Obama's Constitution twisting: His arrogant claims are worse than Nixon's

[caroljane]

lol

[caroljane]

(Curses, foiled again)

A pristine bottle will be offered by your ear-whispering slave and I will taste first.

[Frediano]

Other than ObamaCare, has Obama attempted anything that tops the audacity of Nixon's 1970 Economic Stabilization Act?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_1970

If Obama put forward this same legislation today, he'd rightfully be accused of stealing a lost chapter from Atlas Shrugged, verbatim.

The Economic Stabilization Act of 1970 (Pub.L. 91–379, 84 Stat. 799, enacted August 15, 1970) was a United States law that authorized the President to stabilize prices, rents, wages,salaries, interest rates, dividends and similar transfers.^[1] It established standards to serve as a guide for determining levels of wages, prices, etc., which would allow for adjustments, exceptions and variations to prevent inequities, taking into account changes in productivity, cost of living and other pertinent factors.^[2]

Let freedom ring there, Dick. Jesus, what a horror show Nixon was.

Vietnam: "Never mind, we really didn't mean it...er...Peace with Honor!"

JFK's Space Program: "Over my dead body."

Bretton Woods: 'Burn the mother!"

How can I forget: "I am a Keynsian now, too." (No you weren't; poor abused Keynes had two parts to his theory. No politico ever glommed onto the running uphill save/paydown debt half, only the running downhill borrow/spend half. And we wonder why we are at the bottom of the hill?"

The Imperial White House... piling on to hapless George McGovern in the 72 election....

Who grew the federal government more than Nixon, Reagan and Bush '43?

Obama is giving them a run for our money.

[Frediano]

You could just see Nixon grimacing when he had to congratulate the astronauts on the Moon, bristling at his ceremonial duties to honor JFK's legacy. If you listen real closely,you can hear him muttering, "Ok, ok, great...now get the fuck back here so I can shut this mother f'n puppy down."

[Frediano]

But here is the great equalizer: Nixon was a lawyer...and so was Obama.

[caroljane]

So is Harvey Levin. So what?

[Frediano]

You know what the economic crisis in 1970 was?

A demographic induced recession that peaked with unemployment at 6.1%.

Of course, that was back when unemployment was actually measured. Today that rate would be reported as 2.8%...

1970. Boomers not yet fully in workplace, but fully in the crosshairs of demographic youth group being marketed to. Businesses trying to expand to market to the Boomers could not grow workforce fast enough...and this led to a recession in the economies, caused by lack of manpower.

The opposite demographic problem we have today.

Unemployment -peaked- at 6.1% in that recession, and that isn't comparing apples to apples; they actually measured unemployment back then.

[Frediano]

So is Harvey Levin. So what?

Well, so is a quarter inch thick of most yellow pages.

Indeed.

If a 25 yr old kid wants a crap job with any one of them, he's got to pony up his college transcript.

If Obama or some other fool wants to 'run the[sic] economy', nobody asks to see anything except a few poses in front of a lectern.

Explain that one to me.

[caroljane]

But politics is not a meritocracy, of itself or the disciplines in which the politicians are trained. It is politics.

I don't really understand your comment.

[Brant Gaede]

So is Harvey Levin. So what?

Well, so is a quarter inch thick of most yellow pages.

Indeed.

If a 25 yr old kid wants a crap job with any one of them, he's got to pony up his college transcript.

If Obama or some other fool wants to 'run the[sic] economy', nobody asks to see anything except a few poses in front of a lectern.

Explain that one to me.

Obama has always gotten Media passes for stuff the media would hang a Republican for in an instant. This country is ruled by the media which are constantly fed by college journalism schools turning out uneducated but biased incompetents, 90% of them Democrats.

--Brant

[Frediano]

It is politics.

My personal meta definition(may not be yours) of the seldom defined word 'politics:'

Politics: the art and science of getting what we want from others using any means short of violence.

Mega-politics: the superset that includes violence.

