Fade to Black





----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Emr:  A Texas Tea Party leader admitted recently what most of us already knew, the Republican party doesn’t want African-Americans to vote. When asked at a meeting of Texas Republicans “what can Republicans do to get black people to vote,” a Texas Tea Party leader, Ken Emanuelson, gave the following answer: “I’m going to be real honest with you, the Republican Party doesn’t want black people to vote if they’re going to vote 9-to-1 for Democrats.”
I knew that, did you?

Linda Sampson Rotella   One honest TP goon...must have thought it was a secret meeting and had their white hooded sheets on...

Jesse LoRe  [at the time of this dialogue, Jesse used a portrait of Mark Twain as a "Profile" icon to identify himself on FaceBook] John, I believe it is a qualified statement using the word "if" and I would take it one step farther and say I don't want anyone to vote DemoFascist. Have a great day.

Jeff Thomas   Courting the black vote warrants an "if" when the Republican/Conservative/Tea Party/Libertarian platform is starved of new ideas. (note to Jesse: "Obstructionism" is not a new idea.)
Why waste the time and effort pretending to be "inclusive" when you can just target the voting process and be done with it?

John Emr   Jeff, Jesse is an independent Libertarian, that doesn't necessarily mean he wants racist Neanderthal Republicans in office either, right Jesse? Or do you? Are you a fan of Louis Gohmert? Would you like a congress full of that shit?

Jeff Thomas    . . . and Jesse, you might want to familiarize a bit more with the writings of Mark Twain. You'll find your selection ironic at best. He pretty much despised the very philosophy you Libertarians call "common sense."
Here's a taste, compatible to a brief attention span:
http://www.henrygeorge.org/archimedes.htm
. . . have a great day.

John Emr   Voter suppression is the only way they'll ever win. Extraordinary, no? Ah, American ingenuity at work...

Jesse LoRe   Jeff you say "brief attention span" like that is a bad thing. Why is being mentally deficient a dis-qualifier? Do not those of us with limited intellect deserve the same extra-consideration of, say women in combat, or minorities with lower test scores? Or does your compassion only extend to those that agree with you? Just a thought for Jeff "Mr. Equality" Thomas, aka 'Mr Compassion'.

John Emr   Jesse, I suspect he was specifically referring to you, not all those with "brief attention spans". Stop playing victim, you know you're not...

Jeff Thomas   Ouch . . . although your disingenuous compassion toward the subject of minorities and the disabled leads me to believe I might be helping change your outlook.
I'd be better convinced if the reference you attach to "brief attention span" was restricted to your narrow, spiteful interpretation; however, by simply observing the hay of which a perfectly intelligent man such as your self has made of skimming the surface of these many complex issues; of forming entire platitudes from the crumb-tray of anecdote; I would be hard pressed to restrict the term "brief attention" to the cognitively handicapped.
Now before you take off in some other, unrelated direction, did you learn anything new about your old "hero" Sam.

Jesse LoRe   Jeff, I am afraid your genetically stunted intellect precludes you from reading the words that you so hastily post. Please take the time to read the article you posted and relate that to the circumstance of Americans, visa vi, Sam's perspective as it relates to our current form of "self governance".

Jeff Thomas   Jesse, I thank you for being patient with me; I have indeed squandered too much time with you, assuming that some relic of pride or decency might eventually surface from the cesspool of your rhetoric, (ref: your twin FB posts, from April: "I hate ni##ers". . . . . to some credit however, your daughter scolded you).
You are, plain and simply, unfocused. The essay is not a shuttlecock to be swatted back and forth. It is a document worthy of critique, an exposition of a man and his thoughts. Like the man who wrote it, it is not infallible; it deserves to be read and discussed, not rolled up in your fist to swat pests.

