time for that child to make his or her way in the world, that child will need something to trade to live well.

Until which time our reality changes into a socialist's wet dream, we must all live by the standard of bartering what we can to get what we want. Or don't. Live like women lived where I grew up: Have babies, move into government housing, get just enough spending money to go clubbing, and be content to raise ignorant bastards who repeat the cycle.

Freedom to fail is also freedom.

Yīshēng said...

White folks are born with a "head start" in America, that being White skin. Yet the racists among them why MANY people of color, especially poor people, can't "catch up" and have successful, productive lives?

This is a VERY tired "debate" on FN, year after year after year with NO point agreement between the "entitled" ie racists Whites, and EVERYONE else.

Josh said...

"White folks are born with a "head start" in America

This is a VERY tired "debate" on FN, year after year after year with NO point agreement between the "entitled" ie racists Whites, and EVERYONE else."

The only racist I've met on this blog is you, Yingling.

So self-absorbed and full of hatred for whites. I guess all those whites throughout the Appalachia in mountain hollers are "privileged" too. Or all those whites who live in trailer courts or on skid row. Privileged? Oh, they don't count to you one way or another. They're whites you assume vote Republican and hate blacks, and so it doesn't matter that they're well below any poverty line.

When you define privilege as being white, you have set an impossible standard of extreme ignorant racism.

This is one of the reasons why "debates" may never reach a point of agreement, and that's because racists like you game the language. In the real world, "privilege" means the state of being privileged -- e.g. having special exemptions, rights and immunities. To have privilege, you therefore need two things to define necessarily that privilege exists:

1) Privilege in law, whose language expressly boosts one while holding another back.

2) Privilege in institutions, whose practices expressly boost one while holding another back.

The best the privilege shouters have been able to do in the past 20 years is present a loaded study which suggests black-sounding names are discriminated against in the workplace, without even testing name vs. name; e.g. "Billy Boy" vs. "Becky." No. They test "Emily" vs. "Latoya" and scream PRIVILEGE!

Other than that, what laws or institutions can anyone provide whose purpose is to create privileged classes? Only liberals and their protected classes of minorities do that.

You won't find whites-only anything in this modern age, but you'll find heaps and loads of blacks-only, women-only, Asian-only, etc.

Yisheng, a dumb slut tells her girlfriend, "Girl, my man ain't shit!" So, she dates another one. She tells her girl, "Girl, my man ain't shit!" And another, "Girl, my man ain't shit!" And another, and another, and another. At what point will she realize that she's the one that ain't shit? Sound familiar? If you insist that there's no point of agreement to be had, maybe you'll realize the problem is you.

Like a creationist, you're told that the Grand Canyon is a perfect example of geological strata pointing out the age and scope of the earth and different periods in evolution. And your response: "Nuh uh! Noah's flood!" lol

Anonymous said...

Josh, "The only racist I've met on this blog is you, Yingling."

My lord, you are calling Yisheng a racist when she is the most accepting person on FN. She makes no distinction between the races unless it's the truth.

Yīshēng said...

Welfare for poor people of color = ~ 1/8 the principle and interest on the 30 acres and a mule these folks did NOT get.

So what's the poor White man's excuse for being poor?

Anonymous said...

Fields, the bread be stale!

field negro said...

Great debate between PC, Josh and Doc.

PC, that was book worthy. You were on point.

Josh said...

"She makes no distinction between the races unless it's the truth."

Oh, I get it. Sarcasm! Because every other post I read from her, she's bitching about racist white people, white evil, calling people honkeys and saying fuck their "cracka ass" families.

The Purple Cow said...

Part One

"There are thousands upon thousands of people I can pull in off the streets to swing a hammer. There are very few people I can get to run the stringer and create artistic designs. Thus the latter are exponentially more valuable to the production and success of the company."

Yes, I'm an MBA Josh, so I dont need lectures on business economics.

**

"That doesn't mean they're less valuable human beings; but it does mean they're less valuable workers. They're interchangeable. They offer menial work of subjective value."

