HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Zalatix » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Fri Dec 16, 2011, 09:30 PM
Number of posts: 8,994

About Me

I'm a liberal looking to make a difference in politics.

Journal Archives

Full stop. It's rare that you see stupidity of THIS magnitude.


Ginny Lewis, a Democrat and 72-year-old retired district attorney from Princeton, Ky., says she'll vote for Romney because "I'm tired of the Republicans blaming all the debt on Democrats, so let them take over and see what they do."

What is getting into our water supply???

How many pro-lifers did you personally see taking issue with what Todd Akin or Richard Mourdock?

None, where I hail from.

Yellowface strikes again. Ben Kingsley plays the Mandarin in the next Iron Man movie

Check out the weak ass excuse they gave:


Iron Man 3 Day continues apace with EW unveiling the first look at Sir Ben Kingsley's Mandarin, the bad guy set to put Tony Stark through his paces over the course of the highly-anticipated threequel.

The character of The Mandarin was considered by many (including writer/director Shane Black) as too racially insensitive to be portrayed on screen, but Marvel head honcho Kevin Feige has explained how Sir Ben is going to play the originally Oriental baddie: by not actually being Chinese.

“It’s less about his specific ethnicity than the symbolism of various cultures and iconography that he perverts for his own end,” Feige told EW.

Bullshit. I would have believed them if they said they were afraid of offending China (see: the way they changed Red Dawn's antagonists from China to North Korea )...

actually, no I wouldn't have.

What did I tell you? Mitt Romney boldly made comments about companies shipping jobs to China

and everyone in the WORLD knows he's behind Sensata.

The media - at least the stations I watch - has been going nuts over Sensata.

Yet Romney BOLDLY stood there talking shit about China and talking shit about companies who move factories to China. HE DOES IT HIMSELF IN THE OPEN and yet he trash talks it.

That tells you right there that he knows the public doesn't give a shit. No matter how much the media talks about his Sensata behavior, his naked hypocrisy right on NATIONAL TV won't mean a damned thing. That level of hypocrisy won't move the polls more than a few points, 5 tops.

ARGH. We've got to work harder and make a stink as a Party. We need to do the shouting so people won't just go -


CBS sidelines actress because they don't believe she's sick. Fuck CBS.

The whole network is banned from this household permanently until they make this right.


NEW YORK (AP) — "Blue Bloods" cast member Jennifer Esposito is blasting CBS for sidelining her from the show.

In Twitter postings, the actress has accused CBS of "absolutely shameful behavior" in putting her on unpaid leave from the Tom Selleck-starring police drama.

Esposito tweeted that she's been diagnosed with celiac disease and requires a reduced work schedule. She said CBS believes she is angling to win a pay raise.

CBS has responded that because Esposito can't fulfill the full-time demands of her role, it has "regretfully" put her character, Detective Jackie Curatola, on a leave of absence. Her last appearance for now airs Nov. 2. The network says it hopes Esposito will be able to return.

More proof that China can't survive by stealing American jobs.

Like I keep saying, our vein is running dry. We've got nothing left for them to take.

An economy that depends on huge exports is inevitably a doomed one. Other nations that depend on exports, especially to the USA, are also going to find themselves in deep shit.

The great and mighty Globalism will collapse because production will be forced to go more local and less global. Oops.



BEIJING (AP) -- China's economic model that delivered three decades of double-digit growth is running out of steam and the country's next leaders face tough choices to keep incomes rising. But they don't seem to have ambitious solutions. Even if they do, they will need to tackle entrenched interests with backing high in the Communist Party.

The cost of inaction could be high. The World Bank says without change, annual growth could sink to 5 percent by 2015 — dangerously low by Chinese standards. Some private sector analysts give even gloomier warnings.

The government's own advisers say it needs to promote service industries and consumer spending, shifting away from reliance on exports and investment. That will require opening more industries to entrepreneurs and forcing cosseted state companies to compete. State banks would have to lend more to private business that is starved for credit.

