The state of Minnesota has been shut down because republicans refuse to raise taxes on rich cocksuckers and, as soon as a deal is proposed here comes the biggest and richest bunch of cocksuckers of them all ( the owners of the NFL Vikings ) with their hands out for state money to build a new fucking stadium.

http://sports.excite.com/news/07152011/v0109.html

Quote:MINNEAPOLIS (AP) - When Gov. Mark Dayton and state lawmakers announced that the outlines of a new budget deal were in place, the Minnesota Vikings were hoping that the door was finally open to discuss their plan for a new $1 billion stadium in the Twin Cities suburbs.

It may not be quite that simple.

Vikings owner Zygi Wilf spoke with Dayton on Friday, telling him in a phone conversation that the team wants a stadium bill to be considered in a special legislative session expected to begin next week, according to Vikings vice president for stadium affairs Lester Bagley.

And....

Quote:Wilf and the Vikings have pledged more than $400 million to the project, which also calls for a half-cent sales tax in Ramsey County that would contribute another $350 million and $300 million in state money.

I can't wait for our resident libertarians to drop by and explain why rich cocksuckers have to be permitted to suck on the public tit while the poor and middle class pay through the fucking nose.

What part of 'libertarianism does not advocate any special interest funding' do you not understand? Sports teams can go fuck themselves, if there isn't enough demand for their services to fund a billion dollar stadium then they shouldn't fucking get one.

Ha ha, you guys do this too.
I have an indelible memory of a politician giving reassurance that the sport budget was safe, even though everything else was being cut, our premier science organisation included.

Bread and circuses.

I'm not surprised by these types of headlines nor do I let myself get mad about them anymore.

Right before the Senate elections in 2009 the head of the GOP said, and I'm paraphrasing here but not by much, that if the Republicans gained majority in both the House and the Senate that they'd hold America hostage until public policy was let to revert back to the Bush Jr. era.

Thankfully they only achieved majority in the House and yet with just that small claim to victory they're keeping their word none the less.

As many pundits have said about the matter in the press of late, this isn't about partisan loyalties or tradition. Leadership is about what's good for the country. Unfortunately, when verbiage rings out from law makers the likes of which addresses their elected responsibilities from both sides of the aisle, the old truism remains as the one constant amid the partisan chaos that ensues. A nation divided can not stand.

We see that every day in headlines that describe how bad it is when ego and partisanism cleaves a country in twain. And the one's who suffer are the majority in both parties and all those unmentioned in between. The working class.

I'd love to see Obama address the House GOP and say, about the conflict that's now brewing about raising the debt ceiling, that while compromises are needed to be agreed upon and the GOP refuses to budge until their demands are met that when the deadline arrives the spending cuts needed to take us a few months down the line paying our military and our social security responsibilities, will be guaranteed because from midnight at the deadline of August 2nd the salary of every member of both the House and Senate will be frozen so that those programs, the military salaries and social security, can be paid. While all government funded perks to those members of those houses, such as private government funded transportation, will be indefinitely suspended, in order to cut costs.

I'd love to see the power take the hit rather than the people. But that would take balls and we've yet to see a President that has those when it comes to something like this. That's why they need to get a qualified woman in office to see if there is a pair out there, only found resting further north in a Victoria's Secret under wire.

Lol you really hate successful people, don't you?

I agree with your objection to the stadium though. The state shouldn't be paying for a fucking football stadium. Move the Vikings to Toronto.

(July 17, 2011 at 11:28 pm)theVOID Wrote: What part of 'libertarianism does not advocate any special interest funding' do you not understand? Sports teams can go fuck themselves, if there isn't enough demand for their services to fund a billion dollar stadium then they shouldn't fucking get one.

What part of "libertarianism" in America means no such thing do you not get?

Quote:they'd hold America hostage until public policy was let to revert back to the Bush Jr. era.

More like the Benjamin Harrison era.

(July 18, 2011 at 12:14 am)Minimalist Wrote:

(July 17, 2011 at 11:28 pm)theVOID Wrote: What part of 'libertarianism does not advocate any special interest funding' do you not understand? Sports teams can go fuck themselves, if there isn't enough demand for their services to fund a billion dollar stadium then they shouldn't fucking get one.

What part of "libertarianism" in America means no such thing do you not get?