But without the people doing the menial work, how could the high-value workers operate? We are all players in a very large game. A high-earning parent could not go out to work without the lower paid nursery worker, the nursery worker could not get to work without the badly paid transport worker. None of them could do anything if they had not been taught by teachers.

**

"There's a great quote from Larry Elison: "I've had all the disadvantages necessary for success." He was adopted, his mother died, he was in foster care, hungry, poorly educated, etc, but rather than letting this get him down, he grew a chip on his shoulder."

Larry Ellison is a psychopath, only 1% of the general population are psychopaths, it's not fair to penalise the other 99% for not achieving something they could never achieve.

**

"In a society where we're simply uplifting people to the level of others based on their circumstances, what incentive is there to grow that chip on the shoulder?"

Why would you want someone to grow a chip on their shoulder? Is that seriously the kind of society you would like? And as I said, Socialism is about equality of opportunity not equality of outcomes. I note also that you have provided no evidence that the Dems are in favour of equality of outcomes.

**

"Besides, at some point we also have to stop treating the children of these people as victims and look at the parents as perpetrators. Why do you keep bringing children into this world when you can barely care for yourself!?"

How would you deal with this? Enforced sterilisation of poor people? Would you allow American children to starve to death because you didn;t approve of their parents lifestyle choices?

**
"Look what we do in America to fathers. Oh, you can't pay child support? You're going to jail!

Look what we do in America to mothers. Oh, you can't afford your child? You're now receiving a dozen entitlements, and probably child support."


That is of course a massive over-simplification, but I come back to my previous point what would you do, specifically, to attack this problem?

"A father is considered neglectful if he can't financially support a child. A mother, on the other hand, is allowed to keep having children, and to keep having them, and to keep having them. No matter if she can afford them or not, we don't call this neglect. These mothers are the ones disadvantaging their children, not society, yet we ignore it and don't hold them responsible."

Same question as before. Also how is it the mother's fault that the education system is falling the children? Equality of opportunities.

The Purple Cow said...

Part Two

"Now, that child's worth no less as a human being."

You are contradicting yourself. You seem happy to throw their parents in jail because they work in the narcotics industry (the only industry that is recruiting in their neighbourhood) or because they are dead-beat dads, and you seem happy to send them along dangerous streets to learn in poor schools. How can you then look that child in the eye and say "your life is valuable?"

**

"But we live in a world where you need to barter or trade for possessions. A roof over your head, food in your belly, an iPhone in your pocket, Jordans on your feet -- these are things to be earned."

You're repeating yourself now.

Nobody that I know of is asking for everyone to be given everything for free. What we are asking for is a fair suck of the pineapple.

All kids should have the same opportunities. Health care is a human right that should be free at the point of delivery. Bankers who steal billions should go to prison the same way that kids who steal a car do.

**

"There are no sky fairies handing this stuff out. We exist in an objective reality, not a subjective socialist theory thesis. When it comes time for that child to make his or her way in the world, that child will need something to trade to live well."

Yes, and if that child had had a decent chance at a good quality of education regardless of where they were born, they would have a fair chance of building a decent life.

"Until which time our reality changes into a socialist's wet dream, we must all live by the standard of bartering what we can to get what we want. Or don't. Live like women lived where I grew up: Have babies, move into government housing, get just enough spending money to go clubbing, and be content to raise ignorant bastards who repeat the cycle."

You are getting very receptive now, though I have to say, you clearly have no idea what Socialism is.

Socialism is about breaking the vicious cycle of poverty, and the way to do that is to make good quality education and health care available to all, make the rich pay for the crisis they caused. Resurrect the American dream, start rewarding poor and middle class people for hard work again. A fair days wage for a fair days work. It's not like we are asking for the impossible. That the way things functioned in america from 1945 to 1970.

**
"Freedom to fail is also freedom."

Yes but there are 1% amongst you who have no opportunity to fail. And then there is 99% of you who have increasing little chance to succeed.