When do we declare the KKK a terrorist group?

And when do the drones get sent in?

(Note: just kidding about the drones.)

Free traders, and I mean all of them, worldwide, do you understand what's wrong here?

Offshoring of jobs is meant for one purpose: to reduce wages without reducing prices.

It is why Germany outsources some of its car production to anti-union zones in the United States, and why the United States outsources... well... everywhere.

Globalism exists for no other reason but to use one nation's poor as a spear to pierce the heart of another nation's job security and livable wages. It is the primary weapon of mass destruction against unions - why bother negotiating against unionized factory workers when you can close it down and move it to China? Globalization was designed as a superweapon - a nuclear bomb, a Death Star - against the working class. It is nothing else, it serves no other purpose, it achieves no other effect, but to fatten the corporate bottom line by reducing workers' wages.

For America, globalization does NOTHING but reduce standards of living. NOTHING.

Why? Because nobody ever pursues offshoring to pursue places with better working conditions. Nobody ever pursues offshoring to pursue places with better wages. Nobody ever pursues offshoring to pursue eco-friendliness. In fact, globalism exists to eliminate all three of the above, to do exactly one thing: to make the captains of industry rich.

If you are for free trade you are missing this basic and ever-present reality that lives and breathes at the very expense of America's working class.

Globalization is that which robs Peter to pay Paul. America's working class is Peter. You will never, ever get the allegiance of Peter to such a system. Not ever.

When you tell Peter that he must sacrifice to help Paul you will only make Peter angrier. Especially when the third guy in the equation, Mitt, the guy who's doing the foreign outsourcing, is getting obscenely rich at the cost of Peter.

Write that down. Globalism is making Mitt fabulously rich and is bleeding Peter dry. Peter is America's working class.

When you tell Peter that he is being a xenophobe because he's tired of being bled dry, think about that for a second. You're telling American workers that they should be happy that blue-collar factories and white-collar offices are closing and they're going unemployed with precious little hope of finding an equally good-paying job. You are telling them that they are xenophobes if they have a problem with that.

You might as well ask someone to attach a thousand mosquitoes to their arm and let them suck away at them, and if they say no, then they're xenophobes. That's the logic of your xenophobe argument in a nutshell. In short, you are swimming upstream against basic survival instinct. Nothing ever wins against survival instinct. Anything that does try to win, loses because predators take it out of the game. That predator's name? You guessed it... Mitt, the only guy in the equation who is getting rich off of globalism.

There is no argument you can ever make that will convince America's working class to agree to continue to be the prey of Globalism. Protectionism is a natural survival instinct expressed in political context. You cannot justify opposing protectionism any more than you can justify white blood cells ignoring a disease. A disease injected into our economic bloodstream not by poor people in Mexico, but by people like Mitt. Ever wonder why support for protectionism has grown so explosively? It's because it is a natural immunological response to a deadly pathogen. A pathogen introduced into the environment by the Plutocrats.

When you argue that globalism is not a zero sum game, you are correct on that point: globalization is not a zero-sum game for America's workers, because it is a negative-sum game for America's working class. There is no amount of stretching your imagination, not even in your wildest dreams, that gets you to showing a plus-sum game for America's workers. There is none. Globalism is a negative-sum game for America's workers. They know that. You know that. To deny it is to engage in sheer delusion.

You even bring up the specter of a trade war if America resorts to protectionism. What the rest of America understands, however, is that America has been the target of a relentless GLOBAL trade war for several decades now. A trade war which can easily be seen in the form of our monstrous trade deficit - half of which is NOT oil imports. Without the oil imports it is the largest trade deficit in the history of nations, in absolute if not relative terms. That is a trade war already in progress. Telling America's workers that tariffs amount to a trade war is like telling a kid it's wrong to hit back at a bully. Ever wonder why that doesn't work? Like I said... you're up against survival instinct, and survival instinct only ever loses with an organism that is best suited as prey. America's working class is not best suited as prey.

