Jiminger.Com

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional or disciplinary response[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[2]

I was posting in the comments section of various DailyKos articles. Anyone that’s been on the DailyKos comments sections understands the tone - I was certainly much less vitriolic than the vast majority of commenters while admittedly more than some.

On the healthcare issue I argued against the Obama plan and back my statements by posting sections of the proposed house bill as well as excerpts from publications written by advisors to the White House. Rather than answer me, I was banned as a troll.

It’s interesting what happens in a liberal den when you present facts and attempt a discussion. I previously defined a “fundamentalist” as those who “keep [ their ] worldview hermetically sealed and free from critical examination.” I don’t think there’s a better description of the Kos group than that.

The left wing blog, DailyKos, has a new post called “Idiot Nation.” It’s a rant about a comment that Sara Palin made:

“The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”

The article is juvenile vitriol in response to the perceived idiocy of a nation that would believe such hyperbole without checking. Quite the contrary however. The idiocy of the left is laid bare by the simple fact that the vitriol doesn’t even reference the SOURCE of the concerns expressed by conservatives like Palin.

Thirty seconds of digging will allow you to find the Administration’s advisor’s adherence to various Utilitarian health care ethics. For example, the “complete lives system” (Orwellian doublespeak alert!) where health care will be apportioned based on a judgment (ostensibly by the future gatekeepers of health care resources) of the individual’s perceived potential contribution to society. For example:

White House Health Care Policy Advisor, and brother of Rahm Emanuel, Dr. Ezekiel J Emanuel in a paper entitled “Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions” he co-published WAY back in January of 2009 wrote:

Consideration of the importance of complete lives also supports modifying the youngest-first principle by prioritising adolescents and young adults over infants (figure). Adolescents have received substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet received these investments. Similarly, adolescence brings with it a developed personality capable of forming and valuing long-term plans whose fulfilment requires a complete life.

[...]

The complete lives system also considers prognosis, since its aim is to achieve complete lives. A young person with a poor prognosis has had few life-years but lacks the potential to live a complete life.

What kind of a “complete-life” potential does a Down’s Syndrome child have? Who is going to make the determination as to who gets these scare medical resources according to this (or any other) principle? From the perspective of the parents who love their Down’’s Syndrome child would “Death Panel” appropriately capture that sense? Is this or is it not accurately described as being “based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society’?”

I agree we are becoming a nation of idiots - the best example being the DailyKos writers and commenters.

Obviously My family is not familiar with the phrase “There’s no place like home.” This year we are taking a month-long vacation around most of the US. We are using a 2004 Damon 353, 36′  class A  R.V. We are starting at our house (on July 2nd) and gong up to Hyner PA were we are going to spend July 4th weekend. From there we are heading to Chicago for a few days. Then we are off to Boulder, and after staying there a little bit we head off to some more places and eventualy San Fransisco with one week to get back home. But we haven’t gotten that far yet. today is filled with packing the R.V. and preparing for our trip. My dad put a home entertainment center, new speakers, and a nice big T.V. inside it. We’ve got almost everything packed and will start our trip tomorow. We will be stopping periodicaly at places with Wi-Fi so we will be able to upload pictures and post more posts.

Yesterday I pointed to a few articles by John Carney (certainly no conservative) on how the “Community Reinvestment Act” was a significant contributor to the current financial situation. Today there are several followup posts with even more information. Take a look at:

“How The Government Used The CRA To Push Crappy Lending Standards”

“Government Pamphlet Taught Banks How To Finance A $70,000 Home With A $500 Downpayment”

“Three Ways The CRA Pushed Countrywide To Lower Lending Standards”

Another prevalent theme among conservatives, and related to the CRA issue, has been the extent to which Chris Dodd and Barney Frank were responsible for the crisis. The amazing thing to me is that they still have their jobs - another thing we can chalk up to how uninformed the American public is about what’s really going on. Clusterstock has this gem about Barney Frank.

“Barney Frank Says Fannie And Freddie’s Lending Standards Are Too High (FNM, FRE)”

It’s astonishing how many intelligent people can ignore historical facts when they conflict with their politics. From the beginning of this economic and financial system crisis conservatives have pointed to the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) as one of the causes. There have been no end to the denials that such a program could be saddled with such blame. But take a look at this recent blog entry on Clusterstock (a site I have a mixed impression of). Even if you normally don’t read comments on blogs, take a look there on that post, as the main writers on Clusterstock take on the commenters - which they almost never do to the depth they did there.

Apparently they received so much attention they thought it required another follow up post. Which you can find here: Why I Changed My Mind On The Community Reinvestment Act. The following statement from the article is as bold a statement as I’ve ever read on the issue, and Carney is not exactly a Conservative:

The broader subprime market was basically a creation of the CRA.

In 2005 I wrote that GM should go bankrupt. Well, it certainly took long enough. Back then I commented how the corporate welfare minded Republicans would bail them out. Now that the Democrats have finished the job and taken control of the company, take a look at what we have to look forward to:

Thanks for the reference Andrew

If you’re following the “financial crisis” closely you’ll realize a new evil scapegoat has arisen. People who “short” securities. The government just banned the shorting of 800 stocks (and climbing); a move that was probably the main reason for the surge in the stock market yesterday (Friday, September 19th). In other words, it was completely artificial and created by the actions of our government. Given that I’ve needed to explain what “shorting” was to several people this week, I’m sure that the fact that they don’t even know what it is wont prevent them from following the herd and pointing the finger.

So apparently speculators in oil were last weeks problem for driving the price up. Now those who “short” securities are this weeks problem for driving the price down. What about me? I was SHORT OIL for a while (driving the price of oil down - I guess). Do two evils make a good?

Bloomberg is reporting that the SEC is investigating Chicago-based Wextrust Capital LLC and actually going after the executives personally, claiming they are operating a “Ponzi Scheme.” I had always wondered if Ponzi Schemes were illegal or not. I had been told that they were but this is the first time I’ve seen one prosecuted. The article defines a Ponzi Scheme as:

Operators of so-called Ponzi schemes use money from new investors to pay off old ones.

Funny, I thought that was basically the definition of Social Security. I hope the SEC moves against the Federal Government next. Not only is Social Security the biggest Ponzi Scheme on the planet, it employs forced participation.