WHAT IS THE REAL RIGHT-WING AGENDA? - www.RichardAberdeen.com

[CircleCityEric]

2:08 As I've written in my own lyrics, "The kids hold the future to take th reigns, but we give all he teachers the aches and pains. [Teaching is] the single most important role in the land."

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus We need laws because otherwise people run red lights, steal stuff from stores and murder their neighbor. We need regulations for the same reason, because otherwise businesses shave corners, steal from and murder their neighbors. If we didn't have any business regulations, bridges would routinely fall down, schools would collapse with children inside, apartment buildings would collapse, airplanes would fly into each other, etc. People who pretend we don't need regulations are morons.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen I never said we didn't need laws. Where are you getting this? Agreed, there is need of regulation. However the belief that federal regulation is the answer to all those problems is a naive view of humanity. My comment was asking you if you think the people are the government the shouldn't the government be watched/monitored because it is people? Your logic is a vicious circle.

[lilly00007]

You're a sad, sad person. I would suggest taking the money you blow on internet subscriptions and donating it to all these people you speak of. Shut off your electricity, sell everything you own and donate it to the needy. You speak of caring, so lets see some action. Open a business and advertise "guaranteed employment regardless of performance, top pay guaranteed" and see how long you're in business. You're a fool. And it's the man ON the moon. Idiot.

[richardaberdeen]

@lilly00007 You don't know anything about me. I own a successful business and have earned quite a bit more than I need for the past ten years and so, I spread my excess around to help the less fortunate. It is I who feel sorry for you, because you obviously have never learned it is more blessed to give than to receive. It is actually a more intersting and fulfilling way to live, you should try it some time.

[lilly00007]

@richardaberdeen

I've been a small business owner for 15 years, employ 12 people currently, and yes, I give to local charities, particularly a shelter that has a 7-month rehab program to help people get off the streets, find jobs and housing, and help them walk with the Lord. Feel sorry for me all you want, it's you who doesn't have a firm grasp on reality. And since you're also an employer, how many employees do you have that you've guaranteed employmen to? You've never fired anyone?

[richardaberdeen]

@lilly00007 I've had several sales agents work for my company and I've never fired anybody. That doesn't mean I wouldn't fire someone who just dragged down the rest, which is what Paul is referring to. I known many homeless people in Nashville and elsewhere and never met any unwilling to work; many have asked me for a job; I've met many homeless people who can't find any steady employment or are in wheelchairs, missing legs, arms, are children and senior citizens. You are full of shit.

[lilly00007]

@richardaberdeen Practice what you preach and hire all these people you speak of. I'm full of shit? You're a fucking hypocrite.

[richardaberdeen]

@lilly00007 I don't claim to be a preacher. According to Jesus in Matthew 25, God will judge the nations by how they treat the sick and poor. He does not say "individuals"; Jesus specifically says "nations". According to the prophet Ezekiel, God destroyed Sodom because she didn't help the sick and poor. It's not hard to determine who the hypocrites are; Jesus already pointed them out for us, calling the conservative fundamentalists of his day "liars" and "blind leaders of the blind".

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen Jesus both of you, all I hear is "MY PUSSY HURTS"! Bragging about who helped who more doesn't prove or solve anything. Carry on acting holier-than-thou but the penis measuring contest doesn't actually matter when you can't see the objects involved.

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus Junior was president for eight years and he left the economy and our international reputation in shambles. Thus, anyone who pretends that right-wing politics is the best thing for our nation is very clearly a liar. I don't have to convince anyone who is honest about the historical evidence, the evidence very clearly speaks for itself.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen Then I am to understand that you believe Bush Jr. received a perfect economy with no quibbles whatsoever and he completely fucked it up. If only reality really was that simple then maybe humanity might have learned to just simply get along than care about who killed who's ancestors a few hundreds years ago. If Bush, being the man in charge, crashed the economy, then Obama, by the same privilege is destroying it even more.

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus Junior received a surplus rather than deficit, from there squandered 3 trillion on foreign wars, another trillion or two on tax gifts to the wealthy. You're correct he inherited problems, in particular those caused by right wing lunatics under Reagan, who began bank deregulation--Clinton & Junior deregulated them worse & sure enough, we had the worst recession, actually 2nd worst Depression as a result, clearly demonstrating Republican supply-side economics is a total lie, no shit.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen Surplus =/= healthy economy. You must be mistaken, there is no beleivable estimate the suggests the war cost has been 3 trillion, try around 1.5 trillion. Your "style" of logic is most amusing. You are implying that all of the current woes of the nation (perhaps the world, even) can and are attributed to the a philosophy known as conservatism (a misnomer for fascism as is seems you are want to think). A trillion or two? Quit exaggerating numbers.

