Do liberals really think Shaquille O'Neal and Michael Jordan should get paid the same as the guy who sells popcorn at their basketball games?? I notice libs never have a problem with Oprah, Bill Gates, William Buffet, or any of the thousands of millionaire movie stars being rich, only those mean old business owners who work for a living.
@jakefree25 its quite simple sparky...lets see if you can put 2 and 2 together...since dennis prager has repeated many times "we are equal at birth, we are not equal in results" its obvious he was taken out of context in an attempt to slander him...problem for the two schmucks is nobody believes a single thing that comes out of cenk and olbermann's mouth (save for liberal dickheads who want to perpetuate the same lie) so the backlash they attempted to create for prager fizzled and died
O cmon! Dennis Prager is a bumbling old white man who blunders the points he is trying to make all the time. He is an ultra-conservative Judaism motivated guy who tries to sneak in his religious values at every turn, to proclaim the founding values of this nation. But by all means, hang yourself all you like.
Republicans were cheering Prager after just saying "Equality isn't an American value" means two things. Ether republicans can read his mind on what he meant, OR they were racist. So throwing "Economic equality" up to paint Dems as communists is two faced.
He should have said Economic equality isn't an American value. BUT THATS NOT WHAT HE SAID!
And equality is a French idea!? The French fought along side us in the Revolutionary War. We gave them that idea! WE STARTED THE FRENCH REVOLUTION!
@MentalAtheist uh douche-nozzle...hes repeated for you dickheads many many times that "we are equal at birth, we are not equal in results"...but its no longer a matter of trying to convince liberal dipshits like you...its about countering the lies from you shit-fucks, and placing things in its proper context
@kenocartel - Economic equality isn't that everyone gets paid the same. It about get paid fairly for the work that you do. For example: women get paid less for doing the exact same jobs as men. Economic equality is getting AN HONEST DAYS PAY FOR AN HONEST DAYS WORK.
Money is nothing more then liquidated labor. But because humans aren't infinitely strong, there is a physical limit to how much work you can do. Therefore there is a physical limit to how much you can honestly earn. (Continued)
@kenocartel If a person rewards them selfs $20 million, that person is stating that they can do the labor of 500 individuals. Sense its clear that no one can, that leave only 2 option. They either stole their weath or were grossly over compensated .
It would be impossible for the people, your defending, to preform the labor that millions of dollars would represents! People who are millionaires didn't earn their wealth, They are therefore not entitled to keep it. So tax the rich!!! (Part2)
Only the weak condescend themselves to such hostility.
You obviously have no understanding of the events around you, and have confined yourself to insults because you lack any foundation in your argument. How sad.
These people are pathetic. Not only do they only have the thinnest and most shallow understanding of their opponents, the intellectual Right, but they have the same depth of understanding of our country's history and founding documents. Good job putting all this together....
Almost 100% of what comes out of Cenk uygur's mouth is a lie or spin. Dennis Prager is not arguing against equality, in fact he stated that at the begining of the clip. Dennis is arguing against 'economic' equality. This clown knows that but spins what Prager said so he can stay in the tank for the left and have something to talk about. The left is for economic equality "spreading the wealth" which came out of the Barak Obama's own mouth. As for Olbermann, he's just starving for attention.
in America every human being is not created equal, the sooner Americans come to terms with this the sooner the country might actually do something with itself
Both sides deliberately misrepresenting the other;I think Prager comes out a little less like an asshole,though. If these people and their dishonest rhetoric is as good as debate gets in this country,we're done.
Thankfuly you are someone with some basic understanding of world history. The 'egalite' of the French revolution was the same concept as the 'equality' of the American.
Advocate1234 starts from weak and unfounded premises, switches to unfounded conclusions drawn from such by someone who goes on to make a slap-dash speach that deserves the criticism it then receives. I just don't get it?
being a crazy bible thumper doesn't preclude him from being calculating or intelligent. i never said he wasn't. he is against gay marriage on a religious basis. that alone makes you a crazy bible thumper. we agree that that religious influence goes hand in hand with separation and divisiveness. we need less tribalism and more equality. the bible doesn't mention most everything that exists today, and yet people use it to justify and rationalize everything they see fit. its moronic.
prager is a crazy, biased, bible thumping, right wing jerkoff. disingenuous, and often inaccurate and dishonest, zealots are pervasive on the right. your characterization of "the poor" is also relative and totally subjective. not all people have enough food, let alone AC, electronics and cars. you are dipping into the mentality of no one being deserving of help because of abuse of programs by some people. poor here doesn't equate to poor in the world, as the standard of living is far different.
Another clever talker desperate to disguise his first and foremost desire: Keep the staus quo while assuring that the haves will get more at the expense of the have nots keep tightening their belt.
In the good ol' days greedy bastards proudly owned that label. Today we have closet assholes like this full-of-shit radio host.
There is no justifying injustice. 100 Rush Limbaughs multiplied by 50 Glen Becks and then by 100 more right wing assholes change nothing about the truth: They all suck.
The base pay of employees whose income was above the Social Security wage cutoff -- now $106,800 -- increased 78 percent, or by almost $1 trillion, from 2002 to 2007. During the same period, income for workers increased just 24 percent.
that is why if you have an economic system that highly favors capitalism to the point it is practically its own boss, it has to be balanced by governmental intervention after a while, because there is not balance or fairness. if it was the other way around, the same thing the reverse would apply, because there is no balance that way either.
i am going to post one example to show you what trickle down theory did under g w dumbass, but i am out of room on this post... cont...
prager is an idiot. democrats don't want to NOT grow the economy. an american value is whatever americans decide one is, not what dennis prager says it is. cenk slandered prager in no way. he was spot on, as was olbermann. prager is a slanted, bigoted, self-righteous, greedy, bible thumper. he is very arrogant, and often conveys totally subjective personal opinions as facts, when they are not facts. his blanket statements about what is right, or what is "american" IS offensive. eat shit dennis.
What are Democrats doing to create or to be more precise permit the creation of wealth to grow the economy? Look, the way the economy grows is by entrepreneurs setting up businesses to take risks to create wealth. The government doesn't create wealth, but through taxes and regulations may stifle its creation. That may be a good idea at times to prevent or lessen economic bubbles in preventing recessions, but it doesn't create wealth or build the economy.
if the masses don't have any money to spend, it doesn't matter how many people set up businesses and take risks. there has to be money circulating in the system. the private sector is crumbling, and destroying the economy. the government creating jobs and providing unemployment benefits keeps money flowing in the system. you need to stop drinking the trickle down kool-aid. reagan proved it doesn't work, and g w dumbass proved it again.
Govs. don't create jobs via creation of wealth. They take funds from tax-payers and then make bureaucracies that make jobs. There is no creation of wealth involved. Providing unemployment benefits comes from taxes which comes from businesses and tax payers. Actually Reagan proved it did work as the middle class doubled in size during the 1980s and we had the largest expansion in growth in our nation's history.
Govs don't create jobs via wealth. They take funds from businesses and prevent the growth of wealth and ability to take risks by businesses. I'll grant that the actual money supply comes from the gov but that isn't the same as wealth. If the gov expands the money supply w/o an expansion of wealth by the private sector the result is inflation.
i didn't say govs create jobs via creation of wealth. reagan proved it doesn't work, as his policies of constant tax cuts for the wealthy and the abolition of as much regulation as possible created a nasty recession during g hw bush's term. clinton inherited a bad economy after 12 years of greedy right wing policies. obama is inheriting a far worse situation after 8 years of g w dumbass with very similar policies. absolute capitalism doesn't work, which is what trickle down exudes.
The private sector isn't crumbling or destroying the economy. It is the private sector that is where wealth is created and causes the economy to grow. Tax cuts didn't cause the recession but ended a recession from 2001. Forcing banks or banks volunteering to provide loans en masse to poor people who couldn't afford the loans created a bubble that burst and caused the recession. The recession under Clinton occured after tax increases under Bush '41, whose policies differed radically from Reagan.
Reagan's policies of tax cuts worked. We had one of the largest expansions in economic growth in our nation's history & an end to recession in the early 1980's. There have been 10 recessions since WWII & they were ended by tax cuts. The middle class 2X in size under Reagan & about 17 million jobs were created in the private sector. Bush '41 differed in policies w/tax increases. Democrat policies of providing loans to poor people who couldn't afford it is got us in this recession.
reagan's policies of tax cuts worked for the rich. not for the whole of society. eating an ice cream might make you feel good at the moment, but there is a price to pay for eating things that make you fat. reaganomics doesn't account for greed. trickle down economics assumes that people will share the wealth out of the goodness of their hearts, and that never happens. people want more money, no matter how rich they are. and again, no policy of the government made any lender give money to anyone.
