I think you're having an argument with yourself. That or you didn't read anything I said.

> So let's see Mr Juppo, if we understand you
> correctly - all you want is redistribution of
> somebody else's wealth, but not your own of course
> - and you have no intention of getting your way
> via the ballot box; but instead by violence in the
> streets! While at the same time you demonstrate
> your ready willingness to abridge the rights of
> fellow citizens. I wonder what rights any citizen
> will have left, if your ilk ever gets in power,
> thus getting their way unrestrained.


What people want is to be given back what was TAKEN from them, not expectations of having someone else' money handed over directly into their individual pockets. This isn't about personal spending money or some non-existant Socialist agenda. This has been explained over and over. The taxpayers give billions of public dollars to bailout failed corporations and failed banks who wrote the mortgages and loans to hundreds of thousands if not several million people in the preceding decade knowing they were junk would eventually default but not before pocketing BILLIONS of other people's dollars. You want to talk about "redistribution of wealth?" What the hell do you call that? Any regulation that existed on the banks was slowly stripped away allowing this catastrophe to happen.


> But apparently, you are profoundly ignorant of
> history, as well as lawless. First of all; for
> the most part, those that took part in the
> American Revolution, did so via legitimate act of
> the Continental Congress, and by joining
> Congressionally appointed and regulated militias;
> not by rioting in the streets. And that Congress
> WAS ELECTED AT THE BALLOT BOX!

I should have been more specific, I was referring to the tax revolt and subsequent revolution against the British, who were our governing body. I'm sure if you asked aristocratic or Imperial leaders in the late 1700's and early 1800's, they would be spouting the same rhetoric as you.


>
> It did its revolution in accord with the
> established law of the land.
There is nothing at
> all un-American about insisting that things still
> be decided that way - at the ballot box.

In theory and in a perfect world sure. I would love to believe that simply rallying voters and sending them to the ballots would restructure our entire economic and governing system into something far more equitable and sustainable, but I can see that is an impossibility. If what you say is true, Al Gore would have president in 2000, not Bush. I'm no Gore the Bore fan myself, but I'm sure we never would have gone to war for the last decade, wasting 500 Billion dollars a year on a pointless war with no positive outcome for anyone except the corporate interests that got awarded the reconstruction and security contracts. I wonder how many schools, roads, parks and hospitals we could have built and funded and how many more we could have repaired. Those damn "socialistic" ideas such as public education and public roads. Could have done wonders with the $700 Billion TARP money as well. But that's right, welfare and public money (socialist ideas, right?) are only ok when its Corporate Welfare and the public's money is used to finance failed businesses.

The fact
> that you can't get "re-distribution" through that
> ballot box, is because only a tiny minority
> actually wants it - period; not because of some
> vast corporate conspiracy - which notion is just
> one more example of left wing deception (or is it
> paranoia).

Spoken like the true tool of the right that people like you are. If it was corporate "conspiracy," there wouldn't be so much evidence to support it. Deception and paranoia? Because people want back what was theirs to begin with? Faux News is paranoia and deception writ large.

But what IS un-American, is self
> appointed zealots taking it upon themselves in the
> streets and back alleys, to get their way via
> lawless roving goon squads.

Keep telling yourself that's whats happening. Remove yourself farther from reality.


> You must indeed be a product of the modern
> education system. If you knew anything about
> history, that even a fifth grader would have known
> back in my day; there is nothing at all to laugh
> at, when "Useful Idiots" such as yourself, take to
> the streets, so naively believing that they will
> ever get one thin dime of any "re-distributed
> wealth". History shows in every single case, that
> only the elite will get any, while you loose even
> what you already have. Your a fool if you don't
> know that already!

Oh I'm sorry. Is this silly kid too dumb for you? If I'm a product of the education system in this country and by that you mean I'm uninformed and unenlightened which you imply, then people like you are to blame. Keep stripping more and more money from public schools for corporate bailouts, wasteful government spending and a defense budget of world conquest proportions and you can be assured the our future generations will be sufficiently ignorant.

Its funny you mention education back in your day. I can see the end result of an education system that taught its pupils that the good 'ol USA is doing God's work and blacks and "Indians" and Mexicans and "Japs" are second class citizens and big corporate interests are our friends who just want to spray us with a little more DDT for our benefit and just want to strip mine all the mountains and dump in all the rivers with no accountability. Yep, you sure done did get yer edjumakation good huh?


>
> Well - go on laughing hysterically at my faith in
> democracy. When reality finally sinks in, you
> won't be laughing at all, but still hysterical
> just the same. History is full of examples of
> what happens at any attempted wealth
> re-distribution. In every single case in the last
> 150 years, the attempt destroyed almost all wealth
> - and the means to produce more of it as well.
> All but the very elite were then poor as dirt, and
> the people we're right back where they started
> from but even poorer than when they started - with
> all the wealth still concentrated in the top
> percentile.

You're right, the ultra rich deserve to have a hugely un-proportional amount of our nations wealth and anyone who tries to balance the scales deserves to fail. Boy you sure do have faith in democracy!


> But sans the inevitably destroyed middle class,
> there will be virtually no hope of upward
> mobility; AS WE DO STILL HAVE!

Not for long at this rate, thanks to your "ilk."

I can personally
> testify that we have it - I'm a beneficiary of it!
> I didn't always have a business keeping 43 people
> employed, but with hard work. . . . .

I pity your employees. Bosses and managers like you are why Labor Unions and regulation exist.

Oh - and BTW, the promise of "redistribution of
> wealth", has been the center piece of "Socialist"
> and "Marxist" rhetoric, ever since Karl Marx
> invented the concept. You do know who he was -
> right. You have read and studied his writings have
> you not. Well if not, your own education is
> sorely lacking. If your had, you'd recognize
> "Socialist" rhetoric when you heard it. Karl Marx
> is the one that coined the phrase "Useful Idiot",
> to describe those that actually believed his
> stuff. But you're obviously ignorant of all
> that! Otherwise, you would have recognized and
> rejected it as the faulty dogma that it is.
>
> Redistribution indeed - it ain't ever really
> happened, not even once in history - and it won't
> happen now; no matter how much of what's good
> about this country you destroy trying to get it -
> despite Obummers claims and promises to the
> contrary! Too bad, but he has proved out to be
> just another silver tongued @#$%& politician.
>
> So get over it! History plainly shows that his
> current course has never worked before and won't
> work now. So do what I suggested instead, It has
> worked before! If enough join at the ballot box,
> terminally dump both political parties, and keep a
> skeptical eye on anything the media says; then
> eventually the needed reforms to restore balance
> can happen.

Rar rar rar for the last time, the only people screaming about socialism are the criminal right or whatever goody bag of negative adjectives one could reach into to describe the selfish short sighted right.