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus Several legitimate sources, including The London Guardian and the NY Times, have put the total price tag for Iraq alone at over 3 trillion including costs for long term occupation, rebuilding, replenshing military supplies and armaments and longterm care of soldiers, widows and orphans of soldiers. This info is readily available on the web.  You are very clearly misinformed, I was being generous, as the cost of Afghanistan alone is placed at over 1 trillion and counting.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen Interesting. The CBO says 2.4 trillion by 2017. I am very clearly misinformed? Please explain how. You are philosophically and ideologically inept in that you have yet to defend over half your claims. You ignore your fallacies and move on as if nothing was said about them. If you wish to prove that rightards are terrible, awful, horrible, baby-killing, racist/nazi people that they are, then you must do a better job then simply say "You are very clearly misinformed".

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus Oh, I see, so if Junior only blew 2.4 trillion, then that makes it a good thing. And, Paul Krugman won a Pulitzer Prize in economics because he can't be trusted. Yeah sure, and Glen Beck and Bill O'Reily can be trusted. You're sick and you need to see both a head doctor and more importantly, a heart doctor, so see if he can figure out why you don't have one.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen P1 Again, you are putting words in my mouth. When did I ever say this is ok? You are exaggerating everything that we have 'discussed' and every time you cannot show why or how. So if Glen Beck won a Pulitzer Prize you would trust him? Krugman quite often takes hints of truth and ties them together to make a cute story. Take for instance the article last week about ACT/SAT scores of TX and WI.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen P2 His argument was poorly constructed as SAT/ACT scores do not in any way provide a standard for measuring public education. Where are you coming off saying these things about Beck or O'Reily? I have not once mentioned them, not once quoted or used a statistic from them and yet you automatically associate me with them. Why is that? I can hazard a guess but I can imagine you would simply deny or ignore it altogether and continue ranting on about how horrible I am.

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus And in case you misunderstand, anyone who pretends it is okay to blow up a million Iraqis and fry the skin off of their children's back in the name of "freedom and democracy", is as heartless as they come.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen Who is pretending? Where are these figures supporting the "million Iraqis"? You are full of hot air and your bandwagon attempts to lump anyone who disagrees with you into some sort of 'warmongering racist ' is pathetic.

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus It is estimated by EVERY credible source, that well over 1 million Iraqis have died as a result of Junior Bush's completely illegal invasion of a soverign nation, obviously to secure U.S. oil and other interests. Casualties of war include those who die as a result of poverty, disease, gang violence and long-term illness, not just battlefield deaths. According to The Guardian, more died from wanton gang violence caused by the U.S. invasion than by soldiers on both sides combined.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen I seem to remember a study (from the reputable John Hopkins, imagine that!) in 2006 that claimed 655,000 civilians killed in Iraq. That specific survey is the only one that suggests anything close to 1 million and it's data was gathered incorrectly. How could Krugman EVER be wrong? The IBC (not known for it's love of Bush) puts the number at (maximum) 109,000. You have yet to defend the fallacies inherent within your wonderful philosophy of "if it's right it's wrong".

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus That is clearly in great error because 1) It did not include long term deaths due to poverty, disease and sheer depression; 2) It did not include hundreds of thousands of people who were killed in anarchy and wanton gang violence because we toppled the existing military and police power and 3) The study was completed long before the present 2011. ALL legitimate sources place the death toll of our invasion of Iraq through 2010 as well over 1 million and counting.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen The Guardian only has that article when mentioned deaths in Iraq anywhere near 1 million. I have yet to find anything else. That is where the first "official estimate" came anywhere close near 1 million. Legitimate being Paul Krugman etc etc?

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus And, now I suppose you want to pretend that if we ONLY killed 655,000 or ONLY killed 109,000 or even if we ONLY killed 3,000 or so like we lost in 9/11, then that makes it okay. Again, what is your point? Who draws what line when killing is okay? Who are you to decide whether a single Iraqi child lives or dies? Who gave you the right and, who the hell gave Junior Bush the right? He's not the "decider", God is and God said to put away our swords. MY DISCUSSION WITH YOU HAS ENDED.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen You make so many assumptions it is astounding! My point is that you either ignorantly or maliciously exaggerate whatever story you can grab hold of to further your ideology by screaming at any opposition if they support a negative factor or a worse negative factor. You have no meat in other words. You take issue with those you disagree with, but fail to provide any argument other than assumptions and false associations or religious dogma pertaining to world leaders.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen Not to mention the NYT is known for it's progressive leanings and rarely if ever corrects itself when found to have reported falsely. Also, Paul Krugman is grounds for complete disregard fo the paper.

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus This is total bullshit. The same economic figures reported by Krugman can be found in the Wall Street Journal. They both agree, whereas your responses are completely made up out of Fox Noise fictious baloney. Legitimate economists might disagree on causes and cures, but they do not make up figures--that is reserved for liars like Glen Beck and the entire Fox Noise Network, inventing, skewing and twisting the facts as they go along and otherwise, inventing history out of thin air.