"Give me the private ownership of all the land, and will I move the earth? No; but I will do more. I will undertake to make slaves of all the human beings on the face of it. Not chattel slaves exactly, but slaves nevertheless" - Mark Twain

I hazard to guess you might recognize this from the essay. This would have been a constructive place to begin. Your bigotry simply cannot bear up to scrutiny. Sam has become your eggshell figurehead; to protect one pithy phrase, you would deny the truth of the very man who wrote it.
At this point, I assume you've already folded it into a paper hat. It would be impossible for someone with your remarkable erudition to have completely subjugated the thesis without intention. Your style of debate is as reckless as the politics you employ it to protect.
I like you, but suggest you practice your dialogue on someone less experienced before coming back to be humiliated by me again. (. . just a note: it's "vis a vis", not "visa vi" . . . have a great day.)
- 'Mr Compassion'

Jesse LoRe   Jeff, thanks for pointing to an abbreviation of my deficiencies and thanks again for caring enough to share.
As to my debate style: I did not realize this was a debate. I thought the idea was for us to sit idle while you drone on and on about yourself and fling insults. But if you want to have a civilized debate about Twark Main’s writing I would be glad to . Is Facebook the proper forum? Is brevity wasted here?
The quotation is just that, a quote, regardless of Clemmons’ political bent, the words sum up my perception of the ruling class in America today. As well as citing one quote by an author, (Clemmons) that some have described as the "Father of American literature" hardly elevates him to the status of "eggshell figurehead". I can state without hesitation Clemmons would not share your, complete and unquestioned trust in politicians, of any Party , to Lord over mankind in a just manner.

Is this really the source you want to use to support your thesis? Whatever that is? Some doctored up article of questionable origin. “If Mark Twain wrote the shorter version, did someone else contribute to the longer one attributed to “Twark Main”?” Dr. Jim Zwick, (http://www.georgistjournal.org/2012/09/14/mark-twain-and-the-single-tax/) The evidence points to this article having been written at least in part to Henry George.
However I am still not clear as to your point about Clemmons, are you saying that he advocated abandoning common sense in favor of the ideas of academics elitist, and is this article alone, what you are basing your argument on? Does Clemmons advocacy of the Single Tax make him a socialist? My understanding of the academic argument is that Clemmons “cherry-picked” the ideas of the Single Tax and Social Gospel movements that sought his approval to promote their cause. He is said to have supported the public ownership of utilities and infrastructure, but Clemmons also had the common sense to realize that no workable alternative to private ownership which did not restrict personal freedom and the right for one to enjoy the fruits of his labor had presented itself.
Also considering Clemmons many personal tragedies, [the deaths of his children] and financial troubles as a result of failed investments Clemmons view of the World had certainly become jaded at least a little. Also, you have to give consideration to the time in which Clemmons lived. He lived in a world where a slave owner could “put down” a man if he violated the wishes of his master or was no longer of use to him, where workers (of all colors) toiled on the land they could not own in exchange for the barest of sustenance. The world was in turmoil as the industrial age was in full swing and society was in transition from one socio-economic paradigm to another and as always happens the poor got poorer and the rich got richer. My observation Clemmons remained an observer, more so than an activist.
http://www.henrygeorge.org/archimedes.htm
http://www.georgistjournal.org/2012/09/14/mark-twain-and-the-single-tax/
http://www.biography.com/people/mark-twain-9512564

Jeff Thomas   A good pie fight ends when the shelves are cleared and not before, not the least concerned with who's hand tossed the first shell. There's been more than enough pastry hurled between the two of us to accept anything less than a commitment to stop and laugh at the filling-smeared portraits we've created for one another. You're no more victim than I am. Jolly good that!
My "thesis" continues to be a search for an alternative to the current corporate, libertarian and/or conservative climate which vilifies any discussion of government entitlements to this society's most vulnerable. A large collection of my views on the subject, covering a wide variety of "contemporary" issues can be accessed through this link:
http://jeffreygiov.blogspot.com/?zx=d991f9540c07af43
Here you will find evidence of my work, through dialogues, (most recently a debate with you, imagine that?), conversations and essays.
I respect and appreciate the effort with which you prepared your outstanding response. I also acknowledge that the integrity of the article's authorship is now officially suspect, though not without the obligatory dose of "conspiracy" subjectives: e.g.: "...did someone else contribute ...?"; "...the doubled length of the published article also raises a possibility of joint authorship; and "Did Twain also share the article with Beard, clarifying what “he’ll understand” about the free reign given him in creating the illustrations for the novel?"
I mention this to emphasize the mounting distraction resulting from our stubborn reference to Twain the man (available to us only through a malleable impression of his works), and Twain, the immutable icon of your embrace of Capitalist alienation. These were ideas (ref: Archimedes, Single Tax, Marxism) born of a post European revolution by the proletariat against the bourgeoisie; a struggle as old as "production" itself, yet whose incarnations are as unique to their times as the concept of "Universal Health Care" would be to mid-nineteenth century American sensibilities (read: untranslatable.)
FB is an unusual medium to invest more "capital" in such a rich topic, but I have to conclude by suggesting that your concept of Unrestricted Privatization under the cloak of Unbridled freedom from government intervention is desperately flawed. The freedom from Entitlements cannot answer to the right of a society's disadvantaged to avail themselves of enough resources to supply their basic needs, their humanity.
 