Rich people don't share the wealth out of the goodness of their heart; you don't understand the first thing about economics. The wealth is spread because rich people don't just sit around rubbing their money, they hire people to do the things that made them rich...namely create goods and services. Name one thing you really enjoy that wasn't provided by someone who got rich off it? You live better because of what they do, and then you complain that they're compensated for it.
so me acing macro and micro econ in college doesn't mean anything? i don't understand econ? LOL trickle down econ does not work. rich people do NOT share the wealth they gain. they spend the very bare minimum of money that they can get away with in order to pile up more and more cash. you have your head in the sand if you think that the rich share their wealth. the only wealth they try to create is an increase in their own. they don't give a shit if others make anything.
I hope you're lying about your college experience.
Rich people do not share the wealth they gain? It depends on what you mean by wealth. You're wrong either way, but there are 2 interpretations.
1. Wealth = money. What do they do with their money? They put it in banks which loan it to people who create jobs and start businesses. Or they spend it, thus giving it to other people in exchange for goods and services.
2. Wealth = the stuff they make. They sell that to people who want it.
why would you hope i was lying about my college experience?
i am not wrong. wealth, meaning money, is not willingly shared. you acting like rich people have the motivation to do things with their money in order to provide wealth to others is absurd as a general premise. you are spewing trickle down econ philosophy, which ruins economies. tax cuts for the rich results in more wealth for the rich, and little else. reagan proved it, bush re-affirmed it. its a terrible, rich get richer policy.
Money isn't willingly shared? Yes, rich people have the motivation to do things with their money...why else did they earn it? If we allow the rich people to keep the money they earned, they will keep doing what they did to earn it. That's what we want! We want successful people to keep on working. This isn't exotic econ theory...it's Adam Smith. It's what turned a bunch of stupid European rejects and made the richest country on earth out of them.
wealth & profits are not shared. the rich take advantage of the masses and try to squeeze every cent out of everything they possibly can, and stick the $ in their own pockets. they don't share it. giving someone a job that pays them a pittance while raking in huge amounts of money is not just, nor something to be proud of, and certainly not a way of thinking that should be pursued in desire for the common good. trickle down econ feeds the pigs at the trough that are already fat.
That's Marxist nonsense. If rich people put their money in their own pockets then what are you complaining about? They created stuff to sell and all the rich people have is useless paper! You should be happy. They spend money...i.e. create jobs.
"Take advantage" = willingly trade
"squeeze every cent" = work efficiently
"pays a pittance" = pays what the labor is worth
"just" =/= what uninformed people think who aren't spending their own money
LOL DWG, you are a joke. you have no common sense, and can't see the literal outcome of enacting policies. the rich people KEEP a disproportionate amount of the money they make. they don't create any wealth for anyone else in many circumstances. at best, they would maintain the standard of living of the masses with their actions, but when unfettered, they continuously try to find ways to make more and more, and that includes gaining wealth that should go to the masses. cont...
i am not a marxist in the slightest, as i don't want to live in a socialist nation. the spin you put on the things i said are comically inaccurate and silly. especially "pays what the labor is worth". absolute capitalism as a theory would pay the labor nothing, because that is the best way to make more money. the actual value of the labor is not merely a matter of a business unilaterally deciding what it is worth. you are simply a right wing zealot, and don't give a shit about the masses. sad.
Okay, now I know you were lying about econ classes. You don't pay labor "nothing" because then they quit... You pay them as much as it takes to get the labor you want. And if rich people "keep" money, they put it in a bank. The bank loans it to other people as investments that create jobs, buy homes and cars, etc. They don't just stuff cash in their beds.
Try addressing one of my points instead of throwing insults. I have no doubt that you "feel" you're correct, but try using your mind.
you have a very idealistic, pie in the sky mentality. and that is exactly the foundation of trickle down economics. it is idealistic, and not practical. in theory communism works. in theory absolute capitalism works. neither work in practice because those ideals don't take into account human behavior and desires. i don't just feel i am correct. trickle down doesn't work, AND it does feed the rich more wealth while providing less for the poor. cont....
Capitalism doesn't take into account human desires? Again, read Adam Smith. The poor in America have gotten massively rich compared to a generation ago. They have DVD players, better cars, better entertainment, access to the internet, faster food, microwaves, cell phones, many have iPods, better medicine (even if not the best medicine) and better computers. Saying I'm idealistic or "trickle down doesn't work" is not an argument. It's a conclusion. Base it on something next time.
of course it takes desires into account, but seldom NEEDS, nor what is fair, decent, or appropriate. greed has too much influence. i don't have a problem with capitalism, i have a problem when it is unfettered. i have read adam smith, but that is immaterial actually. if you please, TRICKLE DOWN IS IN INAPPROPRIATE PHILOSOPHY TO EMPLOY IN OUR ECONOMIC SYSTEM, AS IT FAVORS THE RICH, AND ITS THEORETICAL PRECEPTS DO NOT RESULT FROM THE APPLICATION OF ITS PRINCIPAL IDEAS. there is my opinion.
are you out of your mind? the private sector's greed has crushed the economy. no self control or self regulation, only trying to squeeze every penny out of every situation mattered, regardless of it being wise or prudent. no one forced the banks to provide loans to unqualified people. that is a total horseshit lie on your part.
Cent Uygur is a complete moron. Expecting idiocy from him is like expecting the sun to rise in the east. Prager stated that "all men are created equal". He was referring to the equality in dignity at birth of every human being. He wasn't referring to equality in outcome in the lives of every person.
yea they just weren't listening to prager's speeches. "all men created equal" does not mean all men are given equal rights, it simply means that they are born as equal human beings. choices made along the way dictate how your rights are picked and chosen.
"the equal protection of the law" this does not translate into total equality on all aspects of life. it simply refers to laws, which were created by the majority of people in a democratic state.
And from 2000 -2008 we did it Pragers way....tell me who likes the outcome . Like Newt and Rush ..another thrice married rightie loon talking about ethics and equality..spare me
Ha, I thought you would say that. I'll gladly keep my piece of machinery and you can chunk your motherboard back into the earth if you feel it's more valuable there.
Certainly, but you have to admit that a computer is much more valuable than a lump of silicon. Of course labor by itself doesn't create wealth. Somewhere along the chain someone needs resources. And everyone involved needs some knowledge of how to apply their time as labor.
Sounds about right, but I fail to see why you think wealth cannot be grown. As long as you recognize materials (and not the money used to exchange them) are what is considered wealth it becomes obvious that labor (when done right) produces wealth, and with efficient exchanges, the more efficient people can offer us more wealth for which we labor , and these exchanges keep growing.
Advocate1234, you really ought to stop embarrassing yourself :
1) It's obvious you don't know the legal term libel. Libel is used for written and/or printed text. Slander is for verbal expression.
2) Regardless, this is not libel because they are not defaming Prager in any sense, merely disagreeing with his view on Equality.
3) Both Libel/Slander have to be shown to be done with malicious intent - and since Prager is a public figure the standard by which slander is measured differently.
For someone who excoriates the Left - you'd think you'd know the law a little more clearly.
That said: There are Leftists (i.e. Communists) who believe in "equality of outcomes" - but your attempt to conflate that with the entire Left is intellectually dishonest.
You so-called Conservatives love to talk a good game of "equal opportunity" - but you do not live by them. You're closer to George Orwell's view in Animal Farm - that some animals are merely "more equal than others"
A typical elitist view to justify the removal of equal opportunities to all.
It is this failed ideology that under Reagan, Bush Sr and Bush Jr - the income gap grew dramatically and economic mobility also shrunk. France has a better economic/social mobility than we do - what does that say about your so-called "equality of opportunity"?
After nearly 30 years in power show me your proof that the Right values equal opportunity?
C'mon - show us the success stories of the Right. Put up or Shut Up.
I did discuss the video's argument - the point still stands this isn't slander (nor is it libel because it's recorded on permanent media - that view alone should disqualify you from making legal opinions. But I digress...)
If Olbermann is liable for slander cuz he didn't acknowledge Prager's idea of "economic equality" vs "political equality"
Then Prager is just as guilty of slander for suggesting Obama's "spread the wealth" is about anything but undoing 30 years of "Trickle Down" economics.
Heh, look - you're obviously not stupid - so maybe you think I am, or perhaps you think I'm just parroting what someone else is saying: You and I both know that those who advocate "Trickle Down" don't call it that, they don't even call it by name. It has been known as Supply-Side Economics or Reaganomics.
If you want names how about: Arthur Laffer and Martin Feldstein. All prominent members of Reagan's economic policies.
They along with a host of other politicians have advocated cutting taxes on top earners at the expense of the middle and working classes.
The theory being that prosperity will "trickle" downward as the top earners keep their money.
This has obviously not been the case, as wealth - in the hands of few - tends to concentrate. This is why the income gap has grown over the last eight years and social/economic mobility has stagnated.
Look, you economic illiterates on the Left claim that Republicans advocate trickle down economics and then attack it. Nobody has ever advocated it. Period.
The fact of the matter is that when the bottom 40% pay no income taxes because they get all their deductions back, you cannot give them a tax cut.
Moreover, EVERY business pays employees FIRST. Then what is left, if anything, is called profit.
So trickle down is an imagination. Labor gets paid first genius.
