More than a quarter of young Iraqi men remain jobless, threatening stability.
By on Feb 16th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
More than a quarter of young Iraqi men remain jobless, threatening stability.
A report released yesterday by the United Nations’s Information Analysis Unit finds that more than “a fourth of Iraq’s young men are out of work, a situation that is likely to worsen and threatens the country’s long-term stability. … Overall, the country’s unemployment rate is 18%, but an additional 10% of the labor force is employed part time and wanting to work more.” In a country still struggling to attract private investment, government jobs now make up 60 percent of employment, a rate that will be unsustainable as oil prices drop.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
If Obama and his team don’t stop deluding themselves into believing the GOP is deserving of bipartisan coddling, that headline just may be talking about young U.S. men here shortly.
Just saying . . .
February 16th, 2009 at 12:41 pmWhat! Darlyy was just saying that Iraq was stable!
February 16th, 2009 at 12:41 pmDid he mean fit for horses to live in?
Don’t let the bogus unemployment figures out of Washington fool ya – the REAL rate is at least 10 points higher.
And among some groups of Americans in urban areas, the unemployment rate is over 50 percent.
Yes – dur chimpfurher’s policies in Iraq have been a disaster – certainly the nation is not better off. The only folks that are better off are those with investments in the military-industrial complex.
We also have these type of employment issues, threatening stability, here in America.
All another result of dur chimpfurher, repugs/neocons, and the criminal cabal behind that administration.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:42 pmWow, 60% work for the government….socialism?
They are better allies with Iran than they are with us.
success? I don’t think we got our moneys worth and bush sold our soul to the devil to boot.
the presidential rankings must be revised…..bush deserves a permanent position at the bottom.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:43 pmMaybe the SHRUB could hire some of these folks to build his new LIE-BERRY……..just sayin.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:44 pmAccording to all progressives and liberals alike capitalism is a doomed economic system and according to them doesn’t work at all.
watchdog, unless you can post a link or an actual quote by an actual progressive or liberal who has expressed such a sentiment, then you are engaging in “truth reform”.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:47 pmMore than a quarter of young Iraqi men remain jobless, threatening stability.»
– - Chris Matthews is always amazed and amused when he sees Iraqi men by the hundreds congregating and demonstrating in front of news cameras. “Don’t they have anything better to do?”
Well no, Chris, they don’t. This movie could be coming to our neighborhoods pretty soon.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:49 pmReading comprehension problems or willful ignorance…..I choose the latter.
funny dude, bussiness did just fine under Clinton…..not so good under bush….it’s that unfettered part that got them into trouble…..agian.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:49 pmActually, watchdog, forget it. You said “all” progressives. I don’t need you to provide anything since, I, as one of the “all” have clearly stated my belief that capitalism is the best economic system that humans can create. However, I have also stated my belief that free markets must have regulation against greed, just as free people must have laws against harming others.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:50 pmwatchdog is a backwash drinker – big fan of dur chimpfurher neocon/repugs that front the criminal cabal behind that administration.
Of course, those that really made out like bandits looted money far in excess of avarice – they are certainly not bloggin’ here, defending their ciminality.
One can ask why some of the hacks come here to post trash, but then again, they really don’t matter anymore.
The politics they stand for has been widely rejected – if not for the lying liars in the mainstream media, they would not even have a voice. The comments they post here are even more meaningless than the tripe that gets trumpeted on faux and the rest of the noise machine.
Right rush? (only 22 percent approval)
February 16th, 2009 at 12:52 pmwatchdog Says:
“… According to all progressives and liberals alike …”
_______________
You really have nothing to say, do you? Your comments are irrational and silly.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:52 pmAll progressives and liberals? ALL? Gee… the “one-size-fits-all” put down. Define “libs’ for me. Just once. I want to hear it. I DARE you.
Another Joe Says:
watchdog is a backwash drinker…
__________
Actually… being a dog… he prolly drinks out of the toilet… when he isn’t busy licking his own… oops… there he goes again.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:54 pmPatrioticLiberalChristian Says:
However, I have also stated my belief that free markets must have regulation against greed, just as free people must have laws against harming others.