There are other instances of definitions, many of them circular. On separate occasions, I asked recent graduates of both Duke and Syracuse -- both claimed to be "political science majors" -- if they could, after four years, define for me their working definition of the word 'politics.' Not 'the' definition (there is no single definition -- the 'wiki' example is an instance, not a meta definition) but, their working definition. They both stared at me like I had C4 strapped to my chest. They hemmed and hawed. The girl from Duke finally admitted, "I never thought about that." She'd been studying something called "Political Science" for four years at a major university. The boy from Syracuse finally erupted with "Uh...you know; political parties and stuff."

Other instances(not meta-definitions):

"Politics: the art of governing others(when what you want is to convince them to let you govern them.).

"Politics: the art of who gets what(when what you want from others is to convince them to let you be the emperor of who gets what.)

My meta-definitions fits all of the above. Maybe there is a better meta definition. Once, when I was in search of 'the definition' --or at least, a definition that did not circularly refer to 'politics' or 'political' like a snake eating its tail--, I came across a set of materials for educators on the UNESCO website. In it was the admission "there is no widely accepted single authoritative definition of the word 'politics.' If you think about that, the reason is obvious; the reason is purely political. And the surprising thing is, when I say what would never be accepted in any other context of defining a word, that you do know what I mean, even if you deny it.

So by necessity, I've established my meta-definition, which I will cling to until someone provides a better meta-definition of the word, at which point I will gladly substitute theirs..

Sometimes what we want from others is to ask for the time of day, and our strategy is 'to ask for it."

Ditto the TV Remote, a material thing, though largely useless, except for reruns of Honey Boo-Boo..

Sometimes what we want is Kuwait. And then, there is everything in between.

Sometimes what we want from others is to ride them as our birthright like they were tribal public property ponies.

Sometimes what we want from others is to be left alone to live in peace.

Both of those are political wants, though they are not symmetric on any axis of aggression.

Before I could possibly parse your comment, I'd have to understand what your definition of the word 'politics' is.

Especially, what is so special about that definition of politics that it should shield one from the requirement of demonstrating competence before taking on the job of "running the[sic] economy?"

Politics: the most used and least defined word in political debate. And yes--think about it. The reason it is never defined is precisely ... political. It is a more powerful, all encompassing word if left undefined. Without definition, you can make claims like "It is political" and then pretend that something has been argued or conveyed.

It is political. Oh, well then; check the reason at the door. After all; It is political.

[caroljane]

"The art of the possible" is how I have usually thought about it, I guess. It sure isn't a science.

[Frediano]

But politics is not a meritocracy, of itself or the disciplines in which the politicians are trained. It is politics.

But politics is not xxxx...It is politics.

I don't really understand your comment.

Right back at you.

[Frediano]

"The art of the possible" is how I have usually thought about it, I guess. It sure isn't a science.

Now we're getting somewhere: you believe that the reason it is reasonable to ask 25 year old kids getting crap jobs in cubicles to pony up their college resumes before assuming those kind of jobs, while at the same time, it is reasonable not to ask a man who claims to want to 'run the[sic] economy' or even just 17% of it, to see his college transcript and credentials and qualifications for that job, because the latter is engaged in, quote, "The art of the possible."

Is that about right? Please correct me if I've misrepresented your meaning. If that's what you mean, then that is what you mean.

[Frediano]

While you are depending on Otto von Bismarck for your definition of 'politics', here are some more of OvB's greatest hits:

Get quotes daily

Sign in with Facebook

Sign in
options

Otto von Bismarck > Quotes

Otto von Bismarck quotes (showing 1-30 of 36)

“People never lie so much as before an election, during a war, or after a hunt.”
― Otto von Bismarck

tags: lies

30 people liked it

like

“Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others.”
― Otto von Bismarck

30 people liked it

like

“It is the destiny of the weak to be devoured by the strong.”
― Otto von Bismarck

Jesus, that last one was a bit strong, don't you think? What would labor leader A. Philip Randolph say about that?

"At the Banquet Table of Nature, there are no reserved seats; you get what you can take; you keep what you can hold."