Okay so Arthur Laffer and Martin Feldstein are just products of my overactive Liberal imagination. They never wrote papers advocating lowering taxes on the top earners - they never had politicians like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush champion their views. These renowned Conservative economists are merely some delusion of my fevered Leftist mind!
In fact, that picture I just saw of Bush & Feldstein must have been doctored by some nefarious Photoshopper intent on keeping my delusion going!
You find me one quote of Laffer supporting "trickle down" economics.
Top earners have to get lower taxes, because you cannot give lower taxes to people who pay no income taxes.
And, what you ignored is that those "top earners" ALL pay their employees before they even collect a dime. So you mystical trickle down is a figment of your imagination that you created.
"It's kind of hard to sell 'trickle down,' so the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really 'trickle down.' Supply-side is 'trickle-down' theory."
That's not a quote. And again what you ignored is that those "top earners" ALL pay their employees before they even collect a dime. So you mystical trickle down is a figment of your imagination that you created.
I find it fascinating that when discussing your political views you are quite the Objectivist, but when it comes to actually arguing them you resort to the most bizarre relativistic sophistries I have ever seen. So much for being a tried-and-true Conservative!
You can spin it any way you want - Laffer, David Stockman were all Reaganites who advocated Supply-Side Economics, which Stockman himself called "Trickle Down" which as you well know is what the opposition calls it - not its proponents.
You're proving my point exactly - and the numbers demonstrate it. Tax cuts concentrate wealth in the hands of those who determine their employee's salaries. When most corporations prospers they do not share their wealth proportionally with their workers.
This is demonstrated by the income gap which increased over the last eight years. These numbers are much more significant than disposable income.
"income gap is meaningless when the bottom of the gap is constantly improving" : and *I'm* an economic illiterate? Salaries for those NOT in the top 5% have flat-lined and not kept up with inflation.
The way you make your arguments indicates to me you have a need to believe what you're advocating - the way a person of faith needs to believe in God.
While you can't prove or disprove God - your economic "faith" is not supported by the numbers. I suggest you try being a little more rational.
Calling you a misanthrope is an insult to misanthropes - why I put up with your attacks is beyond me except that I am an idealist hoping you might (for once) demonstrate some maturity. But alas, you prove me wrong.
That said, my link is only one part of a bigger picture. The Census Bureau data is only part of it. There is a thorough study by the Economic Policy Institute titled "Economys Gains Fail to Reach Most Workers Paychecks" that shows that wages has stagnated compared to inflation.
Naturally, I don't expect you to take the EPI's word for it. I could list a thousand sources - unless the data fits your narrow neo-Liberal biases or unless it was written by Friedman himself or one his Acolytes - you would dismiss it as Liberal Propaganda or spin the information to seem like something else.
So go ahead, have your last word, I know you're aching for it. I for one am not going to waste anymore time having a discussion with someone so shamelessly intellectually dishonest as you.
Moreover, Libel/Slander cases are notoriously difficult to prosecute in American courts - because of the burden of proof required of the plaintiff.
This is why many celebrities sue tabloids in Britain, where the burden of proof is on the defendant, and have been successful (i.e. Tom Cruise).
So please, if you want to say Olberman's a jackass for taking something out of context - fine - but don't try to puff it up by attaching legalese. It won't work.
Oh come on! This is such a stupid distortion of liberty, equality, fraternity! How stupid are you? I like your vids about Naomi Klein, because she actually is a bitch and makes antisemitic statements, but this vid? I like Dennis Prager, but he no clue what he is talking about! Of course those liberals distort his view a bit, but to give you some kind of reminder:
I probably made a mistake. I clicked on the wrong reply-box. I usually do not talk to people with fecal matter, urine, menstrual blood and syphilis and things of the like in their heads....
Ohhhhhhhhhh my God. What a brilliant insight. I never thought of that. You are totally right. TOTALLY, TOTALLY RIGHT. Blessings for you, man. Thanks. Great job. Thumbs up for your comment.
Listen, I like the way you think. Poor people still poor because they do stupid things. That is it. Everything that happens to us it is our fault. Thanks you for believing that. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING that happens to us it is our fault. Blame is something that is useless. If you use blame you are immature. That is it. Mature people do not blame others if you notice that. Anyway, I do not give a F*** that Bill Gates is rich. "I bless the man and wish him a 7th airplane." D. Prager.
you don't seem to understand the fact that they are not refering to the first part of the video. They are refering to the video where he said "equality is not an american value" and did not specify that he wasn't also refering to human equality. The radio version of the comment he made adding in that "human equality is an american value" was most likely made after he made first comment that was without specification. Why don't americans understand their own legal system? they abuse it enough..
Oh really. It is only libel if there is a defamation of character. First of all, what both cenk and Olberman said was not Libel. They both simply took what prager said, and then argued against it using the Declaration and Bill of Rights. They are both absolutely correct as well. Even in some strange universe were this would be considered Libel. The fact that they were speaking the Truth would have the case thrown out. Maybe you should go back to school.
Well, I don't know that either of these guys could actually be guilty of libel, but obviously they took his comment out of context. Sure, this is "how the Left works", but its also how the Right works. And Mr. Prager is right in theory about the philosophy of the Republicans, but they only selectively act according to those values. The bailout bait and switch would not have been possible without Republican support. And we're not going to call that Socialism? Why? Because it favored the rich?
And Russia has one of the highest crime rates...Let's all go over to Ethiopia and Hati and India and show them how "working hard" seems to easily pull everyone up by their bootstraps.
"Lou Dobbs falsely asserted that "just about 40 percent of all Americans -- working Americans -- don't pay taxes." In fact, all American workers are required to pay taxes on their wages for Social Security and Medicare, and people in the United States are also subject to excise taxes." - Media Matters. I could do more of the research 4 you since you're either too lazy or too dumb to do it yourself.
That's payroll tax, not income tax. Don't be so damn high and mighty when you don't know the half of it either. Aprx. 40% don't pay INCOME TAX, and they would under Obama's plan be cut a check paid for by those who already pay the vast majority of Income taxes. It's understandable that you didn't know that since it wasn't explicitly stated in all that quote that you presented, but hey that's what research is for.
You're an idiot, please look up your facts before trying to make a nonsensical argument on how 40% of "working" Americans don't pay income taxes. Please give me 1, just 1 example of someone that works a legal profession in America and makes over $3k a year doesn't pay income taxes. Or maybe you don't know that not paying your income taxes is against the law. I how you didn't graduate college because if so, please tell me the name of the school so I can make sure no one I know goes there.
Defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual a negative image. Slander refers to a malicious, false, and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images. Most jurisdictions allow legal actions to deter various kinds of defamation and groundless criticism.
Amen to that, I think people like Prager and Medved have a legitimate case to sue Olbermann for defamation. It's obviously not that he just misunderstands what they mean, it's a calculated misrepresentation meant to make those who disagree with his agenda look like bigots. How he misrepresents teh president is disgusting as well. MSNBC should fire him for such irresponsible, dishonest conduct.
the original comment was taken out of context, stripped of its meaning and taken to mean nearly the opposite of what Prager actually said. for all their "read the full sentence" sanctimony, they in fact failed to read/listen to his full sentence where he debunks exactly the claims they make about his observation of french vs US ideology.
OB2, this country already pays the 2nd highest tax rate in the world. Let me rephrase that, only 50% of the people in this country pay the 2nd highest taxes in the world. When you tax those who work and dont those who dont, your promoting a system that favors lack of productivity and inginuity. Life isnt free of social innequality and the US has infinitely less than any other country in the world with LIBERTY remaining the primary value, not Equality!
keith is a fool. Dennis is referring to equality related to pay, soceoeconomic status, job(affirmative action), etc. These values are of teh left. THey can only be applied at the expense of others' liberty, the highest value of the right. Obviously that connection requires to much intellectual depth of the host. Its ok if you disagree with the principal, but sad when you cant even understand the intent. Wow.
"The right valued libery and equality of opportunity"
Oh right. Equality of opportunity to steal millions if you're a CEO. Euality of oppotunity to take the money from the middle class. Equality of opportunity for minorities. Oh yes it's been very equal. They're just liars - stealing the dough. That's all they are. They've come up with some ideological crap so they can steal it faster, and turned it into a religion for everyone to blind to see it.
Why would some value be american or european? Because the Constitution says one thing or another? Or because the leaders of the independence thought this or that?
American values are the values of americans and they are not fixed ones, much less on law. They are for people to decide themselves, so freedom for example is an american value only in the measure americans choose to value freedom and be free.
So there are other "american" values which are not commonly accepted: greed, violence, etc.
Greed may be the failure to limit one's ambition to a rational, let's say sensible way. But that's not my point. What I say is that there is no such thing as "what America is all about". The people in the U.S. have certain values and that's it.
Of course the state has some basic values like being a republic and a democracy. But all the rest in my view is just the state and the media promoting an ideology which is simply non essential to democracy.
Only you can do that of course. But again that's not the point. I don't see why this greed matter is so important to you. All I say is that american values are not fixed as the people in this video claim. And that some negative values (such as greed) can be considered american in the measure americans embrace them.