The criminality some choose to defend here goes far beyond greed – there are no “free markets” in the crony-capitalism that the repugs and neocons have ALWAYS stood for.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:54 pmSide note CEO’s change the word Bonuses to Award.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:54 pmWell, the Shrub did say he wanted them to have a society like ours.
Says something that our present state of affairs closely resembles that of a country that has had the crap bombed out of it for the past 5 years.
Georgie, the idea was to RAISE the standards over there.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:55 pm@12:57
February 16th, 2009 at 1:03 pmThat really your retort? LMFAO
watchdung, like other rightwingers, think they can hide behind a mainstream economic system to cover for the seething corporatism of the last eight years. I love mentioning that job creation is typically better for everyone under democratic presidents. Right-wingers think they own the concept of an economy with no proof whatsoever that such ownership rightfully belongs to them.
I care about the small mom-and-pop shops, troll. I care about undoing the regressive tax policies that have hurt poor and middle class people. I care about a socially-conscious economy that leaves no one group in a permanent recession.
As for the government, especially on the federal side, they tend to set the example by being more open to unionization, keeping pensions intact, providing good health care to employees, among a slew of benefits.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:03 pmWhy does watchdog lick his scrotum all day?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:05 pmBecause he can.
So-So-So-So-SOROS!!!
***quivering***
February 16th, 2009 at 1:05 pmwatchdog, what is your point with the Soros quote?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:06 pmI’m guessing watchdog does not even understand the Soros quote.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:09 pmAnd watchdog, your kind spent most of the last year labelling Obama a socialist, a communist, a marxist, a terrorist, a muslim, an elitist, and whateve else you could throw agains the wall…and look what happened. The country voted for him in record numbers anyway. It looks like “real” americans want a socialistic, communistic, marxist, terroristic, islamic, and elitist government.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:09 pmwatchpug says: liberalism – a political position that supports heavier regulation of the economy and more welfare.
For a troll that isn’t a bad first effort. By heavier regulation do you mean doing something to keep the ultra rich from accepting their welfare in $350 billion bailouts?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:10 pmwatchpuppy,
Soros was warning against the things you support. Obviously, reading comprehension is a problem for you.
in other words, the bush admin with the gop had us on the wrong track…..a track destined for failure. Pretty inciteful actually, don’t you agree wpuppy?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:11 pmwatchdog Says:
McWars Says:
As for the government, especially on the federal side, they tend to set the example by being more open to unionization, keeping pensions intact, providing good health care to employees, among a slew of benefits.
Labor unions are labors own worst enemy. For the little good they have done over the years they have done fare more damage to labors than good.
*
excitable. nervous.
sweating. shooting pain
in left arm. heart attack.
buh-bye, doggie.
*
February 16th, 2009 at 1:12 pmIs this what they call free market capitalism nowadays?
Could the familiar story of the Iraq war’s early bungled reconstruction effort get any worse? Yes, it could. The military is now investigating its own senior officers, who are suspected of trading contracts for huge bribes. In a dramatic twist, much of the testimony driving the investigation into the massive corruption scandal comes posthumously from Dale C. Stoffel, an American arms dealer killed under mysterious circumstances by hostile forces in Iraq in 2004. Stoffel described to officials shady deals in which contractors would deliver tens of thousands of dollars hidden in pizza boxes to military leaders in order to score lucrative reconstruction jobs. The New York Times reports the investigation is focused on two officers who held top positions in distributing reconstruction funds shortly after the invasion–Lt. Col. Ronald W. Hirtle of the Air Force and retired Col. Anthony B. Bell of the Army.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/dikkday48yahoocom/2009/02/lucy-you-have-some-splainin-to.php
February 16th, 2009 at 1:12 pmLabor unions are labors own worst enemy. For the little good they have done over the years they have done fare more damage to labors than good.