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen I'm extremely excited to hear Krugman and WSJ agree, however the Congressional Budget Office does not. (Not that it's known for it's accuracy either) I want to perfectly understand you here: I disagree with you, therefore, I am made of "Fox Noise fictious [sic] baloney". Not only am I lying, but I am getting my responses from Fox Noise. I applaud your powers of ESP and your moral character for reserving only the most vile insults for one of the evil entity known as FOX NEWS.

[richardaberdeen]

@OlimDeus I don't understand your point or, if you even have a point. How could you possibly know that your figures are more accurate than those from AlterNet, NY Times and WSJ, which all agree? And, why does it matter?  Are you trying to sell me some absurd sick disease, that it is okay to spend 1.5 trillion blowing up children as long as it isn't 3 trillion? What is your point? Jesus said to put away our swords and that it's wrong to hurt children for any reason, so what's your point?

[OlimDeus]

@richardaberdeen You are now using your head. Congratulations. Why does the CBO differ from the sources you have should be your question. Again, you are putting words in my mouth. If you would kindly stop assuming that I agree with spending 1.5 trillion or blowing up children (because that what bombs are for, right?). I don't give a damn what Jesus said when it comes to this. My point is that you make gross assumptions of myself and what I think to fit your view of those who don't agree with you

[lilly00007]

We DO believe in the constitution as it was written. However, when politicians constantly try to change the meaning of it, twisting it to fit their own needs, the politicians become people we can't trust. Of course we're aware that "We the People" are the government. No duh. Your points have so many holes in them it's really sad, and scary to realize you think of yourself as intelligent and informed. The demon isn't just the conservatives. It's much bigger.

[richardaberdeen]

@lilly00007 Oh, I see, like you believe in appointing right-wing fanatical Supreme Court judges who pretend that corporations have the same "rights" as we the people do. This is completely the opposite of what Thomas Jefferson and the Boys believed, who specifically set up safeguards to protect we the people against big money interests. You neither understand or believe in the Constitution any more than the man in the moon.

[lilly00007]

richardaberdeen, you're an idiot. guaranteed jobs? for who? everyone? regardless of what they do, how they do it, or how much damage they cause? What about all the people who refuse to work, but would rather collect checks from those who WORK for a living? I wholly support helping those who cannot take care of themselves, as is dictated by Christ. I also support helping people help themselves. I DO NOT support supplying people with a means to sit around. In Acts, who put those two to death?

[richardaberdeen]

@lilly00007 Oh, I see, you believe that "he who doesn't work, shouldn't eat", yet you don't give a damn if they can actually find a job and even if they do, you don't give a damn if they earn enough to house, feed and clothe their hungry children. Yeah, now that's real 'christian' of you right-wing lunatics ...

[waterwart]

ya but, Let's see how everybody feels after that obama agenda starts in January of 2011. I am betting there will be a bunch of people wishing they would have did a lot of voting a couple of months earlier in november.

[richardaberdeen]

@waterwart I didn't vote for Obama, so why are you blaming me? Obama isn't remotely a liberal or a socialist. Obama is somewhere to the conservative right of President Eisenhower, who himself was a moderate conservative. You sound an awful lot like a victim of the Fox Noise Screw We The People Network to me.

[waterwart]

@richardaberdeen...blame you? I'm blaming you? Really? I don't know where obama is. I think he stands more toward socialisem than democrocy myself. Referance his dad and granddad and what they did while alive. Obama is nowhere near a democrat in my book. And Look at that piloci bee-itch. What a commy! And fox news victom of? I don't know. But maybe I listen to too much a.m. talk radio during the week. who knows.

[johnnyohness]

@waterwart I think you forgot to mention whack nut right wing propaganda radio.

They are little more than an extension of the GOP. Limbaugh Hannity Beck the list goes on and on. Right Wing radio comprises 97% of all AM talk. Why do they call them selfs Conservative? They want nothing GREEN, deregulate every thing from the EPA to WALL STREET and All Banks pollute water and air destroy forest over fish oceans is OK w/them they scream freedom but want to look in the bedrooms of everybody.

[waterwart]

@johnnyohness I wish you would take two benedrill tablets and then sit back and reread all that you just posted. It makes no sense.

[johnnyohness]

@waterwart What did I write that you cant comprehend. Or maybe you do get it but just disagree. There is nothing there that isn't true.

[waterwart]

@johnnyohness okay Johnny those guys are all that's on down here during the day on a.m. radio. and I admit I listen to a lot of it during the day. And I can't walk away saying they don't make sense. Maybe they do or maybe they don't have a hidden agenda. But if what they are saying is bullshit, then what proof can you offer me from the democratic sides viewpoint? There aren't any democratic toalk shows on the radio down here.

[johnnyohness]

@waterwart 1st I would have to know who you listen to, most of them have the same talking points. The constant demagoging of the Pres. with the most outrageous lies

they can think of every single day. Claiming the Pres party is out to divide the country.