Although perhaps I see what your concern is. Perhaps you do not perceive greed as a negative value?
Exactly, The United States (like all countries) has no other values to it's self than those that define it as a state/nation: the republic, democracy, and some others.
But including others like life, liberty and the pursuit of hapiness is beyond the common values that a democracy can have, simplily because in a plural society those values will not be always shared.
And when they are imposed by the media or the state you have rather antidemocratic scenario.
You've just disqualified yourself from being taken seriously. American is the only country in the world that was founded on ideas and distinct value system.
I am sorry that you think so. Because you see, every single country pretends to have it's own unique value sistem which it tries to impose on it's citizens. What I say precicely is that it is for us to decide our own values regardless of those of the state. And even change the state's values.
I see that you have unfortunately believed everything about the American official value sistem. I think that is one of the reasons why the US is on it's downfall: believing it is above all other coutries.
Europe's middleclass is equal to what Americans would consider poor.
Europe has higher violent crime, but a lower murder rate. Europe also has a higher rate of hot burglaries (people breaking into your home when you are at home), because their government disarms their citizens.
Europe taxes people at close to 50% of their income.
Iceland, that was supposed to be the "happiest" place in the world is literally bankrupt now.
They come here for college and when they are sick too.
My comment below is simply stated, and has to be for a Youtube post, but, I recommend you debate Prager on his show, yours, or in a mediated forum. He has had everyone he disagrees with from Howard Zinn to George Lakoff on his show. Big, big intellectuals. You can take on the "pale/pasty white male", can't you Cenk? Regarding Keith Olbermann debating Dennis Prager, I think I just saw a pig flying passed my window outside. But I will wait for hell to freeze over.
The people are constantly wanting, are the same people who expect you to support them. Get an education, get married, support your kids, and GET A JOB!
To Cenk Uygur: Equality of opportunity IS what Prager is talking about. Not equality of outcome. I.e. the government will not get in the way of any person, from any background (race, creed, religion, etc.), to pursue their goals and dreams. It will NOT provide income redistribution or opportunities to one person/group over another in order to ensure everyone has the same or a similar outcome. That's why liberty AND equality are separate and distinct values. Not mutually exclusive, however.
I think you're not hearing this correctly or you just don't get it. Maybe you don't understand the definitions of liberty or equality? As for the way your post starts out, you're in total agreement with everything that Cenk said so it's obvious to me that you don't get it; just wanting to fall back on your redistribution claim which Obama never said. All you're doing is just regurgitating 'speak' that McCain is feeding you. Somebody please burp this baby.
How did you get that? Prager says: That liberals what economic equality(wrong). That economic equality is a French, European value(wrong). That when Obama says,"spread the wealth" they want equality of result(wrong). Are you that naive? Is Prager your Sensei? Please answer this: do you honestly believe that the Dems what everyone to have economic equality? Do your homework before you follow everyone off the cliff. You don't want to be standing with this guy on the wrong side of history.
dauoo -- What the hell are you talking about? I am absolutely right on all counts. Liberals push for equality in all areas. Affirmative action? Diversity? Come on, it's all over the place. They always vilify the rich, as Obama has, by implying they are somehow wrong for earning lots of wealth. I'm on the right side of history. I endorse individual rights and liberty. I'm against state control of our lives. Eliminate the fda, epa, fcc, etc. Cut taxes to zero.
Do liberals really think Shaquille O'Neal and Michael Jordan should get paid the same as the guy who sells popcorn at their basketball games?? I notice libs never have a problem with Oprah, Bill Gates, William Buffet, or any of the thousands of millionaire movie stars being rich, only those mean old business owners who work for a living.
twincrier 1 year ago
@jakefree25 its quite simple sparky...lets see if you can put 2 and 2 together...since dennis prager has repeated many times "we are equal at birth, we are not equal in results" its obvious he was taken out of context in an attempt to slander him...problem for the two schmucks is nobody believes a single thing that comes out of cenk and olbermann's mouth (save for liberal dickheads who want to perpetuate the same lie) so the backlash they attempted to create for prager fizzled and died
kenocartel 1 year ago
O cmon! Dennis Prager is a bumbling old white man who blunders the points he is trying to make all the time. He is an ultra-conservative Judaism motivated guy who tries to sneak in his religious values at every turn, to proclaim the founding values of this nation. But by all means, hang yourself all you like.
gugeyewalker 1 year ago
Republicans were cheering Prager after just saying "Equality isn't an American value" means two things. Ether republicans can read his mind on what he meant, OR they were racist. So throwing "Economic equality" up to paint Dems as communists is two faced.
He should have said Economic equality isn't an American value. BUT THATS NOT WHAT HE SAID!
And equality is a French idea!? The French fought along side us in the Revolutionary War. We gave them that idea! WE STARTED THE FRENCH REVOLUTION!
MentalAtheist 1 year ago
@MentalAtheist uh douche-nozzle...hes repeated for you dickheads many many times that "we are equal at birth, we are not equal in results"...but its no longer a matter of trying to convince liberal dipshits like you...its about countering the lies from you shit-fucks, and placing things in its proper context
kenocartel 1 year ago
@kenocartel - Economic equality isn't that everyone gets paid the same. It about get paid fairly for the work that you do. For example: women get paid less for doing the exact same jobs as men. Economic equality is getting AN HONEST DAYS PAY FOR AN HONEST DAYS WORK.
Money is nothing more then liquidated labor. But because humans aren't infinitely strong, there is a physical limit to how much work you can do. Therefore there is a physical limit to how much you can honestly earn. (Continued)
MentalAtheist 1 year ago
@kenocartel If a person rewards them selfs $20 million, that person is stating that they can do the labor of 500 individuals. Sense its clear that no one can, that leave only 2 option. They either stole their weath or were grossly over compensated .
It would be impossible for the people, your defending, to preform the labor that millions of dollars would represents! People who are millionaires didn't earn their wealth, They are therefore not entitled to keep it. So tax the rich!!! (Part2)
MentalAtheist 1 year ago
@MentalAtheist oh god, just shut your pissflaps you stupid liberal cunt
kenocartel 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kenocartel "oh god, just shut your pissflaps you stupid liberal cunt"
WOW... What an insightful thought...
I never thought of it like that...
If you can't make any sound
arguement to replay with
then I will simply declair
VICTORY!!!!
MentalAtheist 1 year ago
@kenocartel
Only the weak condescend themselves to such hostility.
You obviously have no understanding of the events around you, and have confined yourself to insults because you lack any foundation in your argument. How sad.
I await your barrage of insults.
newloser 1 year ago
Wow. He really doesn't listen.
zahayna 1 year ago
Actually, Keith Olbermann is the worst person in the wooorrrrlllllddddd!
coolandtall 1 year ago
These people are pathetic. Not only do they only have the thinnest and most shallow understanding of their opponents, the intellectual Right, but they have the same depth of understanding of our country's history and founding documents. Good job putting all this together....
soopermexican 1 year ago
Almost 100% of what comes out of Cenk uygur's mouth is a lie or spin. Dennis Prager is not arguing against equality, in fact he stated that at the begining of the clip. Dennis is arguing against 'economic' equality. This clown knows that but spins what Prager said so he can stay in the tank for the left and have something to talk about. The left is for economic equality "spreading the wealth" which came out of the Barak Obama's own mouth. As for Olbermann, he's just starving for attention.
mytuber81 1 year ago 6
@mytuber81 Well gee, considering how good his ratings are he must be pretty goddamn hungry.
Useless2112 1 year ago
@Useless2112 ?? what??
mytuber81 1 year ago
@mytuber81 Starving for attention? Ah, forget it.
Useless2112 1 year ago
in America every human being is not created equal, the sooner Americans come to terms with this the sooner the country might actually do something with itself
Sorcoral 2 years ago
Both sides deliberately misrepresenting the other;I think Prager comes out a little less like an asshole,though. If these people and their dishonest rhetoric is as good as debate gets in this country,we're done.
mrbriscoe2001 2 years ago
Libeled Him ??
well let me join the club !
prager is a f_ucking douche bag
who probrobly likes little boys !!!
hows that ?
DeepSpaceFunk9 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MongoloidBabyUSA
Thankfuly you are someone with some basic understanding of world history. The 'egalite' of the French revolution was the same concept as the 'equality' of the American.
Advocate1234 starts from weak and unfounded premises, switches to unfounded conclusions drawn from such by someone who goes on to make a slap-dash speach that deserves the criticism it then receives. I just don't get it?
Origen305 2 years ago
Comment removed
Origen305 2 years ago
He's talking bull shit. Conservatives are closet faggots
Userzxcvbnm 2 years ago
ugyur is more of a spinmaster than people like rush limbaugh and sean hannity. he's honestly the worst of the worst.