And the worst joke of it all? While you are trying to sell benefits of globalism that do not exist by any stretch of one's imagination, the globalists you are defending, are brazenly fighting wage increases in the very poor nations you say depend on stealing American jobs. You have nothing to say about that. You can't say anything about it. It's as important a part of globalism as the brain is to the human body. If other nations aren't fighting wage increases, then globalism cannot exist; if wages go up, then jobs can't move overseas. It becomes too expensive to do so. Globalism dies, production becomes more local. Please, free traders, get familiar with the term Ouroboros. Globalism is that. You support a system that either sustains itself by ruining entire nations, or which will devour itself into nonexistence. How is that logical?

Globalism will ruin America. It has destroyed America's working class, it is why we've lost all concept of job stability, it is why a record number of Americans are on welfare, and most of all, it is part of why people like Mitt Romney are getting filthy rich. It is a major contributor to our national debt, a millstone around the value of our currency, and it has done absolutely nothing for America's working class except drive it into ruin.

If you are for Globalism then you really do not care about America's working class. You really don't care if the ranks of America's poor continue to swell. You don't care about the Plutocracy capturing 90% of all economic gains while American workers sleep in forests in 22 degree weather because their wages have been driven into the dirt. You don't care because you defend the very system that enables all of this to happen.

You only have yourself to blame for how hostile America is now to free trade. If you were to scream loudly about how Globalists suppress wage increases in other nations, then perhaps your argument would have some credibility. But free traders worldwide, have scarcely ever done such a thing. If you would come out and protest the environmental pollution and poor working conditions where jobs are outsourced to, then you might have some credibility. If you would speak out against the captains of industry who get ultra rich while Americans go unemployed and Chinese workers commit suicide to escape their jobs, you might give protectionists pause. If you were to protest when Plutocrats complain about workers not wanting to work for $2 a day, and if you were to admit that there simply aren't enough "new industry" jobs to support America's swelling ranks of the unemployed, you might have some common ground. You can't do these things because to do these things is to question the need for globalism to exist. It can't exist without cheap labor, exploitation or environmental ruin.

Finally, one thing is true down to the last person when it comes to people who support free trade: they never, ever express any feelings of regret or sympathy for America's working class as they pay the ultimate price for globalization: joblessness and increasing poverty, and living in the woods in 22 degree temperatures, even as absolutely everyone in the third world and especially the Plutocracy, enjoy growth and increased prosperity. One thing that is common to all free traders is that they don't even TRY to feel sorry for American workers. Globalism has told America's working class to find a spot under an overpass and go fuck themselves or die trying. How can you be surprised, then, that American workers are now saying the same thing to globalism?

Listen to America's working class. They don't want globalism. The harder you push it, the worse things will get.

This post would be hidden by a jury decision

if I had posted this shit among a bunch of feminists.

Feminism isn't a dirty word yet around here, is it? We still understand what 'insulting women' and 'fetishizing women' and 'objectifying women' means, right? Or have we moved so far to the right that blatant disrespect of women is not so blatant anymore?

I shudder to think just how bad this makes us all look. We look like hypocrites. Seriously.

Clint Eastwood's Daughter Francesca Is Not Voting For Mitt Romney


Clint Eastwood may be Mitt Romney's most famous supporter, but his daughter isn't following in her father's footsteps.

TMZ caught up with the actress and model and asked her if she shared Clint's political views. "I happen to be voting for a different man," she said. "But I love that he stands up for what he believes in."

Barack Obama also recently mentioned the elder Eastwood, jokingly telling guests at last night's Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner to take their seats, "or else Clint Eastwood will yell at them."

The quip was a reference to Eastwood's speech at the Republican National Convention, where the actor berated an empty chair that he pretended was occupied by Obama. The moment was widely mocked and even taken as a sign of a derailed Romney campaign, though Obama would go on to say he is a big fan of the actor and didn't take it personally.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »