EagleTribune.com : Blogs : The Soapbox

I repeat, it's the Cloward-Piven strategy.
Originally proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Carefully orchestrated media campaigns, carried out by friendly, leftwing journalists, would float the idea of "a federal program of income redistribution," in the form of a guaranteed living income for all -- working and non-working people alike. Local officials would clutch at this idea like drowning men to a lifeline. They would apply pressure on Washington to implement it. With every major city erupting into chaos, Washington would have to act.
Source: discoverthenetworks.org

There is another article about this strategy in the American Thinker. It's insightful, thought provoking, and downright terrifying. The idea that there could be so many people who believe in and encourage the ideas brought forth by these anarchists boggles the mind. Who would so willingly advocate for the collapse of a society that has given so many people, including Cloward and Piven, their opportunities in life? When did hard work, saving your money, and living responsibly become so passe and un-p.c.?

I can't wrap my mind around such nonsense.

If someone can explain this to me, I would be eternally grateful....

BTW, we're not "slouchng" toward socialism, we're running full tilt!

See you in the re-education camps, all!

Socialism? You've got to be kidding. Didn't we take care of this in 1913, with ratification of the 16th Amendment? Answer: Yes we did.

Bilge Rat, First I couldn't agree more we are on a slippery slope to socialism. I think it was a blogger who said recently,
"Democrats are now socialists, republicans are Democrats and God help us" Personally, I cannot do anything but call todays politicians, evil people.
VOTE YES ON QUESTION ONE
VOTE AGAINST ALL INCUMBENTS
On your other point, though what is it that makes you think the group of crackpots led by Cloward and Priven are any diiferent from all the other groups who purport to want to drive the world or this country to what their particular image of what it should be? Do you think they have been successful at anything? Do they have anything to do with the latest crisis?
More so than this nations insatiable need for credit and more credit? Or oil?

I can't tell you how disappointed I am that there is no Editorial of Outrage regarding Congress' $100 million Socialist bailout of the Red Cross.

Sure, the scale is smaller... but this is still government being involved in a private enterprise where it has no business being, right?

Jason, Usually, I'm not in favor of government involvement in anything, however in this case , this is a charitable organization, which has been decimated by a series of natural disasters and as a result has lost its liquidity. So its a case where either we as individuals ramp up our giving or someone loans money to them. God knows the government has loaned/given money to much less deserving causes and I assume this is a loan. I can say with certainty that the Red Cross will be there the next time we (collective) need them. I'm not sure Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae will be. I can't tell from your posting if your tongue is in your cheek but I hope it is.

I suppose we just need somebody smart to tell the rest of us when it's okay to "take money from wealthier people and give it to those having trouble." From Taylor Armerding's original post, that sounded like a bad thing that is destroying America.

To JasonW: In response to your question regarding somebody "smart" to tell us when its OK to take money from the wealthy and give it to those having trouble, doesn't require rocket science. It requires common sense and logic.

Taylor was simply pointing out the difference between capitalism v. socialism.

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” This is socialism, not capitalism.

The wealthy/entrepenur creates the wealth under capitalism by creating jobs and do so by their own free will. For any government to undermine this concept is totally anti-capitalistic and is socialistic.

When was the first or last time someone who was receiving funds from the taxpayer to the non-taxpayer offered anyone a job?

Merriam Webster online defines socialism as the following:
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

How can anyone who works, pays taxes, owns a home or small business think this is a good idea???? Whatever happened to working hard to achieve the american dream? Since when has the american dream been dependent on how much the government can give to a person?

There is nothing wrong with our republic and the capitalist system. Sure, there are a few problems that could easily be fixed ie: subprime lending, political graft, illegal immigration, etc, however it's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak.

Keep your grasping, money hungry, socialist hands out of my wallet, Obama, and spread your own wealth.

My original comment (#5) was about the lack of outrage towards the Red Cross bailout.

I'm not defending socialism, I'm questioning why $100M in taxpayer money to the Red Cross is any less reprehensible than, for example, Obama's "grasping, money hungry, socialist" plans. Is it just the scale? What's the magic number that is crossed before the handouts are unacceptable? Common sense and logic would be great, but WHOSE common sense and logic? There is my point: if it is not clearly defined, then I need somebody smart to tell me when it's okay and when it's not.

Jason, I wasn't railing on you, and I apologize if it seemed that way. Overall, I don't agree with any of these bailouts. Being the evil conservative that I am, I believe in "you lay down with dogs you wake up with fleas." But Jim does make a logical argument in favor of helping out the Red Cross. If given a choice I would rather see my tax dollars going to legitimate charitable organizations that provide vital services in times of disaster.

Jim, I'll try to answer your questions in response to my previous posts...........
"On your other point, though what is it that makes you think the group of crackpots led by Cloward and Priven are any diiferent from all the other groups who purport to want to drive the world or this country to what their particular image of what it should be?"
I don't see a difference, they're all a bunch of unhinged lunatics who fail to realize that they may very well get what they wish for and then where will they be? How well would the speech of the lunatic fringe, from either side, be protected if their visions of utopia come true?

"Do you think they have been successful at anything? Do they have anything to do with the latest crisis?"
I absolutely think they have been successful. They (the extremists on both sides) have managed to seriously divide this country. Although I do feel the liberals have done far more damage than the conservatives with their ever increasing dependence on "social" programs, promotion of the victim mentality, and stubborn refusal to admit failure.

More so than this nations insatiable need for credit and more credit? Or oil?"
As far as the credit goes, maybe Senator Dodd, Senator Obama, and Congressman Frank could shed a little insight as to why they pooh-poohed the warning signs regarding Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac back in 2006. Frugality and personality responsibility have been spurned as being old fashioned out of date ideas that only us old fools believe in. It wasn't cutting edge. Now look where we are...

Regarding oil, drill more drill now drill here....at the same time, let's work on alternative fuels, such as sugar ethanol, which is more efficient, cleaner burning, faster and cheaper to produce. Yes, we need oil, however we're not the only major consumer. In fact, I no longer think we are the top oil consuming country anymore. I'm not positive, but I think China and possible India are in the lead now.

I meant to say "personal" responsibility, not "personality" responsibility"...duh.... ;-)

duh...again...
sugar ethanol is cheaper to produce, more efficient, and cleaner burning than corn ethanol....

Got up on the wrong side of the bilge today.....

Bilge Rat, I asked that question only in relation to the Cloward/Priven Group you brought up and radicals like the Weathermen etc. Also I view the people/governments use of credit to be the precipiting factor in the current disaster as well as our dependence on foreign oil. I was searching to see if you thought there was any real connection with Cloward/Previn.
Jason , I have to say I am disappointed that you don't see any difference between the government action with the Red Cross and any of its current adventures into socialism. Let me ask you a question, If you had the resources and you had to give a large donation either to the Red Cross or any of the organizations the government is gong to give/loan/buy, which would you choose?

I entirely agree with you, Jim, regarding the credit crisis.
Again, it goes back to personal responsibility. You don't buy more than you can afford, regardless of what anyone tells you. It doesn't take an advanced degree in economics to realize if you only make 50K a year, you can't afford a 400K house. Like the old saying goes, if it sounds too good to be true, it is.

Also, I really don't understand why home ownership has now become a right, not a privilege. You work hard, save money, and live responsibly and yes, you too can own a home. However, over the past few years, thanks to socialist government programs, especially the Community Reinvestment Act, made home ownership a right, not a product of an individual's hardworking lifestyle.

The silver lining in all of this has been the gas prices. As of this morning, oil was under $70/barrel and OPEC is having a nervous breakdown....

Is it too late for McCain to step down and Joe the Plumber to join the ticket???

Joe the Plumber/Palin '08

Jim,

I'm just bringing up the question of just how far to ratchet back government handouts. I'm sure most, including myself, would like to see a handout go to a charitable organization helping out those struck by natural disaster. There is big talk about government spending and socialism, but I'm wondering where everyone's line really is.

No, Palin's name was not previously Paling.

She has only recently added the 'L' !

No, Palin's name was not previously Paling.

She has only recently added the 'L' !

Greetings from Costa Rica.

Let me get this straight.

First it was Barack Obama was a Muslim passing himself as a Christian.

Then it was he worshipped at the altar of a preacher who claimed 9-11 was the result of an arrogant US foreign policy.