MrBWB 2 years ago
How am I in anyway pompous or anti-intellectual?
godlypotatoe 2 years ago
yes mongo... prager is a game playing, self-righteous asshole.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
being a crazy bible thumper doesn't preclude him from being calculating or intelligent. i never said he wasn't. he is against gay marriage on a religious basis. that alone makes you a crazy bible thumper. we agree that that religious influence goes hand in hand with separation and divisiveness. we need less tribalism and more equality. the bible doesn't mention most everything that exists today, and yet people use it to justify and rationalize everything they see fit. its moronic.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
And you would think an all knowing God would have known that in the future there would be a USA.Not?
MrTabby5000 2 years ago
Comment removed
MrTabby5000 2 years ago
prager is a crazy, biased, bible thumping, right wing jerkoff. disingenuous, and often inaccurate and dishonest, zealots are pervasive on the right. your characterization of "the poor" is also relative and totally subjective. not all people have enough food, let alone AC, electronics and cars. you are dipping into the mentality of no one being deserving of help because of abuse of programs by some people. poor here doesn't equate to poor in the world, as the standard of living is far different.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
The importance of some degree of economic equality came from the people who lived through the dark ages. You may want to heed their words.
killerbandit 2 years ago
It's true we are all CREATED equal, but that doesn't mean we all keep an equal outcome.
godlypotatoe 2 years ago
Another clever talker desperate to disguise his first and foremost desire: Keep the staus quo while assuring that the haves will get more at the expense of the have nots keep tightening their belt.
In the good ol' days greedy bastards proudly owned that label. Today we have closet assholes like this full-of-shit radio host.
There is no justifying injustice. 100 Rush Limbaughs multiplied by 50 Glen Becks and then by 100 more right wing assholes change nothing about the truth: They all suck.
polkadotbox2 2 years ago
hes arguing agianst economic equality, which is a necessary prerequisite for prosperity
eugdog106 2 years ago
The base pay of employees whose income was above the Social Security wage cutoff -- now $106,800 -- increased 78 percent, or by almost $1 trillion, from 2002 to 2007. During the same period, income for workers increased just 24 percent.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
that is why if you have an economic system that highly favors capitalism to the point it is practically its own boss, it has to be balanced by governmental intervention after a while, because there is not balance or fairness. if it was the other way around, the same thing the reverse would apply, because there is no balance that way either.
i am going to post one example to show you what trickle down theory did under g w dumbass, but i am out of room on this post... cont...
slyjokerg 2 years ago
prager is an idiot. democrats don't want to NOT grow the economy. an american value is whatever americans decide one is, not what dennis prager says it is. cenk slandered prager in no way. he was spot on, as was olbermann. prager is a slanted, bigoted, self-righteous, greedy, bible thumper. he is very arrogant, and often conveys totally subjective personal opinions as facts, when they are not facts. his blanket statements about what is right, or what is "american" IS offensive. eat shit dennis.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
What are Democrats doing to create or to be more precise permit the creation of wealth to grow the economy? Look, the way the economy grows is by entrepreneurs setting up businesses to take risks to create wealth. The government doesn't create wealth, but through taxes and regulations may stifle its creation. That may be a good idea at times to prevent or lessen economic bubbles in preventing recessions, but it doesn't create wealth or build the economy.
Aegius 2 years ago
if the masses don't have any money to spend, it doesn't matter how many people set up businesses and take risks. there has to be money circulating in the system. the private sector is crumbling, and destroying the economy. the government creating jobs and providing unemployment benefits keeps money flowing in the system. you need to stop drinking the trickle down kool-aid. reagan proved it doesn't work, and g w dumbass proved it again.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
Govs. don't create jobs via creation of wealth. They take funds from tax-payers and then make bureaucracies that make jobs. There is no creation of wealth involved. Providing unemployment benefits comes from taxes which comes from businesses and tax payers. Actually Reagan proved it did work as the middle class doubled in size during the 1980s and we had the largest expansion in growth in our nation's history.
Aegius 2 years ago
Govs don't create jobs via wealth. They take funds from businesses and prevent the growth of wealth and ability to take risks by businesses. I'll grant that the actual money supply comes from the gov but that isn't the same as wealth. If the gov expands the money supply w/o an expansion of wealth by the private sector the result is inflation.
Aegius 2 years ago
i didn't say govs create jobs via creation of wealth. reagan proved it doesn't work, as his policies of constant tax cuts for the wealthy and the abolition of as much regulation as possible created a nasty recession during g hw bush's term. clinton inherited a bad economy after 12 years of greedy right wing policies. obama is inheriting a far worse situation after 8 years of g w dumbass with very similar policies. absolute capitalism doesn't work, which is what trickle down exudes.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
The private sector isn't crumbling or destroying the economy. It is the private sector that is where wealth is created and causes the economy to grow. Tax cuts didn't cause the recession but ended a recession from 2001. Forcing banks or banks volunteering to provide loans en masse to poor people who couldn't afford the loans created a bubble that burst and caused the recession. The recession under Clinton occured after tax increases under Bush '41, whose policies differed radically from Reagan.
Aegius 2 years ago
Reagan's policies of tax cuts worked. We had one of the largest expansions in economic growth in our nation's history & an end to recession in the early 1980's. There have been 10 recessions since WWII & they were ended by tax cuts. The middle class 2X in size under Reagan & about 17 million jobs were created in the private sector. Bush '41 differed in policies w/tax increases. Democrat policies of providing loans to poor people who couldn't afford it is got us in this recession.
Aegius 2 years ago
reagan's policies of tax cuts worked for the rich. not for the whole of society. eating an ice cream might make you feel good at the moment, but there is a price to pay for eating things that make you fat. reaganomics doesn't account for greed. trickle down economics assumes that people will share the wealth out of the goodness of their hearts, and that never happens. people want more money, no matter how rich they are. and again, no policy of the government made any lender give money to anyone.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
Rich people don't share the wealth out of the goodness of their heart; you don't understand the first thing about economics. The wealth is spread because rich people don't just sit around rubbing their money, they hire people to do the things that made them rich...namely create goods and services. Name one thing you really enjoy that wasn't provided by someone who got rich off it? You live better because of what they do, and then you complain that they're compensated for it.
darwinkilledgod 2 years ago
so me acing macro and micro econ in college doesn't mean anything? i don't understand econ? LOL trickle down econ does not work. rich people do NOT share the wealth they gain. they spend the very bare minimum of money that they can get away with in order to pile up more and more cash. you have your head in the sand if you think that the rich share their wealth. the only wealth they try to create is an increase in their own. they don't give a shit if others make anything.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
I hope you're lying about your college experience.
Rich people do not share the wealth they gain? It depends on what you mean by wealth. You're wrong either way, but there are 2 interpretations.
1. Wealth = money. What do they do with their money? They put it in banks which loan it to people who create jobs and start businesses. Or they spend it, thus giving it to other people in exchange for goods and services.
2. Wealth = the stuff they make. They sell that to people who want it.
darwinkilledgod 2 years ago
why would you hope i was lying about my college experience?
i am not wrong. wealth, meaning money, is not willingly shared. you acting like rich people have the motivation to do things with their money in order to provide wealth to others is absurd as a general premise. you are spewing trickle down econ philosophy, which ruins economies. tax cuts for the rich results in more wealth for the rich, and little else. reagan proved it, bush re-affirmed it. its a terrible, rich get richer policy.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
Money isn't willingly shared? Yes, rich people have the motivation to do things with their money...why else did they earn it? If we allow the rich people to keep the money they earned, they will keep doing what they did to earn it. That's what we want! We want successful people to keep on working. This isn't exotic econ theory...it's Adam Smith. It's what turned a bunch of stupid European rejects and made the richest country on earth out of them.
darwinkilledgod 2 years ago
wealth & profits are not shared. the rich take advantage of the masses and try to squeeze every cent out of everything they possibly can, and stick the $ in their own pockets. they don't share it. giving someone a job that pays them a pittance while raking in huge amounts of money is not just, nor something to be proud of, and certainly not a way of thinking that should be pursued in desire for the common good. trickle down econ feeds the pigs at the trough that are already fat.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
That's Marxist nonsense. If rich people put their money in their own pockets then what are you complaining about? They created stuff to sell and all the rich people have is useless paper! You should be happy. They spend money...i.e. create jobs.
"Take advantage" = willingly trade
"squeeze every cent" = work efficiently
"pays a pittance" = pays what the labor is worth
"just" =/= what uninformed people think who aren't spending their own money
"pigs" = people who make your life better
darwinkilledgod 2 years ago
LOL DWG, you are a joke. you have no common sense, and can't see the literal outcome of enacting policies. the rich people KEEP a disproportionate amount of the money they make. they don't create any wealth for anyone else in many circumstances. at best, they would maintain the standard of living of the masses with their actions, but when unfettered, they continuously try to find ways to make more and more, and that includes gaining wealth that should go to the masses. cont...
slyjokerg 2 years ago
i am not a marxist in the slightest, as i don't want to live in a socialist nation. the spin you put on the things i said are comically inaccurate and silly. especially "pays what the labor is worth". absolute capitalism as a theory would pay the labor nothing, because that is the best way to make more money. the actual value of the labor is not merely a matter of a business unilaterally deciding what it is worth. you are simply a right wing zealot, and don't give a shit about the masses. sad.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
Okay, now I know you were lying about econ classes. You don't pay labor "nothing" because then they quit... You pay them as much as it takes to get the labor you want. And if rich people "keep" money, they put it in a bank. The bank loans it to other people as investments that create jobs, buy homes and cars, etc. They don't just stuff cash in their beds.