I just don't have the space to begin to list them When called out they scream freedom of speech w/o ever just justifying their outrageous claims. If you tell a lie enough times it becomes the truth 2 U. This is why we need the Fairness doctrine

[waterwart]

@johnnyohness Who I listen too? Hell man, to all them in that picture above! Lies? Well..I can't dispute that, because I never hear what the other side in sayin, because there aren't any of them type of talk shows on the radio down here. I MIGHT try and find some on the internet now to think of it. 'See how they talk and see if I see a differance I like or somethin. I ain't really tryin to say theys bad, just that I never hear from them, cause they ain't on down here. It's all sowed up downhere.

[johnnyohness]

@waterwart Taxes: in 01 Bush gave the very rich a C/gains tax cut.The Repbs had to cram it through in reconciliation. They agreed it had to end in 10 yrs. Now 10 yrs later they are trying to convince you this is new taxes. Already 25% of the nations total income goes to the top4% .They cry about the N/debt but want the M/Class to pay 4 it.

82% of the stock is owned by 4% at the top. The 2nd largest s/holder in Fox is an Arab Muslim but Fox slams Arabs all the time. Sadly peeps believe their B/S

[johnnyohness]

@waterwart Why do they call Obama a communist, socialist, Marxist They know he is none of these much less all 3 at the same time. They can say anything because they know most of their audience are low information voters that depend on them for all they should know. Beck w/be in Wash this w/end. The lemmings there will B bused in by the Koch Bros. Who R they? search -teabaggers exposed

on U-tube check out the first thumb in the upper left colum. These are who AM talk

is preaching to. DO IT. 

[waterwart]

@johnnyohness ya well..I watched it. All I saw was a man trying to "show" some people that couldn't explain things right at the moment. I DIDN'T SEE any definition as to what "the left" is trying to say. I only have a.m. talk radio down here. As I said, it's filled with those people above in the picture. I know what they talk. And I can't go away saying it doesn't make me think. I just would like to know what the left is saying to rebuke it, that's all.

[johnnyohness]

@waterwart Here is two ways to help you see the other side of the coin. Read the Huffington Post. Put it in your favorites, one of the best news sources anywhere.

Watch MSNBC News Kieth Oberman and Rachel Maddow in the evening are 2 of the best researched shows ever. What state are you in?

[richardaberdeen]

@johnnyohness Those sources are better than Fox News. Unfortunately, they also tend to be biased and exaggerate one "side" over the other. It is never wise to be biased or to exaggerate, rather it is wise to place "truth" as the goal and to seek what is really true. And to answer your question, I currently live in a "state" of utterly disbelief, that modern Americans can be so easily deceived by the Glen Becks and Sara Palins of this world, who are pushing an agenda for disaster.

[johnnyohness]

@richardaberdeen @richardaberdeen I did vote for Obama and I say it with pride. I heard his speech at the 2004 Dem conv. And couldn't believe my ears. I knew he would be Pres some day just not this quick. Tonight he said the reason 20% think he is a Muslim is there are a host of networks PURPOSELY spreading misinformation. U know who they are. The church, family values, right wing nuts bible thumpers that choose lies over truth. U C they want to be just like Jesus. There called Republicans. 

[johnnyohness]

@richardaberdeen Yes I agree that those sources do represent the other side, but in a world of AM talk radio where well over 90% of talk radio is comprised of RABID out right lies spun into half truths, some one has to correct them. I have the greatest respect for Rachel Maddow MSNBC 9 PM EST. She is such a prolific researcher of her facts, vertually nobody on Fox "disinformation" News will debate her. Do you think Limbaugh, Beck Hannity or Palin would? She would expose then for what they are.

[richardaberdeen]

@johnnyohness I have nothing against either Maddow or Olbermann, but neither one of them are liberals compared to somebody like me. They are moderate liberals at best and Olbermann is in the main, which I would call a moderate conservative from a fair historical perspective.  A true liberal doesn't believe in capitalism and doesn't believe in the so-called "founding fathers" or their WASP aristocratic oriented slave endorsing Constitution. If you want to know what a liberal is, listen to Jesus

[johnnyohness]

@richardaberdeen You are right. If one uses the bible as a measure of hoe we should think and live the greedy rich republicans are violating many of the tenants

of the good book. The book of Amos slams the rich for greed and coveting money.and power. Matt 25:40 For as much as you have done good for the LEAST of these YOU have done it for me. (Jesus) Another place talks about redistributing the nations wealth every 50 years.The top 1% collects 25% of the nations income

Tp 1% increaced 245%income

[johnnyohness]

@richardaberdeen You are right. If one uses the bible as a measure of hoe we should think and live the greedy rich republicans are violating many of the tenants

of the good book. The book of Amos slams the rich for greed and coveting money.and power. Matt 25:40 For as much as you have done good for the LEAST of these YOU have done it for me. (Jesus) Another place talks about redistributing the nations wealth every 50 years.The top 1% collects 25% of the nations income

Tp 1% increased 245%income

[richardaberdeen]

@johnnyohness If everybody did what Jesus said, there would be no such thing as a poor person or a rich person. Everybody would have what they need and, there would be no such thing as a hungry or homeless person. Unfortunately, people in the United States who call themselves Christians don't follow Jesus, they follow the fool's god of mammon, who stands for the love of wealth.