This only makes sense if I read it out loud with a Scottish accent to match the spelling…and even then, well, still not so much.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:13 pmAw, Fred, I (post 23) was trying to get watchdog to explain the Soros quote, betting that he couldn’t. Wait, I’m not sure he explain your explanation either!
February 16th, 2009 at 1:14 pmWhy do we have to defend against this ignorance? Blanket statement of belief with nothing to support it….nothing…absolutly nothing.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:14 pmKnock, knock. Yup, the puppie’s head is made of wood.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:16 pmFrom Merriam-Webster online:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberalism
Main Entry:
lib·er·al·ism
Pronunciation:
\?li-b(?-)r?-?li-z?m\
1: the quality or state of being liberal
2 a often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity
b: a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard c: a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties dcapitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal party
—
“… emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market…”
________________
watchpug says: liberalism – a political position that supports heavier regulation of the economy and more welfare.
Funny… your self-serving definition isn’t ANYTHING like what Webster’s says.
Of course, given the enormous damage Bernie Madoff just did, and how a lack of oversight helped him get away w/ it as long as he did, perhaps a little more regulation might not be a bad thang, huh?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:16 pmliberalism – a political position that supports heavier regulation of the economy and more welfare.
That post is brown and yucky — did you pull it out of your undisclosed location?
More welfare: needed when the GOP is in power, since their job creation rate is lower and job axing higher.
Heavier regulation: I don’t think you can name one respectable economist who wouldn’t agree that returning to the Clinton years, or even before the Reagan years, would be a good catalyst for sustained job creation.
If you can’t run a business w/o an element of corruption, you shouldn’t be lobbying the government for less regulation, you should be out of business. (I’m looking at YOU, 400% interest payday lenders plopped around military bases!)
February 16th, 2009 at 1:16 pmWatchdog, just look at the unemployment, poverty and foreclosures under the Shrub vs oh, lets say Clinton and you will see that Dems win hands down when it comes to the economy and the repukes spend like hell with our tax dollars.The re-pukes raised taxes and stop spending to kill the New Deal which was working fine until they came along,Reagan lowered taxes for the wealthy and had a huge deficit, so he raised taxes on the working man and we have suffered since and the Boy Emperor lowered taxes for the wealthy and statrted a war frot the wealthy and now we have a 7 trillion dollar deficit and our economy is in the toilet.We won in Nov. so all youre-pukes can go to Blazes(HELL). and take all of your hypocrises with you.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:17 pmWatchdog barks:
Labor unions are labors own worst enemy. For the little good they have done over the years they have done fare more damage to labors than good.
Right. Cuz nobody wants 40 hr workweeks, or overtime compenstation, or basic safety standards, or OSHA protection, or mine saftey regulation, or child labor laws, or health benefits.
As someone who has been a union member and worked without union protection, I can say that union jobs are so much better in every way. Better for the worker, better for the consumer and better for the community.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:18 pmSorry plc, I just wanted to point out doggies inablility to comprehend…….he seems to be substantiating my implication quite nicely.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:18 pmTROS, I’m saving that 2nd definition for Daryll!
February 16th, 2009 at 1:18 pmThank you! Thank you! Loser idiot freak GWBush! What a service have you provided to humanity! Trash Iraq, it’s people, it’s resources loot, and the world will follow. Let’s all stand and applaud for a new order has emerged. It’s all because of you IDIOT!
February 16th, 2009 at 1:19 pmFred Says:
Why do we have to defend against this ignorance? Blanket statement of belief with nothing to support it….nothing…absolutly nothing.
________________
Excellent reply, Fred. That’s EXACTLY what swatchdog’s comment was.
Meaningless. One could point out that the peak of prosperity for the working and middle class in this country was the Fifties, which strangely enough was also when unions were strongest in this country. Now THAT’S a fact based comment, not just hysterical hand waving and pants wetting.