Try addressing one of my points instead of throwing insults. I have no doubt that you "feel" you're correct, but try using your mind.
darwinkilledgod 2 years ago
you have a very idealistic, pie in the sky mentality. and that is exactly the foundation of trickle down economics. it is idealistic, and not practical. in theory communism works. in theory absolute capitalism works. neither work in practice because those ideals don't take into account human behavior and desires. i don't just feel i am correct. trickle down doesn't work, AND it does feed the rich more wealth while providing less for the poor. cont....
slyjokerg 2 years ago
Capitalism doesn't take into account human desires? Again, read Adam Smith. The poor in America have gotten massively rich compared to a generation ago. They have DVD players, better cars, better entertainment, access to the internet, faster food, microwaves, cell phones, many have iPods, better medicine (even if not the best medicine) and better computers. Saying I'm idealistic or "trickle down doesn't work" is not an argument. It's a conclusion. Base it on something next time.
darwinkilledgod 2 years ago
of course it takes desires into account, but seldom NEEDS, nor what is fair, decent, or appropriate. greed has too much influence. i don't have a problem with capitalism, i have a problem when it is unfettered. i have read adam smith, but that is immaterial actually. if you please, TRICKLE DOWN IS IN INAPPROPRIATE PHILOSOPHY TO EMPLOY IN OUR ECONOMIC SYSTEM, AS IT FAVORS THE RICH, AND ITS THEORETICAL PRECEPTS DO NOT RESULT FROM THE APPLICATION OF ITS PRINCIPAL IDEAS. there is my opinion.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
are you out of your mind? the private sector's greed has crushed the economy. no self control or self regulation, only trying to squeeze every penny out of every situation mattered, regardless of it being wise or prudent. no one forced the banks to provide loans to unqualified people. that is a total horseshit lie on your part.
slyjokerg 2 years ago
The job of the Jew is to confuse people on all sides.
shasha1873 2 years ago
If there's a liberal reading this.... FUCK YOU NAZI SCUM!
MrBeefmuncher 2 years ago
Keith Olbermann is a complete IDIOT. He sure helps you liberals look like FOOLS.
ksparks2112 2 years ago
Cent Uygur is a complete moron. Expecting idiocy from him is like expecting the sun to rise in the east. Prager stated that "all men are created equal". He was referring to the equality in dignity at birth of every human being. He wasn't referring to equality in outcome in the lives of every person.
Aegius 2 years ago
He is a zionist jew. A cancer in American media.
shasha1873 2 years ago
Fuck you
MrBeefmuncher 2 years ago
Take it easy sunshine.
shasha1873 2 years ago
He should have worded his speech correctly, using simply equality instead of saying economic equality really f'd up what he was trying to say
arahman1900 2 years ago
yea they just weren't listening to prager's speeches. "all men created equal" does not mean all men are given equal rights, it simply means that they are born as equal human beings. choices made along the way dictate how your rights are picked and chosen.
"the equal protection of the law" this does not translate into total equality on all aspects of life. it simply refers to laws, which were created by the majority of people in a democratic state.
fiman16 2 years ago
And from 2000 -2008 we did it Pragers way....tell me who likes the outcome . Like Newt and Rush ..another thrice married rightie loon talking about ethics and equality..spare me
televin 2 years ago
Ha, I thought you would say that. I'll gladly keep my piece of machinery and you can chunk your motherboard back into the earth if you feel it's more valuable there.
HerrSchenkel 3 years ago
Certainly, but you have to admit that a computer is much more valuable than a lump of silicon. Of course labor by itself doesn't create wealth. Somewhere along the chain someone needs resources. And everyone involved needs some knowledge of how to apply their time as labor.
HerrSchenkel 3 years ago
Sounds about right, but I fail to see why you think wealth cannot be grown. As long as you recognize materials (and not the money used to exchange them) are what is considered wealth it becomes obvious that labor (when done right) produces wealth, and with efficient exchanges, the more efficient people can offer us more wealth for which we labor , and these exchanges keep growing.
HerrSchenkel 3 years ago
How do you define wealth?
HerrSchenkel 3 years ago
From where does that wealth come, without a market?
HerrSchenkel 3 years ago
Dennis Prager and Milton Friedman are GOD!
migkillertwo 3 years ago
Shhh shhh, remember there's "no such thing" as that-economic-policy-which-shall-not-be-named. : )
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Advocate1234, you really ought to stop embarrassing yourself :
1) It's obvious you don't know the legal term libel. Libel is used for written and/or printed text. Slander is for verbal expression.
2) Regardless, this is not libel because they are not defaming Prager in any sense, merely disagreeing with his view on Equality.
3) Both Libel/Slander have to be shown to be done with malicious intent - and since Prager is a public figure the standard by which slander is measured differently.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
For someone who excoriates the Left - you'd think you'd know the law a little more clearly.
That said: There are Leftists (i.e. Communists) who believe in "equality of outcomes" - but your attempt to conflate that with the entire Left is intellectually dishonest.
You so-called Conservatives love to talk a good game of "equal opportunity" - but you do not live by them. You're closer to George Orwell's view in Animal Farm - that some animals are merely "more equal than others"
mikepalomino 3 years ago
A typical elitist view to justify the removal of equal opportunities to all.
It is this failed ideology that under Reagan, Bush Sr and Bush Jr - the income gap grew dramatically and economic mobility also shrunk. France has a better economic/social mobility than we do - what does that say about your so-called "equality of opportunity"?
After nearly 30 years in power show me your proof that the Right values equal opportunity?
C'mon - show us the success stories of the Right. Put up or Shut Up.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Hey genius, since it was broadcast in permanent form it can be considered libel.
Moreover, they intentionally took him out of context for the purpose of defaming him. It had malicious intent.
Did you just fail the Bar and have to study up again in the Spring?
Glad you got out your Bar/Bri books to throw up on a YouTube page.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
lol - don't be throwing stones when you're in quite the glass house yourself.
A video recording is not considered written speech. A newspaper, magazine or even web article is considered written speech.
Nice try.
Furthermore, it is neither malicious or defamatory to take someone out of context (especially a public figure).
Defamation is very clearly understood in law as an attempt to hurt or affect someone's reputation. This was clearly neither.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Look, you're just flat-out wrong:
All you have to prove is malice:
1) Knowledge that the statement is false;
2) Reckless disregard as to whether it was false.
Either is true in this case.
Maybe that's why you failed the Bar.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
Yes, of course - and your ad hominem is nothing more than a disguise for your brilliant legal arguments.
Why don't you shoo and go back to recording your "Angry White Man" videos - I can see you're quite the intellectual.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Look, genius; you fired the first shot. Instead of discussing the argument of the video, you were the one who got into legal jargon.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
I did discuss the video's argument - the point still stands this isn't slander (nor is it libel because it's recorded on permanent media - that view alone should disqualify you from making legal opinions. But I digress...)
If Olbermann is liable for slander cuz he didn't acknowledge Prager's idea of "economic equality" vs "political equality"
Then Prager is just as guilty of slander for suggesting Obama's "spread the wealth" is about anything but undoing 30 years of "Trickle Down" economics.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Quote me one Republican in the last 50 years who supported something called "Trickle Down" economics.
Just one.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
Heh, look - you're obviously not stupid - so maybe you think I am, or perhaps you think I'm just parroting what someone else is saying: You and I both know that those who advocate "Trickle Down" don't call it that, they don't even call it by name. It has been known as Supply-Side Economics or Reaganomics.
If you want names how about: Arthur Laffer and Martin Feldstein. All prominent members of Reagan's economic policies.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Quote me one Republican who used the phrase "Trickle Down" economics to describe their policy.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
They along with a host of other politicians have advocated cutting taxes on top earners at the expense of the middle and working classes.
The theory being that prosperity will "trickle" downward as the top earners keep their money.
This has obviously not been the case, as wealth - in the hands of few - tends to concentrate. This is why the income gap has grown over the last eight years and social/economic mobility has stagnated.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Look, you economic illiterates on the Left claim that Republicans advocate trickle down economics and then attack it. Nobody has ever advocated it. Period.
The fact of the matter is that when the bottom 40% pay no income taxes because they get all their deductions back, you cannot give them a tax cut.
Moreover, EVERY business pays employees FIRST. Then what is left, if anything, is called profit.
So trickle down is an imagination. Labor gets paid first genius.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
Okay so Arthur Laffer and Martin Feldstein are just products of my overactive Liberal imagination. They never wrote papers advocating lowering taxes on the top earners - they never had politicians like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush champion their views. These renowned Conservative economists are merely some delusion of my fevered Leftist mind!