[johnnyohness]

@richardaberdeen You keep talking like that and someone is going to call you a communist or a socialist. Communist? Does that word come from communion?

I remember hearing the phrase holy communion in the good book some where.

Hummmm. Just wondering.

[lilly00007]

@richardaberdeen

Jesus also said "If you don't work, you don't eat".

[richardaberdeen]

@lilly00007 A gross distortion of what Paul said. In Acts, two people were put to death for not being willing to share all of their wealth in common. When right-wing religious hypocrites are willing to share all of their wealth in common or the very least, support guaranteed jobs and liveable wages, then and only then would you have a point; it's hard to work without a job or roof over one's head or when you can't afford health care or medicine when you are sick. Who are you trying to kid?

[IDawgedYou]

@richardaberdeen Nice to know you think you can redefine words to meet whatever twisted definition your monkey ass can come up with.

[waterwart]

@johnnyohnes Well...I'll give it a shot. And I am in Texas.

[johnnyohness]

@waterwart @richardaberdeen I did vote for Obama and I say it with pride. I heard his speech at the 2004 Dem conv. And couldn't believe my ears. I knew he would be Pres some day just not this quick. Tonight he said the reason 20% think he is a Muslim is there are a host of networks PURPOSELY spreading misinformation. U know who they are. The church, family values, right wing nuts bible thumpers that choose lies over truth. U C they want to be just like Jesus. There called Republicans.

[richardaberdeen]

@johnnyohness Right-wing Republicans promote the opposite of what Jesus both said and did. Anybody who has actually read the teachings of Jesus knows that.

[johnnyohness]

@richardaberdeen You said it best.

[waterwart]

@johnnyohness Well,personally,I don't care that you voted for obama. The I feel that the jest of the conversation was to try to explain to me why I should be siding with democrats,because, all I here on our a.m. radio, isALL of those people above,in this video, and what THEY are saying. Here nothing from democrats on a.m. radio. However, I am going to try and find a radio blob from them,or something. I mean, there has GOT to be someplace somewhere to find what they say.

[waterwart]

@johnnyohness No,I don't "know who they are"Those last couple of sentances made no sence to me. Look, all I got out of this is that you don't like republicans. I saw nothing to dispute what it is that they did or do wrong, or to dispute what these republicans say. I cannot say what those people in this video are saying doesn't sound right. This whole comunication started because Johnny was tryin to explain the democratic side. If what those in this video are sayin is wrong,I just needed proof.

[johnnyohness]

@waterwart This may take a couple of post but here is the nut shell. You surely are aware of the T-Party It has been billed as a grass roots movement by "the people"

Not many at all in the party know where this movement even started, or that they are being used as pons. Lets start here.

Google=Covert operations New Yorker Mag (and) Google Koch Bros exposed The New yorker

The radio guys in the vid above wont tell you what you are about to read. Bothare short reads but very informative.

[richardaberdeen]

@johnnyohness Just goes to show how easily Americans are deceived with flattering words. It is wise to go by what politicians actually do, rather than say. As a matter of fact, it's wise to go by what anyone does, rather than what they say. Consider for example, what Obama promised while running for office and, consider that he has pretty much done the exact opposite. Even Junior Bush tried to throw a few crumbs to the homeless; Obama continues to ignore them, even homeless veterans.

[roaddog0111]

theres no help for you

[KasparHauser4]

I hear ya! Great video!

[strawbary]

this is the dumbest video ever made

[itlfa2009]

You're boring

[nEMOheartTaco]

You're silly. You think there's a difference between the parties. The Republic of the United States of America has one political party and it's called the FED.

[richardaberdeen]

My video never mentions either the Democrat or Republican party. I agree that there is only one "Demo/Publican" Party, representing us the corporations against we the people. This is aptly covered in some of my other videos, including one entitled "Who is Really Scamming Who?". In the 60's, Walter Cronkite was viewed as a moderate conservative; by the time he died, he was called a voice for the far left. Cronkite did not change very much. Rather, the entire media became much more right-wing

[richardaberdeen]

@nEMOheartTaco I don't believe there is much of a difference between the parties. Today we have the conservative Democrat Party, who's agenda is to the right of Republican presidents Eisenhower and Nixon and, we have the extreme right-wing Republican Party. Many of my other videos clearly chastize the Democrat whackos. This one is aimed at the Republican whackos. I have never been a member of either party.

[johnnyohness]

@richardaberdeen You vid hit the nail right on the head. Now we have a new party

the teabaggers that is the brain child of the Jewish Koch Bros. (The Koch Brothers and the Tea Parties The Washington Independent) Google this. They are extreme right wingers with close ties to the John Birch Society. The T/P has been billed as a grass roots org by the common people. instead they are lemmings doing the bidding of the Billion air Koch Bros Sadly they haven't a clue

[richardaberdeen]

@nEMOheartTaco I agree that there is only one Republico-Demo Corporate Party. I have never said that I am a Democrat, who are nothing but Reublican-lite. My video is merely pointing out the utter insanity of right wing lunatics and especially, the utter hypocrisy of religious conservatives who support them. Jesus is very clearly the most liberal person in human history, by a very long shot and his teachings, which include sharing all wealth in common, do not remotely support either party.