Yīshēng said...

Josh "class" was dismissed MANY posts ago, yet you get BEGGING for PC to intellectually whip your ass.

What are you, slow?

You're way out your league on this blog fruitlessly attempting to verbally spar with the most educated Black on the internet. YOU may think your White skin puts you on the same level with myself, Field, and PC but that will NEVER be the case because unlike YOU, we ALL have advanced degrees. In other words, you need at leasta Masters degree, to be among your peers around here.

Josh said...

"You are contradicting yourself. You seem happy to throw their parents in jail because they work in the narcotics industry (the only industry that is recruiting in their neighbourhood) or because they are dead-beat dads, and you seem happy to send them along dangerous streets to learn in poor schools. How can you then look that child in the eye and say "your life is valuable?"

I'm not contradicting myself. You are conflating while equivocating -- which is a weird blend to navigate, I'll be honest.

First off, you have no idea about my stance on this bullshit "drug war" we're fighting. You just assume I'm happy to lock people up. That's categorically false. I believe drugs should be legal.

Secondly, there's no contradiction. I make it clear that there's a distinction between a person and their live, and a company and its success. The latter of which needs valuable members to promote it to success. Sorry, but there is no postulate in all of socialist theory that can tell me a way my stair plant can be a success if every person I hire is a laborer and none of them are skilled enough to actually create templates, carve designs, set treads and risers, etc. If everyone swings a hammer, the business is going under. Socialism does nothing to counteract that, save siphoning money away from a successful business to keep mine afloat, backed by government (who hold it based on the peoples' proxy).

"Yes, and if that child had had a decent chance at a good quality of education regardless of where they were born, they would have a fair chance of building a decent life."

Two points:

1) Some of the most intelligent, successful people in the history of civilization have been autodidacts.

2) 60 kids sit in an Asian hut, bereft of clean drinking water or any modern luxuries, taught by 1 teacher and an abacus, and outperform our kids across the f'n board. You don't need anything fancy to learn; numbers in an old beat-up textbook are the same as numbers on iPad 5. The difference: Their cultures put an emphasis on education, our culture puts an emphasis on screaming "cultural bias!" "You owe us!"

"...and the way to do that is to make good quality education and health care available to all"

Again, education is education. "Quality" is this arbitrary add-on we ascribe to education in order to excuse the cultural phenomenon of bad parenting and children who thumb their noses at education.

Like to say, "If only we put more money into schools, little Johnny and Jimmy would actually learn!"

That's nonsense, and can be shown as demonstrably false. Already we spend more per capita on student than anyone else, particularly in these areas where bleeding hearts say we should. And why are they failing? Is it because schools aren't fancy enough? It is because every child doesn't have a PC? It is because there aren't enough highly-paid teachers to teach the material?

No.

It's because children are raised in these areas primarily by single mothers who cannot prepare them for education.

Children are not being held to the cultural standard that education is vital; instead, we make excuses for their failure.

Children in these areas far and away have disproportionate disciplinary problems (back to poor parenting).

Children in these areas are not instilled with a work ethic; they have no career goals and thus do not recognize school as anything but an inconvenience.

All the money in the world doesn't change this. You can buy your way to good parenting or effort from children. I've even heard the idea floated to pay children for going to school, a legitimate minimum wage. lol

Josh said...

"You're way out your league on this blog fruitlessly attempting to verbally spar with the most educated Black on the internet."

Yet I'm doing okay.

But...wait a minute. You mean you're a liar? I thought you didn't read what I wrote.

And, trust me, I have no issues with arguing my stances. The only reason you choose to add your worthless fucking opinion is because I'm white. And we know how that goes -- if the black don't win, we all jump in. lol

Limpbaugh said...

There is an old Vulcan saying, "Only Nixon can go to China". Obama is doing more to advance civil rights for black people by being the president of all Americans than he could ever do if he focused on black issues. He has set an example that will open a lot of doors for people in the future.