Oh bullshit you sad little man, you specifically asked the libertarians here, Myself and Adrian, to explain "why rich cocksuckers have to be permitted to suck on the public tit while the poor and middle class pay through the fucking nose" - When I tell you, at your request, that giving public funding to special interests is EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what I defend you bitch and moan that you were talking about "American libertarians" - BULL FUCKING SHIT, you're a narrow minded asshole and your tactics are so transparent that you could host your own version of Glenn Beck on some communist china TV network.

Why don't you go find me a single self-proclaimed libertarian in the USA who advocates spending billions of dollars propping up sports industry? If these "American libertarians" are all what you describe them as it should be pretty easy to track one down, but you won't find ANY, because the only person who is giving blatant neo-cons the label "American libertarians" is YOU.

Well, you come on over and explain to the Koch brothers and the rest of the libertarianazis around here that they are wrong.

Meanwhile, they will keep doing what they are doing and driving this country into the shitter. I wish you well. Our local republicans don't seem to have the backbone to tell them off.

Maybe they'll listen to a couple of foreigners.


But I doubt it.

(July 18, 2011 at 12:33 am)Minimalist Wrote: Well, you come on over and explain to the Koch brothers and the rest of the libertarianazis around here that they are wrong.

Meanwhile, they will keep doing what they are doing and driving this country into the shitter. I wish you well. Our local republicans don't seem to have the backbone to tell them off.

Maybe they'll listen to a couple of foreigners.


But I doubt it.

Congratulations Min, you have truly became an analogue of Glenn Beck! Just like he attacks socialism by taking a socialist who was an asshole such as Stalin or Hitler and then rambling about how all socialists are like Stalin, you attack positions you disagree with by finding someone on the other side who most people find deplorable and then use it as an ad homnimen to attack the position it's self - Just like him you completely ignore the fact that some people are just ass holes regardless of their general position, except of course when they are of a similar position to yourself.

Oh, but wait a second, you actually fail harder than Beck, because at least there is no real question that Hitler or Stalin were of the socialist political philosophy despite their totalitarianism (Which is NOT an argument against Socialism), there is a serious question about whether or not the Koch brothers are still libertarians, for instance;

"The Koch brothers who strongly deny having anything to do with the Tea Party, even though they fund it heavily, are going to have a hard time keeping their Libertarian title. The billionaire brothers who own a conglomerate of companies have decided that their billions are more important than the environment. Clearly the Koch’s never read the Libertarian Party platform which includes supporting a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources."

"The Koch brothers, who say they are Libertarian, have recently been tied to donations and parties for the Tea Party who of course is anti-anything as long as it gets attention. The Libertarian agenda specifically seeks to reduce pollution especially that created by corporations and with the amount of industry the Koch’s own they’re one of the biggest polluters in the country."

"When fighting government regulation helps them maximise profits – even by putting the rest of us at risk from cancer-causing chemicals – they are all about libertarianism. Yet when government rules or subsidies provide an opportunity to make some money, that free-market ideology is quietly shelved."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/...s-lobbying
http://www.mybloggityblog.com/wordpress/...communist/
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/...fact_mayer

Not only that, but their donations to the Republicans MASSIVELY outweigh their donations to the Libertarian party and they clearly favour the Tea Party over the Libertarians in the modern landscape... You would think that, given that these two are genuinely greedy asshole who go beyond self interest and actively seek to force their will on others and hide from the genuine damage they do to others or their property, if they really thought that libertarianism was their best bet they wouldn't be funnelling money into the corporatocracy, right? They want less regulation AND subsidies, Libertarianism will give them the former, Democrats will give them the later, the GOP will give them both - And which of the those parties are likely to take the harm done by their pollution seriously? The Libertarian party platform ranks it as a priority and the Democrats are trying to engineer a green-economy, so given they actively seek to limit their liabilities it is no fucking surprise where their money is really going - The same fucking bought-and-paid-for neo-conservatism/corporartism that all companies love, the stuff you find most pervasively in the Big Government majority of the Republicans and the "Moderates" in the Democrat party.

(July 18, 2011 at 12:13 am)CharlieMilles Wrote: Lol you really hate successful people, don't you?

You would of thought 'successful people' wouldn't have to be scavenging off the state. If they are 'successful' they can pay for it them-fucking-selves.