[JanusChrist]

Great video Richard! I am an atheist but you certainly have my respect.

[cardmaverick]

This is laughable, sorry, I'm trying to be respectful here, but common:

"Our problems stem from human greed, not from government."

Guess who controls the Govt: GREEDY HUMANS. Unless you think its robots.

Like I said, its just a big tool, were better off keeping it terribly small, just enough to uphold contracts, national security and basic law an order. Thats it.

By the way, everything you whine about has govt. meddling at its roots. Open your eyes and look yourself.

[cardmaverick]

The swastica makes no sense if you think small govt. advocates should be compared to it. Hitler was a fascist, he was very much about big govt. control, but it was under the fake presentation of a free market. Again, do your homework, you're making yourself look like a total fool.

[richardaberdeen]

The end result of the so-called "free" market is enslavement of the masses. This is clearly true today, where large corporations left to their own unregulated devices lower wages here & literally enslave foreign citizens, habitually paying as little as possible for goods & services. The more profits are "supply-sided" to the wealthy, the more political power they gain & thus, the more they bribe legislation in their favor and against the poor. This is overwhelmingly historically indisputable.

[cardmaverick]

First study Libertarianism, "Left and Right" are just a diversion, both are totalitarian. Don't you realize that the powers Corps. have that you hate come from GOVT? In a true free market many of their current abilities would NOT be possible. As for low wages, guess what, I own a business, when the govt devalues money and hikes taxes, prices go up. I assume you don't want that since your a consumer. What do they do now? Ship jobs away and hire super low wages. Why? It's a response to YOU and Gvt

[richardaberdeen]

I agree that the "left" and "right" in America is mainly just an illusion. However, libertarianism is based on a total lie. Unregulated markets have no historical track record of ever being an advantage for the majority of citizens. I own more than one business and have been a member of several unions. Americans were far better off when unions were strong and upper tax brackets were high. High upper brackets force investment to avoid them, which creates job. That's the historical facts.

[richardaberdeen]

(continued) When I was a kid in the 50's and 60's, unions were strong and thus, non-union wages were also good, regulation was tighter and the highest tax bracket was 91%. Yet in this "anti-libertarian" market reality, most working families got by on one parent's income, took vacations ever year, had affordable quality health care and could afford pro sports, concerts, Disneyland and other normal entertainment. In other words, citizens as a whole in the United States were far better off.

[cardmaverick]

Libertarianism is not a lie. Don't you realize that a true free market has NEVER existed here? How can you say it won't work. All we do is make the govt. bigger and bigger and things get worse and worse. If you want things to improve, go the opposite direction.

[cardmaverick]

Do you realize our money is FAKE? The govt. controls it, and its backed by nothing since 1971. We have set up a system that benefits ONLY the US, other countries base their fiat money on our fiat money.... If you control the money, you control the power. You can create "prosperity" illusions for years when you just print money, the market is huge, which is why you can't fully control it, nor sustain a never ending "boom" ala Kaynes style economics. Mises has been right for about 100 years now.

[richardaberdeen]

This has nothing to do with historical reality. Lower class populations have been enslaved for thousands of years by the wealthy, long before terms such as "socialism" or "capitalism" even existed. Whether you examine ancient Sumeria, Egypt, Rome or Middle Ages Europe, the same results habitually occur every time. Statistically speaking, the wealthy gain control of government policy through bribery or similar means and, tweak legislation protecting their wealth at the expense of the masses.

[richardaberdeen]

(continued) This is clearly exposed from Ronald Regan forward, where ongoing thrugh Bush deregulation of markets very clearly caused our current massive economic mess. The more business is  deregulated, the more it will screw the common people. This lesson is as old as history is long, even before there was any such thing as a bank. The more unregulated markets are, the more the economically strong step all over the economically weak. There is perhaps no plainer lesson of history.

[richardaberdeen]

(continued) Prior to T Roosevelt and regulation, Americans were sold tainted meat that killed them, bogus medicine that didn't cure diseases and food in restaurants mixed with sawdust. There were no child labor laws, no protection if someone was badly injured on the job, no vacations, no sick days and the average American worked 14 or more hours, 6-7 days per week, yet many died from malnutrition. That is what happens in unregulated "free" market reality or worse. Consider serfdom under Czars.

[cardmaverick]

Again, You still spout the propaganda. Look, govt. here is a downward spiral. The top is Freedom for all, the bottom enslavement for the many. The wingnut is "left and right". As one side pushes one way, the other pushes back harder. A good example are corporations: GOVT. CREATED ENTITIES. The labor left wants to take control of the market, so the business right erects bogus entities to shield themselves, this spurs on immoral behavior since now they are not accountable. There, proof.