Jesse LoRe   Jeff,why am I not surprised by the obligatory, shameless plug for your collection of meandering ramblings.
Like Clemmons. your frame of reference is has been scaled over by progress for the human condition over the last century to the point you can barely recognize the dead form.
Just a thought maybe we should move this over to another page and leave John out of it. LMAO.
 . . . Have a great!

 

John Emr   It's funny, some people advocate cutting taxes so they see a few dollars more at the end of the year not realizing(blockheads) or caring(greedy) that this would devastate millions of people of whom the dream called "America" has evaded. I think you're both intelligent people, but let's acknowledge, we know plenty of people who are not. I'd like my taxes to be lower too, but not at the expense of people who don't or can't work the free market economy

http://youtu.be/CdAZ79AhcfY (note: this is a link to an edit from the Mr. Rodgers PBS children's show)

There's so much in this world we can learn, no matter how young or how old we are... 

 

Jeff Thomas   Jesse, . . . and why is it tediously predictable of you to frame every benevolent gesture with pig-headed suspicion? Your tendency to forget the questions you ask has become annoying, but for the sake of integrity, I'll continue the example I have set for you with the prospect you're not yet too damaged to learn.
Information seems to frighten you, so it is small wonder, the fascination it holds; anything so potent, it follows, must hold great value. Is this why you confuse my invitation to explore the form and content of my politics (my "thesis" as you put it) with a commodity? One "plugs" something for profit and "shares" something for which he expects no return. But then, it is my fault for assuming you were more clever with the concept of sharing.
If by "scaled over" you are attempting to express the idea that our perpetual concern for the "human condition" has, through contemporary enterprise, been rendered inconsequential, I politely refer you back to my dear friend John Emr, who initiates these discussions for the very dialectic exercise we are "guilty" of. What better use of this space than to crush the life out of an idea as selfish, contemptible and medieval as your own. And please, for the sake of my sanity, look up words and phrases you don't know. I'm tired of mining your words for meaning.
Have a greater day than yesterday.

 

(. . . and John, I was wondering if you know anything that might support the story about Fred's preference for zippered sweaters over buttons. My sources tell me that he skipped a button hole one time on primetime and was mortified. It was all zippers from then . . . true?)

 

John Emr   Since childhood, the sweaters were all made by his mother, and he preferred zippers, never buttons...

 

Jeff Thomas     . . . oh. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . so it was never buttons then . .. . . .. .. . . . I see.

 

Jesse LoRe   Jeff. 'scale deposits' such as lime or rust that tend collect on inanimate objects, like your politics.

Jeff Thomas   . . . and Jesse: Your reply about the "Archimedes" essay was far more involved than my reply. I would like you to understand my sincere appreciation of the work involved. FB, as you point out, is a difficult medium to address issues of such breadth, but worth the effort to sharpen our pens.
You ask what influence this article has on my "thesis"/"argument." I offered this essay as one might suggest a YouTube file from an old Jon Stewart show. I simply found it funny that you have replaced your profile picture with Sam's likeness and a quote of his, "not measuring what use he made of it" (Shakespeare, Henry V.) Your explanation was satisfactory to the task. Thanks.
It is as ridiculous to extrapolate my entire ethics from this essay as it would be to plumb the depths of Jon Stewart's body of work to understand the details of our economy.
and this:
" . . . where workers (of all colors) toiled on the land they could not own in exchange for the barest of sustenance."
Have you come across the term "alienation"? Marx coined this phrase to describe the ownership by one class of the diminished labor of another class. I ask because your context of the phrase in question seems to betray a sentiment at odds with a Capitalist model. How do you feel about this?