But no one mentions that the preachers and leaders of the far right, Christian extremist wing of the GOP;, preachers and leaders John McCain called "agents of intolerance" and a "poisonous influence in the GOP" in 2000, claimed 9-11 was God's punishment of America because it's guaranteed the right of a woman to make her own reproductive health decisions, because America is slowly recognizing that gay and lesbian citizens are entitled to equal protection under the Constitution, and a long list of other things the Christian extremists view as sinful and "un-American".

No one mentioned that.

Likewise, no one's mentioned that the board Obama served on with William Ayres was funded by the Annenberg Foundation. Now, you don't get more Republican and conservative than the Annenberg Foundation

People also forget, after Ayres did his time, every minute of which he deserved I might add, he earned a Ph.D and became an expert on issues pertaining to education reform.

What I'd like to know is why, given that many Republican politicians in Illinois also "palled around" with Ayres because of his expertise on those issues, they are not also guilty of kissing up to "domestic terrorists"?

I'd also like to know why no one is seriously looking into Todd Palin's membership in the right wing Alaska Independence Party.

The AIP advocates Alaska's secession from the Union.

Its late founder, much like Bill Ayres, believed in, and advocated, violence if that's what it would it take to achieve the AIP's agenda.

Why is that not "domestic terrorism".

You know, you all on the right are really an almost pathetic bunch. Everything you've advocated over the last eight years has proven to be an abysmal failure.

That can't be an easy thing to accept, but accept it you must.

After all, no problem can be solved until there is a recognition that a problem exists.

Michael, you don't really expect a reply to your diatribe do you? Why do you have to alienate people with name calling?

Hi Michael!
How's life in the Third World? I was worried, I thought you got lost in the jungle!

First, I seem to recall Rev. Wright saying the chickens have come home to roost re:9/11. The fundamental difference between Reverand Wright and that right wing lunatic preacher (whose name escapes me at the moment) is Senator McCain didn't attend his church for 20 years and very plainly stated he didn't agree with the radical pastor. Meanwhile, Senator Obama sat in the pews for 20 years listening to his "pastor" spew his anti-American, black theology, racist views and never disavowed the hate that was festering and fostered by Pastor Wright. Come on, Senator Obama listened to Wright's "sermons" for 20 years, yet claimed he had no idea what his pastor's radical views were all about? Please, don't insult our intelligence.

Second, the majority of respected right wing talk show hosts have, on many occasions, stated they do not believe Senator Obama is a practicing Muslim. What they DO believe is that he is sympathetic to the radical, fundamentalist Islamist movement based on his psyche being steeped in black liberation theology and his socialist leanings and policies.

Third, the Alaska Independence Party is not even close in comparison to the Weathermen. In 1990, the Alaska Independence Party nominated Walter Hickel for Governor. Hickel had been elected Governor of Alaska as a Republican in 1966, and in 1969 he was appointed US Secretary of the Interior. In 1990, he won the election for Governor of Alaska as the Independence Party Candidate, becoming one of only six third party candidates in US history to win a governor’s race (Jesse Ventura of MN, and Lowell Weicker of CT are two of the others). In 1994, the AIP nominated then Lt. Governor Coghill in the race for Governor. Coghill finished third, behind the Democratic winner Tony Knowles, and the Republican nominee Jim Campbell, but ahead of the Green Party and Patriot Party nominees. Also, Walter Hickel, Republican governor of Alaska in 1966, was revered by the left. In fact, he was fired in 1970 over a letter he wrote criticizing Nixon's handling of the Vietnam war. He admonished the federal government for not giving credible attention to the youth protestors and splinter groups of the day. This letter was written in response to the Kent State shootings.

Fourth, Todd Palin didn’t “join” the Alaska Independence Party – he selected it as his “party preference” when he registered to vote. This may seem like a technicality, but anyone who lives in a state where voters record their “party preference” knows what that means. In Alaska, voters have the option of registering their party preference, which is not necessarily the party they belong to.

Fifth, onto the issue of Bill Ayres. Mr. Ayres, as recently as 2001, claims the Weathermen didn't do enough bombings, they should've done more. He is in no way repentant of his crimes, is a murderer, and it disgusts me that this individual basically got away with his crimes and he is now in a position to influence future generations with his twisted, psychotic rhetoric. The left can spin it as much as they want, but Ayres is no different than Timothy McVeigh. Don't you just love the picture of Ayres standing on the american flag???? /sarc off/

Anyhow, I hope all is well with you in Costa Rica. Take care down there, and it's good to hear from you again!