[cardmaverick]

Keep this "corkscrew wingnut" image in your mind, and you'll see that we once started at the top but from day one with ignoring slaves as people, we began our slow decent down to totalitarianism. As a liberal, I don't understand why you refuse to aknowlege

[cardmaverick]

big govt. atrocities. Look at any mass genocidal effort. Guess who created it: Big Govt. As for bad business, let the market prevail. If the product is harmful, why do you assume people will keep buying it!!?? It makes no sense at all. A competitor will rise up and use it as leverage, a safer product, to win market share. If govt. controls the market, guess what, you no longer have a choice. Remember the flu vaccine given out for the last swine flu? The vaccine killed more than the flu.

[cardmaverick]

Who distributed that vaccine: The US Govt.

Open your eyes man, all our problems stem from people on both sides using govt. to "get back" at the other side.

It's that simple.

[richardaberdeen]

These are truly a historically naive responses. Pretending we don't need regulation is the same as pretending we don't need any morality or ethics or legal laws in a society. Our problems stem from human greed, not from government. There is zero evidence that unregulated "free" markets will self regulate for the common good. Rather, the evidence overwhelmingly dictates monopolies will inevitably arise, preventing legitimate competition; i.e., history of U.S. steel and the railroads. .

[richardaberdeen]

(continued) Consider corporate radio monopoly, a direct result of deregulation. A non-regulated system based on human greed will not self-regulate for the common good, no matter what fancy names you attach to it and, no matter how you slice the political pie. Wise regulation is the same thing as wise legal law that says, you shall not murder, steal or deliberately lie and, the same thing as punishing someone with a ticket for driving 200 MPH in a school zone. Wise regulation protects citizens

[cardmaverick]

I should point out that in a true free market with free "hard" money prices will fall, and items will become more accessible. Just the opposite of today. If a price falls in our current system, it has more to do with slave labor in china, or inventory clearances. But in the grand scheme, govt. controlled currency, fake money, only spirals into inflationary death, causing misery (high prices, wages never keeping up, etc.) Our country has had several forms of fiat money, they all died.

[richardaberdeen]

In a true what you call 'free" market, there would be no laws hindering unionization, there would be no laws against workers demanding their representatives create sane government legislation protecting them against the unbridled greedy bastards of mass deception who destroyed our current economy. I've never met a libertarian who believes in either freedom or the free market. In the "free" market you want, Carnegie and Rockefeller control everything and enslave the masses, accordingly.

[cardmaverick]

Wow, again, you don't get it. Do you realize "Liberal" was the original name of current Libertarianism? They hijacked the name. Libertarians by definition ARE FOR PEACE AND FREEDOM. What you don't get is that in a true free world, unions are not needed, neither is govt. regulation. You point to hardship as a reason for gov.t regulation. You can't identify a problem till something goes wrong. What about the latest FDA screw up over hydroxycut Guess who found the issue: the free market. Wake up.

[richardaberdeen]

The terms "left" & "right" trace back to the French Revolution, where opposiing "sides" sat on different sides at a famous political gathering. If there was no regulation, Hydroxycut would be "freely" sold, the same as other kinds of human rat poison. Again, you have no historical basis for your position. History is full of non-regulated business interests screwing everyone into the ground, if for no other reason, because the greedy bastards who own them can.

[richardaberdeen]

(continued) This debate has ended for me. Come back after you've read a few dozen history books, including Howard Zinn's "People's History of the United States". Like Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, you don't know your historical ass from a black hole in the ground. Nobody who has studied a history book or two believes in the "free" markets, any more than anyone who has honestly looked at the evidence believes in atheism. Markets based on unbridled human greed = human oppression.

[cardmaverick]

I have read Zinns book. Way back in high school, and I still think he's an idiot. I just keep finding holes in your argument. As for your last comment about the grapes of wrath and depression era US, guess what caused it: Govt. control of the money supply. For everything you throw, a Libertarian can disprove. I suggest reading the works of Ludwig von Mises and other highly educated Libertarians. It'll wake you up fast. BTW, don't assume I'm not Christian, I am. Atheism is Big govt. friend.

[richardaberdeen]

And don't I'm a Christian, which I'm not. Jesus wouldn't support Christianity any more than he would support Libertarianism and free markets. He was in favor of taking as much as possible off the top where it's not needed and spreading it around the bottom where it is. A true communist if there ever was one.

[cardmaverick]

Again, incorrect. You are confusing the Law of Consecration with Communism. They are not even close to being the same. Communism is forced, consecration is NOT. Communism dictates everyone gets the same. Consecration says that you use what you need, and give the excess away. The amounts given will vary from person to person, we all have unique needs, something commies don't understand. Here's the big irony. Look at how lavish Stalin lived, compare it to the average "comrade". Nuff Said.

[richardaberdeen]

I've read the teachings of Jesus several times, as well as the rest of the New Testament. As I recall, the story in ACTS of sharing all things in common was anything but optional, unless you want to call being struck down dead an option.