In fact, that picture I just saw of Bush & Feldstein must have been doctored by some nefarious Photoshopper intent on keeping my delusion going!
mikepalomino 3 years ago
You find me one quote of Laffer supporting "trickle down" economics.
Top earners have to get lower taxes, because you cannot give lower taxes to people who pay no income taxes.
And, what you ignored is that those "top earners" ALL pay their employees before they even collect a dime. So you mystical trickle down is a figment of your imagination that you created.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
"It's kind of hard to sell 'trickle down,' so the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really 'trickle down.' Supply-side is 'trickle-down' theory."
David Stockman, Ronald Reagan's budget director
Ninjaslippa 3 years ago
That's not a quote. And again what you ignored is that those "top earners" ALL pay their employees before they even collect a dime. So you mystical trickle down is a figment of your imagination that you created.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
I find it fascinating that when discussing your political views you are quite the Objectivist, but when it comes to actually arguing them you resort to the most bizarre relativistic sophistries I have ever seen. So much for being a tried-and-true Conservative!
You can spin it any way you want - Laffer, David Stockman were all Reaganites who advocated Supply-Side Economics, which Stockman himself called "Trickle Down" which as you well know is what the opposition calls it - not its proponents.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
No, I'm sorry; no person in history has ever advocated "Trickle Down" economics. Period. That phrase came from opponents to attack it.
"Tax cuts for the wealthy" aren't even trickle down because, as you seem to ignore, all profits come AFTER employees are paid.
So in order for the rich to get rich, they must FIRST pay those you consider at the bottom if they are even to make a profit at all.
All profits trickle up.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
"all profits come AFTER employees are paid."
You're proving my point exactly - and the numbers demonstrate it. Tax cuts concentrate wealth in the hands of those who determine their employee's salaries. When most corporations prospers they do not share their wealth proportionally with their workers.
This is demonstrated by the income gap which increased over the last eight years. These numbers are much more significant than disposable income.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
"determine employee's salaries"
Salaries are determined by supply and demand. You're an economic illiterate.
When most corporations prosper, their employees by definition prosper.
There isn't a fixed pie...this "income gap is meaningless when the bottom of the gap is constantly improving.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
"income gap is meaningless when the bottom of the gap is constantly improving" : and *I'm* an economic illiterate? Salaries for those NOT in the top 5% have flat-lined and not kept up with inflation.
The way you make your arguments indicates to me you have a need to believe what you're advocating - the way a person of faith needs to believe in God.
While you can't prove or disprove God - your economic "faith" is not supported by the numbers. I suggest you try being a little more rational.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Salaries have not flatlined; in fact, they have increased by 51% since 1970, not including the healthcare benefits.
Look, like I said, you're an economic illiterate.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
Well the U.S. Census Bureau begs to differ with you Mr. Poopy Pants (how's about that for ad hominem?):
money(dot)cnn(dot)com(slash)2008(slash)04(slash)09(slash)news(slash)economy(slash)incomegap(slash)index(dot)htm
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Yeah, great...now you're a statistical illiterate.
You're looking at household income, which only increased by 8% since 1970.
But, real INDIVIDUAL income has increased by 51%.
The reason is because household size has shrunk since 1970.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
Calling you a misanthrope is an insult to misanthropes - why I put up with your attacks is beyond me except that I am an idealist hoping you might (for once) demonstrate some maturity. But alas, you prove me wrong.
That said, my link is only one part of a bigger picture. The Census Bureau data is only part of it. There is a thorough study by the Economic Policy Institute titled "Economys Gains Fail to Reach Most Workers Paychecks" that shows that wages has stagnated compared to inflation.
mikepalomino 3 years ago 2
Great, you cite a Leftist org like EPI, and nothing that you say has any validity since wages have been increasing.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
Naturally, I don't expect you to take the EPI's word for it. I could list a thousand sources - unless the data fits your narrow neo-Liberal biases or unless it was written by Friedman himself or one his Acolytes - you would dismiss it as Liberal Propaganda or spin the information to seem like something else.
So go ahead, have your last word, I know you're aching for it. I for one am not going to waste anymore time having a discussion with someone so shamelessly intellectually dishonest as you.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Moreover, Libel/Slander cases are notoriously difficult to prosecute in American courts - because of the burden of proof required of the plaintiff.
This is why many celebrities sue tabloids in Britain, where the burden of proof is on the defendant, and have been successful (i.e. Tom Cruise).
So please, if you want to say Olberman's a jackass for taking something out of context - fine - but don't try to puff it up by attaching legalese. It won't work.
mikepalomino 3 years ago
Keith Olbermann is a flaming douche. I wish I knew how he is able to live with himself.
HarrySeeword 3 years ago
TYT and Olbermann are tools.
mackdan7 3 years ago
Oh come on! This is such a stupid distortion of liberty, equality, fraternity! How stupid are you? I like your vids about Naomi Klein, because she actually is a bitch and makes antisemitic statements, but this vid? I like Dennis Prager, but he no clue what he is talking about! Of course those liberals distort his view a bit, but to give you some kind of reminder:
KripkeSaul 3 years ago
Its not libel when its true. Whats false and a lie is your premise describing the difference between the left and right. Sad really.
FrankieArts 3 years ago
I probably made a mistake. I clicked on the wrong reply-box. I usually do not talk to people with fecal matter, urine, menstrual blood and syphilis and things of the like in their heads....
cjla1987 3 years ago
Ohhhhhhhhhh my God. What a brilliant insight. I never thought of that. You are totally right. TOTALLY, TOTALLY RIGHT. Blessings for you, man. Thanks. Great job. Thumbs up for your comment.
cjla1987 3 years ago
George Bush earned his money yes.
The rich are rich because they keep doing the right things that make them richer.
The poor are poor because they keep doing the stupid things that make them poorer.
If you're poor, and refuse to work longer hours...it is your fault.
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
Listen, I like the way you think. Poor people still poor because they do stupid things. That is it. Everything that happens to us it is our fault. Thanks you for believing that. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING that happens to us it is our fault. Blame is something that is useless. If you use blame you are immature. That is it. Mature people do not blame others if you notice that. Anyway, I do not give a F*** that Bill Gates is rich. "I bless the man and wish him a 7th airplane." D. Prager.
cjla1987 3 years ago
Nice back peddleing.
He doesn't know the first thing about either revolution!
TheRebel2007 3 years ago
Who are you talking about?
HowTheWorldWorks 3 years ago
Cenk NEEDS to die.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
you don't seem to understand the fact that they are not refering to the first part of the video. They are refering to the video where he said "equality is not an american value" and did not specify that he wasn't also refering to human equality. The radio version of the comment he made adding in that "human equality is an american value" was most likely made after he made first comment that was without specification. Why don't americans understand their own legal system? they abuse it enough..
RedMedium 3 years ago
"All men are created equal" should be removed from the constitution; Prager is right
Nnfefe 3 years ago
they still haven't retracted what they said because they are 100% correct. This is not in any way Libel, the creator of this video is an idiot.
RedMedium 3 years ago
Is this how tax dollars are wasted on Canadian Youth, just teach them to make an argument by fiat without evidence?
Advocate1234 3 years ago
Oh really. It is only libel if there is a defamation of character. First of all, what both cenk and Olberman said was not Libel. They both simply took what prager said, and then argued against it using the Declaration and Bill of Rights. They are both absolutely correct as well. Even in some strange universe were this would be considered Libel. The fact that they were speaking the Truth would have the case thrown out. Maybe you should go back to school.
RedMedium 3 years ago
1) Dennis explained what he was talking about, and everyone listening knew what he was talking about;
2) Either a) Cenk and Olberamann have no understanding of history; or b) they libeled Prager.
Did you not hear Prager quote the DOI.
Again, Canadians evidently wasted their tax dollars to pay for your education.
Advocate1234 3 years ago
Well, I don't know that either of these guys could actually be guilty of libel, but obviously they took his comment out of context. Sure, this is "how the Left works", but its also how the Right works. And Mr. Prager is right in theory about the philosophy of the Republicans, but they only selectively act according to those values. The bailout bait and switch would not have been possible without Republican support. And we're not going to call that Socialism? Why? Because it favored the rich?
cdoc77 3 years ago
And Russia has one of the highest crime rates...Let's all go over to Ethiopia and Hati and India and show them how "working hard" seems to easily pull everyone up by their bootstraps.
ob2kanob 3 years ago
"Lou Dobbs falsely asserted that "just about 40 percent of all Americans -- working Americans -- don't pay taxes." In fact, all American workers are required to pay taxes on their wages for Social Security and Medicare, and people in the United States are also subject to excise taxes." - Media Matters. I could do more of the research 4 you since you're either too lazy or too dumb to do it yourself.
dauoo 3 years ago
That's payroll tax, not income tax. Don't be so damn high and mighty when you don't know the half of it either. Aprx. 40% don't pay INCOME TAX, and they would under Obama's plan be cut a check paid for by those who already pay the vast majority of Income taxes. It's understandable that you didn't know that since it wasn't explicitly stated in all that quote that you presented, but hey that's what research is for.