Wise men.

[Frediano]

We are exchanging ideas in a section of this site titled 'Politics'

We chose to come here.

Surely, we must know what we're about.

It is politics.

[Frediano]

I must disclose what I want from others by being here: I've disclosed it many times in many contexts. "To participate in my cheap alternative to much needed therapy."

And, thank you for doing so. That's it, I swear.

[Frediano]

But Shirley we can discuss politics wihout being engaged in politics????

[Mikee]

Politics is the art of manipulating others into giving you what you can't get for yourself. A baby crying is practicing politics. That's why women are so often liberals.

[Frediano]

Politics is the art of manipulating others into giving you what you can't get for yourself. A baby crying is practicing politics. That's why women are so often liberals.

That is another insight into why the word politics is never accurately defined; the last thing in the world politicians want is for those they are begging, cajoling, and huckstering to clearly understanding what the Hell the activity is really about.

Hell; they have most of us convinced they are engaged in some kind of honarable tradition, even as we despise what they are all doing. That is some politics.

The beggars in Media (please lets us keep making a living doing this, we really never want to get anywhere near a real job) have the nation perseverating on politics 24/7/365 every year, not just during election years.

Just, not in any informed way.

That's so unfair to journalists; do I think it is easy to put opinions down in writing?

[Selene]

Maybe, us being influenced by the mother of Objectivism, and her owning up to one figure she was indebted to for some insight and guidance;

Aristotle called politics one of the true sciences...

1. Political Science in General

The modern word ‘political’ derives from the Greek politikos, ‘of, or pertaining to, the polis’. (The Greek term polis will be translated here as ‘city-state’. It is also translated as ‘city’ or ‘polis’, or simply anglicized as ‘polis’. City-states like Athens and Sparta were relatively small and cohesive units, in which political, religious, and cultural concerns were intertwined. The extent of their similarity to modern nation-states is controversial.) Aristotle's word for ‘politics’ is politikê, which is short for politikê epistêmê or ‘political science’. It belongs to one of the three main branches of science, which Aristotle distinguishes by their ends or objects. Contemplative science (including physics and metaphysics) is concerned with truth or knowledge for its own sake; practical science with good action; and productive science with making useful or beautiful objects (Top. VI.6.145a14–16, Met. VI.1.1025b24, XI.7.1064a16–19, EN VI.2.1139a26–8). Politics is a practical science, since it is concerned with the noble action or happiness of the citizens (although it resembles a productive science in that it seeks to create, preserve, and reform political systems). Aristotle thus understands politics as a normative or prescriptive discipline rather than as a purely empirical or descriptive inquiry.

In the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle describes his subject matter as political science, which he characterizes as the most authoritative science. It prescribes which sciences are to be studied in the city-state, and the others -- such as military science, household management, and rhetoric — fall under its authority. Since it governs the other practical sciences, their ends serve as means to its end, which is nothing less than the human good. “Even if the end is the same for an individual and for a city-state, that of the city-state seems at any rate greater and more complete to attain and preserve. For although it is worthy to attain it for only an individual, it is nobler and more divine to do so for a nation or city-state” (EN I.2.1094b7-10). Aristotle's political science encompasses the two fields which modern philosophers distinguish as ethics and political philosophy. (See the entry on Aristotle's ethics.) Political philosophy in the narrow sense is roughly speaking the subject of his treatise called the Politics. For a further discussion of this topic, see the following supplementary document

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-politics/#PolSci

At least we can all agree with this as a definition to start an argument from...

[caroljane]

Is this why the waitress is practicing politics while the businessmen slowly get stoned?

[Frediano]

Maybe, us being influenced by the mother of Objectivism, and her owning up to one figure she was indebted to for some insight and guidance;

Aristotle called politics one of the true sciences...