The word "consecration" is a religious term having nothing in commone with either Jesus or any author of the New Testament. They were extreme radical communists, sharing all things in common and distribuing to each according to need, rather than equally.

[richardaberdeen]

This is what NJKV version of the New Testament actually says: "Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. "

I'm not sure what Bible you've read, but you're the first person among many thousands who used the word "consecration" in an email to me. Perhaps you can start a new religion; first church of consecration or whatever excuse you need for not doing what the Bible actually says.

[cardmaverick]

You interpret this incorrectly:

"Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. "

So, "as anyone had need"... if I need more than you, I get to have more, thats not communism! In communism, you get what the despot leaders decide for you, which is equal rations (except for the leaders living the high life).

[richardaberdeen]

Actually, that's exactly what true communism is. What you're describing is what happens if you happen to live in either the United States or the former Soviet Union; both nations are about politicians rewarding their wealthy cronies, or is it just my imagination that everyone in congress is worth more than an entire block of middle-class Americans or an entire city of homeless people?

[cardmaverick]

As for "consecration", its a Mormon belief. Tithing is considered a lower form or the Law of Consecration, which involves giving up your excess wealth for others, but only after you have fulfilled your own needs. Its not like communism at all, especially considering that the spirit of the Lord is required. Communism has no spirit, and it seeks to destroy belief in a God.

[richardaberdeen]

I admire the Mormons more than most religions, in that they do set aside stuff for their members when they need help and they do help each other find employment and etc. I don't like their religion for the most part,, but I have no quarrel with that particular part of it.

[richardaberdeen]

@cardmaverick According to the book of Acts in the New Testament, God's preferred lifestyle for us is to share all things in common, distributing to each according to need. Perhaps you know more than God, but I doubt it. I am by no means a Mormon, but I do give them credit over most conservative religions, for taking care of their own. Conservative baptists, for example, typically do not even help members of their own congregations eat or find work in time of need, let alone anyone else.

[richardaberdeen]

@cardmaverick According to Acts in the New Testament, God struck down two people who were willing to share some of their wealth but held some back. That hardly matches what you said, which isn't surprising, in that nothing modern Christians promote remotely matches what Jesus actually said and did.

[cardmaverick]

Again, you make NO sense at all. If you heard hydroxy cut was killing people via free market consumer advocacy groups (which exist) would you buy it? Would you buy it if your friend died from it? I bet not. The free market at work, yet again, and always WAY ahead of govt. agencies that pay no price for messing up. Hydroxycut will pay a price, it might even go out of business. Again, free market forces protecting your butt.

[cardmaverick]

Do you realize that every anti trust case was brought to court by guess who: a whining competitor who couldn't keep up. How? Well, the "monopolies" had lower prices, bigger economies of scale. "Monopolies" are interesting. Who is forcing you to buy steel? There is also iron, wood, plastic. etc.. Get a grip, liberal historians really distorted that period. By breaking up a company with economies of scale, they actually made it worse for buyers, because prices had to rise under smaller production.

[cardmaverick]

I should note, I'm giving some modern alternatives, but you see my point. You could add stone too. Iron wasn't the best example (steel is made from iron), but what about aluminum? There are other metals out there. BUT WHY BOTHER? If the steel "monopoly" provides a better cheaper alternative.... See, the free market really does work.

[richardaberdeen]

Steel was monopolized by Carnegie who tried to monopolize the railroads that carried his steel. Corporations are controlled by slimy greedy unbridled bastards of mass deception. Monopolies always charge lower prices until everyone else is out of business, then they let people starve to death who can't afford their prices. Apparently, you've never picked up a legitimate history book. I suggest the Britannica for starters and you might throw in the Bible to shed a little light on the subject.

[cardmaverick]

Now your just babbling. Do you realize that a business CAN'T stay in business if no one can afford to buy the products? Seriously, wake up, you're being really naive here. If one guy creates cheap resources, that means I can buy from him to create cheap products for Joe Schmoes like YOU to BENEFIT from. And once more, its NOT a one commodity market. No one is making you use their stuff. Alternatives exist, always will. The more you post, the more you discredit yourself with non-sense arguments.

[richardaberdeen]

I understand that, but obviously GM, Bank of America and many other corporations have failed this history lession, illustrated quite dramatically by Stenibeck in the Grapes of Wrath, where hungry common laborers are standing beside a huge pile of rotting fruit, unable to afford what the "company" store is selling. This is not fiction--it's happened frequently throughout American history. You can accuse me of "babbling" all you want, but you can't deceive someone who's read a few history books.

[exbronco1980]

i like how Hitler is in that group of people at teh beginning. it's very fitting

[richardaberdeen]

When a political leader says "if you're not with us, you're against us" and his party faithful continue to push this same "lock-step" mentality mantra of, everyone who doesn't agree with us is "unpatriotic", you can rest assured that Adolf Hitler or worse is not very far around the corner.