LSulla 3 years ago
You're an idiot, please look up your facts before trying to make a nonsensical argument on how 40% of "working" Americans don't pay income taxes. Please give me 1, just 1 example of someone that works a legal profession in America and makes over $3k a year doesn't pay income taxes. Or maybe you don't know that not paying your income taxes is against the law. I how you didn't graduate college because if so, please tell me the name of the school so I can make sure no one I know goes there.
dauoo 3 years ago
The "WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD" um except for Olberman himself of course, but that is a given.
HymeraBob 3 years ago 2
So where is the libel?
jfsfrnd 3 years ago
Defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual a negative image. Slander refers to a malicious, false, and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images. Most jurisdictions allow legal actions to deter various kinds of defamation and groundless criticism.
Entropy56 3 years ago
Amen to that, I think people like Prager and Medved have a legitimate case to sue Olbermann for defamation. It's obviously not that he just misunderstands what they mean, it's a calculated misrepresentation meant to make those who disagree with his agenda look like bigots. How he misrepresents teh president is disgusting as well. MSNBC should fire him for such irresponsible, dishonest conduct.
LSulla 3 years ago
wow you're dense.
the original comment was taken out of context, stripped of its meaning and taken to mean nearly the opposite of what Prager actually said. for all their "read the full sentence" sanctimony, they in fact failed to read/listen to his full sentence where he debunks exactly the claims they make about his observation of french vs US ideology.
theMediaFork 3 years ago
Barack Obama!!!
dauoo 3 years ago
They defamed him UNKNOWINGLY? Are you kidding me. Both of these assholes knew exactly what they were doing.
deucegeary 3 years ago
OB2, this country already pays the 2nd highest tax rate in the world. Let me rephrase that, only 50% of the people in this country pay the 2nd highest taxes in the world. When you tax those who work and dont those who dont, your promoting a system that favors lack of productivity and inginuity. Life isnt free of social innequality and the US has infinitely less than any other country in the world with LIBERTY remaining the primary value, not Equality!
ktnoah684 3 years ago
keith is a fool. Dennis is referring to equality related to pay, soceoeconomic status, job(affirmative action), etc. These values are of teh left. THey can only be applied at the expense of others' liberty, the highest value of the right. Obviously that connection requires to much intellectual depth of the host. Its ok if you disagree with the principal, but sad when you cant even understand the intent. Wow.
ktnoah684 3 years ago
Nice Job man, keep it up.
qxdc 3 years ago
"This is how the left works"
I disagree with advocate1234 and In my opinion I think you are an idiot. There, since it's my opinion you can't call it libel. Noob.
lithion 3 years ago
"The right valued libery and equality of opportunity"
Oh right. Equality of opportunity to steal millions if you're a CEO. Euality of oppotunity to take the money from the middle class. Equality of opportunity for minorities. Oh yes it's been very equal. They're just liars - stealing the dough. That's all they are. They've come up with some ideological crap so they can steal it faster, and turned it into a religion for everyone to blind to see it.
Rama0099 3 years ago
Why would some value be american or european? Because the Constitution says one thing or another? Or because the leaders of the independence thought this or that?
American values are the values of americans and they are not fixed ones, much less on law. They are for people to decide themselves, so freedom for example is an american value only in the measure americans choose to value freedom and be free.
So there are other "american" values which are not commonly accepted: greed, violence, etc.
Homofilos 3 years ago
What is greed?
Violence against bad people who would commit violence is good.
Advocate1234 3 years ago
Greed may be the failure to limit one's ambition to a rational, let's say sensible way. But that's not my point. What I say is that there is no such thing as "what America is all about". The people in the U.S. have certain values and that's it.
Of course the state has some basic values like being a republic and a democracy. But all the rest in my view is just the state and the media promoting an ideology which is simply non essential to democracy.
And in the end it's all against democracy...
Homofilos 3 years ago
So who decides how much I should limit my ambition?
Advocate1234 3 years ago
Only you can do that of course. But again that's not the point. I don't see why this greed matter is so important to you. All I say is that american values are not fixed as the people in this video claim. And that some negative values (such as greed) can be considered american in the measure americans embrace them.
Although perhaps I see what your concern is. Perhaps you do not perceive greed as a negative value?
Homofilos 3 years ago
If there are no distinct American values, than America has no values at all.
Advocate1234 3 years ago
Exactly, The United States (like all countries) has no other values to it's self than those that define it as a state/nation: the republic, democracy, and some others.
But including others like life, liberty and the pursuit of hapiness is beyond the common values that a democracy can have, simplily because in a plural society those values will not be always shared.
And when they are imposed by the media or the state you have rather antidemocratic scenario.
Homofilos 3 years ago
You've just disqualified yourself from being taken seriously. American is the only country in the world that was founded on ideas and distinct value system.
Advocate1234 3 years ago
I am sorry that you think so. Because you see, every single country pretends to have it's own unique value sistem which it tries to impose on it's citizens. What I say precicely is that it is for us to decide our own values regardless of those of the state. And even change the state's values.
I see that you have unfortunately believed everything about the American official value sistem. I think that is one of the reasons why the US is on it's downfall: believing it is above all other coutries.
Homofilos 3 years ago
Here is the fundamental brake down between "Left" and "Right":
Liberals want to maximize the use of government to minimize inequalities. Conservatives want to minimize the use of government to maximize freedom.
TimeWarp66 3 years ago
Vote Palin vote stupid.
yourcamden 3 years ago
Hey genius, there are more total people in the top 1% than the bottom 1%, and more total people in the top 20% than the bottom 20%.
The top 20% also pays 70% of all the income taxes.
This isn't a fixed pie. Nobody gives the top 1% the money, they earn it.
And if you are wondering whether or not you are going to be able to eat, get your ass off the computer and get a damn job.
Advocate1234 3 years ago
Aren't you Canadian?
Advocate1234 3 years ago
You're not going to get me to defend the spending over the last 8 years.
All American citizens have Habeas corpus rights.
Speed limits are conditioned on federal funding.
Any state could eliminate it, but would lose funding.
Advocate1234 3 years ago
I'm not picking sides here. But I want to know what's so bad about Europe? They have better schools happier people and less crime?
daddycez 3 years ago
Europe's middleclass is equal to what Americans would consider poor.
Europe has higher violent crime, but a lower murder rate. Europe also has a higher rate of hot burglaries (people breaking into your home when you are at home), because their government disarms their citizens.
Europe taxes people at close to 50% of their income.
Iceland, that was supposed to be the "happiest" place in the world is literally bankrupt now.
They come here for college and when they are sick too.
Advocate1234 3 years ago
Oh, and Europe has a genocide in its own backyard every ten years.
Advocate1234 3 years ago
great vid.
spark300c 3 years ago
My comment below is simply stated, and has to be for a Youtube post, but, I recommend you debate Prager on his show, yours, or in a mediated forum. He has had everyone he disagrees with from Howard Zinn to George Lakoff on his show. Big, big intellectuals. You can take on the "pale/pasty white male", can't you Cenk? Regarding Keith Olbermann debating Dennis Prager, I think I just saw a pig flying passed my window outside. But I will wait for hell to freeze over.
jminsc76 3 years ago
The people are constantly wanting, are the same people who expect you to support them. Get an education, get married, support your kids, and GET A JOB!
KCSteak 3 years ago
To Cenk Uygur: Equality of opportunity IS what Prager is talking about. Not equality of outcome. I.e. the government will not get in the way of any person, from any background (race, creed, religion, etc.), to pursue their goals and dreams. It will NOT provide income redistribution or opportunities to one person/group over another in order to ensure everyone has the same or a similar outcome. That's why liberty AND equality are separate and distinct values. Not mutually exclusive, however.
jminsc76 3 years ago
I think you're not hearing this correctly or you just don't get it. Maybe you don't understand the definitions of liberty or equality? As for the way your post starts out, you're in total agreement with everything that Cenk said so it's obvious to me that you don't get it; just wanting to fall back on your redistribution claim which Obama never said. All you're doing is just regurgitating 'speak' that McCain is feeding you. Somebody please burp this baby.
dauoo 3 years ago
dauoo -- Cenk is misrepresenting Prager's position AND Obama's position. In fact, it looks like Cenk agrees with Prager.
ORagnar 3 years ago
How did you get that? Prager says: That liberals what economic equality(wrong). That economic equality is a French, European value(wrong). That when Obama says,"spread the wealth" they want equality of result(wrong). Are you that naive? Is Prager your Sensei? Please answer this: do you honestly believe that the Dems what everyone to have economic equality? Do your homework before you follow everyone off the cliff. You don't want to be standing with this guy on the wrong side of history.
dauoo 3 years ago
dauoo -- What the hell are you talking about? I am absolutely right on all counts. Liberals push for equality in all areas. Affirmative action? Diversity? Come on, it's all over the place. They always vilify the rich, as Obama has, by implying they are somehow wrong for earning lots of wealth. I'm on the right side of history. I endorse individual rights and liberty. I'm against state control of our lives. Eliminate the fda, epa, fcc, etc. Cut taxes to zero.
ORagnar