For Those That Are Interested in Discussion

[dadakarma]

Here's what I like about what ADMIN said today:

This site was started with the hope that many would join and add to the discussion, with no ownership biases toward any political orientation or leaning. We hope to provide you all with a forum that meets your expectations. Ultimately this site, like any other forum, is the product of membership and we trust that you all, both new and old members, will be able to create that which best serves you.

I interpret that to mean that our presence here is welcome. And that no matter how much whining and sniveling persists about how my "crew" should "get our roll out", guess what? It ain't happening. ADMIN's glad we're here.

[MMC]

What do you expect from some PH rejects? They ban people there for the slightest thing that doesn't fit in with their view and then come here trying to do the same thing.

PH, Debate Politics, DCJ, PF, it doesnt matter.....it's not happening here despite the single echo yelling otherwise.

[ramone]

Here's what I like about what ADMIN said today:



I interpret that to mean that our presence here is welcome. And that no matter how much whining and sniveling persists about how my "crew" should "get our roll out", guess what? It ain't happening. ADMIN's glad we're here.

It probably would be if you had anything to say, unfortunately that is not the case. Sorry to burst you bubble but you're not quite as smart as you think and I've yet to see anything you've said worth reading.

[MMC]

Here's what I like about what ADMIN said today:



I interpret that to mean that our presence here is welcome. And that no matter how much whining and sniveling persists about how my "crew" should "get our roll out", guess what? It ain't happening. ADMIN's glad we're here.

Now let me show you.....
This site was started with the hope that many would join and add to the discussion, with no ownership biases toward any political orientation or leaning. We hope to provide you all with a forum that meets your expectations. Ultimately this site, like any other forum, is the product of membership and we trust that you all, both new and old members, will be able to create that which best serves you.

Once you break the trust the hope and clearly now are set on dividing the site. So that you can feel better about yourself. Pretty much ends that.

[dadakarma]

Is there a translator in the house??

[keyser soze]

Here's what I like about what ADMIN said today:



I interpret that to mean that our presence here is welcome. And that no matter how much whining and sniveling persists about how my "crew" should "get our roll out", guess what? It ain't happening. ADMIN's glad we're here.

What's a PH reject and why are we thought to be same?

[MMC]

Yep, but you wont like who it is!

[dadakarma]

What's a PH reject and why are we thought to be same?

Some here think we came from Political Hotwire, which is a place I hadn't heard of until I started reading this board.

[Mister D]

What I thought and think it means is right there printed large in this thread. I am saying no different now from what I said before.
.

You have probably been misusing the term corporatism for years now. That's no surprise.

And when I've been talking about our paid for $#@!s in Washington, who do you imagine I think did the paying? I've been saying here nothing but that - and generally getting agreement on that point. The Summers and Geitners of the world are the primary movers of Exxon-Mobile, GM, Apple etc ascending the thrown of a re-organization of our society. Whether OWS knows it, this is one of the fundamental things they are complaining about.

Exxon-Mobile, GM, Apple etc are not part and parcel of what it means to be a corporate society. It's not about business, profit, and finance. I'm sorry if this sudden revelation has left you a little dazed but better now than never, right? A better example of corporatist policy and philosophy would be contemporary identity politics and the like.

When Apple, for example, moves American jobs overseas to take advantage of slave and child labor, of course it has to do with profits and business. Policies that expose our working people to unfair/unwinnable competition like this put shareholders rights ahead of citizen rights.

Yes, that does concern profits and business but it does not concern corporatism. In fact, outsourcing would be foreign to a corporatist society! You have a poor understanding of what corporatism means but I'll give you some time to work through this crisis.

I did and do understand. I don't think you previously understood my view.

I do understand your view and I even agree with some of it but it has nothing to do with corporatism.

I'll go with the dictionary definition of the word, and the one that is commonly understood to refer to the things I'm trying - mightily - to talk about. If you think it is wrong, I can accept that. Just know when I use the term, this is how I use it.

Your dictionary definition and your usage do not correspond. yes, many people do use the term incorrectly online. They do the same with terms like fascism.

[keyser soze]

Yep, but you wont like who it is!

??????