Oh, and by the by,  so you get the pun: "mining your words" . . . thank you.

Jesse LoRe I thought the quote expressed my feelings of disenfranchisement, and my feelings of a government that is against me, not just on the local level but on all levels. Not just against me but "for" the other guy. A government of good intentions and unforeseen consequences equals chaos, which is what we have now. I may not be sophisticated by any standard, but at least I have the benefit of knowing that what I say is true. Not sure what your experience is Jeff, but it does not sound like you have spent much time around the low or lower lower socioeconomic class. I am curious if you have ever, intentionally, been overseas to examine other cultures?

I realize (not sure if you do) that there will always exist the 20% of the population that is incapable of "taking care of themselves" and the debate we are having is what to do with these folks.
My position, which I think is reasonable is this:a safety net for the least able. The social experiment of the Great Society has failed. As evidence I point to the $17 trillion in national debt compared to the $18 trillion "invested" in the socialist movement. However noble an enterprise the Great Society "was", as it has morphed into full on Socialism, there is NO evidence that it has provided any catalyst to lift anyone out of poverty (with possible exception of thieves/politicians) in fact I say it has institutionalized poverty. I contend the government of the last 50 years has created a false economy that, as by the laws of nature will collapse. Government meddling in the economy prolongs recessions and actually insures that we have one regularly. Think of the government like the alcoholic or drug addict, conventional wisdom says they have to hit bottom before they can begin to recover. The same goes for the economy you have to weed out the bad, let the money change hands, so we get back to the business of making more of it. A good for you, is good for me, philosophy. Not a society where you take half of everything I make and give it to some schlep that can't earn.

I am not saying do nothing, just 'scale' it back to a more manageable level, and weed out the fraud and abuse that would more than make up any deficit. But no, our politicians are to lazy and greedy to do the real work of governing. As a Building Contractor in a past life, I cannot count how many times I have heard from public officials, how they had to 'spend it' or they would get their budgets cut, as if they were protecting their little fiefdom. How much sense does that make to you? What about all the deadbeat dads who's children you are supporting? Are you encouraging bad behavior? By what standard is that bad behavior you ask? By the standard of,"if you cannot afford to have kids then don't, fucking, have kids. What are you, a farmer with no tractor that you need 22 kids?

Jon Stewart---really!!!!! Guess I just never developed a taste for screaming and yelling as a form of entertainment. You, have fun with that though.

Jeff Thomas   You've lost the privilege of conjecture. You know nothing about me. My personal history would humble your smuggest efforts to discredit me. If you detect some resentment, try and recall the fun you had composing "genetically stunted intellect " after I shared personal, family related information concerning such matters. I was perfectly willing to let it ride, along with the rest of your jabs, but you now attempt to weave them into your thesis. Enough is enough.
The suggestion that you've cornered the market on "hardship" is simply irrelevant and egocentric.

You have finally conceded the need for specific entitlements for some abstract 20%. All your writing to this date suggest this is a new twist in your thinking. How is it possible to reconcile your claim:
"Not a society where you take half of everything I make and give it to some schlep that can't earn."
(Here we have the opportunity to explore the tangent issue: "You didn't make that.")

You blame the government for the recession. My thoughts on this subject begin here (not a plug, but a link to some information you are conceivably unaware of):
http://jeffreygiov.blogspot.com/2009/08/shortly-after-class-economics-student.html

I haven't time to continue right now, but I will finish by adding that it seems we're really not so far apart after all. There is much common ground between us. I hope to meet you there soon.

Jesse LoRe Ah Jeff I thought we were having fun here? As for the jab, chaulk that up to "short attention span" probably a symptom of to many blows to the head. Surely you do not credit me with being able to recall something that far in the past. I am not attempting to weave anything, just trying to offer some insight into how my perspective is formed. I would be that last person to complain about my circumstance as the my experience tells me I have no legitimate claim on misery. You are right that we do have more common ground than is apparent I believe where diverge is on the solution side. In closing I apprrciate your patience with my stunted intellect and apologize for the jab. Have to run finish up later. Thanks.

John Emr It will not be finished until one of you is dead.

Jeff Thomas Just needed to let you know it pissed me off. Thanks for writing back; explanation understood, apology accepted. . . took a few too many blows to the head myself over the years.