1. Political Science in General

The modern word ‘political’ derives from the Greek politikos, ‘of, or pertaining to, the polis’. (The Greek term polis will be translated here as ‘city-state’. It is also translated as ‘city’ or ‘polis’, or simply anglicized as ‘polis’. City-states like Athens and Sparta were relatively small and cohesive units, in which political, religious, and cultural concerns were intertwined. The extent of their similarity to modern nation-states is controversial.) Aristotle's word for ‘politics’ is politikê, which is short for politikê epistêmê or ‘political science’. It belongs to one of the three main branches of science, which Aristotle distinguishes by their ends or objects. Contemplative science (including physics and metaphysics) is concerned with truth or knowledge for its own sake; practical science with good action; and productive science with making useful or beautiful objects (Top. VI.6.145a14–16, Met. VI.1.1025b24, XI.7.1064a16–19, EN VI.2.1139a26–8). Politics is a practical science, since it is concerned with the noble action or happiness of the citizens (although it resembles a productive science in that it seeks to create, preserve, and reform political systems). Aristotle thus understands politics as a normative or prescriptive discipline rather than as a purely empirical or descriptive inquiry.

In the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle describes his subject matter as political science, which he characterizes as the most authoritative science. It prescribes which sciences are to be studied in the city-state, and the others -- such as military science, household management, and rhetoric — fall under its authority. Since it governs the other practical sciences, their ends serve as means to its end, which is nothing less than the human good. “Even if the end is the same for an individual and for a city-state, that of the city-state seems at any rate greater and more complete to attain and preserve. For although it is worthy to attain it for only an individual, it is nobler and more divine to do so for a nation or city-state” (EN I.2.1094b7-10). Aristotle's political science encompasses the two fields which modern philosophers distinguish as ethics and political philosophy. (See the entry on Aristotle's ethics.) Political philosophy in the narrow sense is roughly speaking the subject of his treatise called the Politics. For a further discussion of this topic, see the following supplementary document

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-politics/#PolSci

At least we can all agree with this as a definition to start an argument from...

In total, that is one of the most blatantly political definitions of the word 'politics' I've ever seen. Including your last unilateral assertion. Ha!

Lets see if it sheds any light on what was asserted up thread: It is reasonable to require aspiring cublicle denizens to pony up college transcripts for crap jobs, while at the same time, it is also reasonable not to require same of politicos intent on 'running the[sic] economy' because the latter are involved in something pertaining to the city-state concerned with the noble action or happiness of 'the' citizens.

Well, Ok, but apparently the crap jobs in the cubicles have more demanding requirements than all that ill defined goo.

What doesn't pertain to the city-state concerned with the noble action or happiness of the citizens?

Is it impolite of me to point out that the quoted definition came from a political science department? Methinks it might be a little self serving. These are academic entities which can pump out political science majors totally flabbergasted when asked to simply provide 'a' definition of the word politics, and yet, they claim to build critters able to put under their 'authority' such things as military science, household management, and rhetoric — which 'fall under its authority'

Seriously? I wouldn't assess the average politsci major as able to authoritatively rule a bag of cats, much less, 'the' city-state, but even so, should one show up claiming such ability, as in, running the[sic] or 17% of the[sic] economy. I'm still looking for the first explanation as to why a peek at the college transcripts is not only not reasonably in order but an absolute necessity, relative to your basic cubicle denizen seeking to take over his expense account?.

[Frediano]

This is kind of a hoot. See, nobody can just come out and tell us what the word politics means; it always ... pertains to something. It is ... concerned with something. And in this latest example, something very concrete, like ... the noble action or happiness of the citizens.

Seriously. What the fuck is it? What it 'pertains' to ... what it is 'concerned' with ... is so vague as to be completely meaningless.

And by 'the noble action or happiness of the citizens' does that mean of all citizens or of connected crony interest goups?

No wonder we can't stand politicians. They are 'concerned' with .... whatever whim suits them, like Emperor wannabes.

If a carny huckster rolled into the tribe and wanted to take it over, his first act would be to make up a new word that could mean absolutely anything, and then constantly refer to it as his justifcation for doing whatever he wanted.

[caroljane]

Cool down, relax. The waitress will pracise the politics while the businessmen slowly get stoned, deciding what politics are.