Stay tuned, for I'm sure I'll be admonished by Jim for responding to Michael! I know I shouldn't have, but I couldn't help myself! :-)

Mr. Cook you are truly amazing, nowhere in the 19 posts preceding yours or in the article by Mr. Amerding can I find any reference to Obama's religion,Supposed Rev, Wright or any thing else in your bitter missile. Did you interpose that stuff so you could throw your own brand of barbs?
The article and all the posts were so far as I can see ,all about the soicialistic change this country is apparently going through to which you had no response. Of course that too is a liberal tactic. Attack, Lie, stretch the truth and try to beat them down. Thank you Blarny Frank and Charlie Schumer.

Bilge Rat, would you please change your name? I hate addressing you that way.
I don't remember and I hope I've never admonished you for discussing anything with our liberal friend, Mr.Cook. personally when he gets me to the point that I feel like vomiting, I throw in the towel for my personal health but I try not to impose my will or thoughts on others.

Hi Jim,
I was speaking tongue in cheek regarding the admonishment, you've never chastised me before. Your previous post, #21, was pretty clear in its meaning, but I couldn't help myself...

I'm sorry, Jim, I can't change my name.....Please don't feel bad using it, I chose it for a bit of shock value anyways. Good to know it's working! LOL ;-)

Michael,
I've always respected our spirited banter because we've managed to agree on points in the past without resorting to insults. However, the name calling was unwarranted.
Did you wake up on the wrong side of a banana tree this morning?
Joe the Plumber/Palin '08

Just to get back on message (socialism v. capitalism) and the messenger (Taylor), let me give you the following quote from George Bernard Shaw (believe me, he was not a conservative.)

"A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."

Jim, you called Michael as a liar and admonished him for name calling, he referred to you as almost pathetic, score one for Michael I think. Same with you Blidge Rat, is almost pathetic beyond the pale?

Or is the truth as Michael suggested that the abysmal failure of the last eight years is to much to own up to.(

By the did Talyor write this before the robust independent market soceity was shown to have been undermined by liberal intrest groups buying McMansions in Florida and Nevada for low income illegal aliens? 1 am surprised he hasn't jumped on that one.

The GOP, stick a fork in them and turn them over, they're done!

Wink!

Another country heard from, ImNotAnOstrich....I'm not really sure what you were attempting to articulate, but I think I get the general idea.....Capitalism and conservatism are baaaaad, socialism and liberalism are gooood....we'll see soon enough ;-)

"Socialists make the mistake of confusing individual worth with success. They believe you cannot allow people to succeed in case those who fail feel worthless."
-Kenneth Baker

"A light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany ... and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Obama"

- Barack Obama Lebanon, New Hampshire.
January 7, 2008

Doesn't this scare anyone???? A megalomaniac with a messiah complex who will be within arm's reach of the proverbial "button"...great....

bilge rat, it was GW Bush Bush who told us it was God who told him he must run for president. He's all but said he was "chosen"; how messianic, meglomaniacal, and delusional is that?

His own mother was appalled at such an assertion!

I really feel for sorry for you, Jim carlson, and Mr. Armerding.

The American people are waking up to the fact that all the things you, no doubt, fervently believe in, are not in the country's best interests.

You are all, quickly, devolving into a bunch of politically pathetic and irrelevant characters.

Bait me all you want, Michael, but I refuse to engage in childish, tantrum driven, and name calling rhetoric maligning other posters on this board. Adults don't engage in that kind of behavior. But, if that's what you prefer, I have no problem taking the gloves off, kid.

Yes, I agree that Bush's statement about God in 2003 was extremely obtuse, but the last time I checked, he wasn't running for president.

SO Bilge Rat, do you identify with the pigs or the sheep, or the horse or the dogs. Or maybe the farmer

I don't think that you believe it is that clear cut though, that black and white, maybe you do. All things that benefit the community are bad? All those that benefit the individual are good?

i'm glad i no longer read any of the eagle-tribune's publications. have fun with this type of dialog for the next four years.