Oddly… the Fifties is a time righties like to point to endless and say… “Sigh… America was such a great place back then…”
How… how… contradictory… those evil unions… helping to produce the greatest peace-time prosperity this country has ever seen.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:19 pmThe interesting thing about unions is that if management treated their employees fairly, they wouldn’t exist. So the thugs really only have themselves to blame.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:20 pmBobwurst Says:
Right. Cuz nobody wants 40 hr workweeks, or overtime compenstation, or basic safety standards, or OSHA protection, or mine saftey regulation, or child labor laws, or health benefits.
As someone who has been a union member and worked without union protection, I can say that union jobs are so much better in every way. Better for the worker, better for the consumer and better for the community.
_____________
All that’s worth repeating again, Bobwurst…
Bobwurst Says:
Right. Cuz nobody wants 40 hr workweeks, or overtime compenstation, or basic safety standards, or OSHA protection, or mine saftey regulation, or child labor laws, or health benefits.
As someone who has been a union member and worked without union protection, I can say that union jobs are so much better in every way. Better for the worker, better for the consumer and better for the community.
_____________
Don’t forget… unions also raise the wages for non-union members too…
February 16th, 2009 at 1:23 pmFred, no worries. We had the same goal, just a different technique. I hit him low, you hit him high. I do notice that watchdog has chosen to ignore us both.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:23 pmIraq Govenment is sitting on 80 billion dollar surplus and still collecting money from the US. The Iraq Stock Market is doing very well without Foreign investors. The promblem with Iraq is with every country that has a Govenment that gives to the Law Makers and friends and not to the citizens. Iraq is just following the Bush Administration Policies. Notice how Republicans gave out billions to business and Wall Street but voted no to the taxpayers. The US has our own unemployment problems to take care of.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:24 pmAn idiot Says: Labor unions are labors own worst enemy. For the little good they have done over the years they have done fare more damage to labors than good.
I’ve been onto this pattern by the right: if they don’t like something, they go out and claim that it hurts who it intends to help. The underlying motive, of course, is that they know it helps but don’t want the good life spread beyond a lucky few.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:25 pmHoodathunk Says:
——————————————————————————–
The interesting thing about unions is that if management treated their employees fairly, they wouldn’t exist. So the thugs really only have themselves to blame.
I truly believe that`s the biggest reason for unions, slave labor is wanted everywhere and unions put a stop to it in this country and now the rest of civilised society needs unions to.I am a unionized worker for NWA and we have merged with Delta and the amounts of money that management is spending on anti union campaigning is sick when they could be putting it to better use, say new equipment,better customer service and so on.Union yes all the way!!!!EFCA all the way!!
February 16th, 2009 at 1:28 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
——————————————————————————–
From Merriam-Webster online:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberalism
Main Entry:
lib·er·al·ism
Pronunciation:
\?li-b(?-)r?-?li-z?m\
1: the quality or state of being liberal
2 a often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity
b: a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard c: a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties dcapitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal party
I would say, TRoS, that in the vernacular of political debate, item a. is redundant, item b. irrelevant (and weird to find as the second definition) the third is specifically geared toward economics and sounds like it is referencing Libertarianism more than Progressive Liberalism (certainly the stimulus Bill doesn’t fit this definition in any respect) and item d. is the classic definition of Liberalism as used in American politics. Or at least it used to be, until it was rebranded as Progressivism, a bit of semantic judo that never ceases to puzzle as to its motivation.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:29 pmIn 30+ years of working, I have seen many things. I have been a union member, helped organize a union in a shop trying to bust the union, worked beside many union members on all sorts of projects.
I have also seen businesses where the union tried to organize and they were told thanks but no thanks. Their reason was that management was responsible and treated their workers fairly.
Unions will always have a place as long as there is management that doesn’t recognize that without their workers, they are nothing.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:30 pmHoodathunk Says:
The interesting thing about unions is that if management treated their employees fairly, they wouldn’t exist. So the thugs really only have themselves to blame.
__________
As the French would say… Bingeau!
February 16th, 2009 at 1:30 pmWhoops – missed the 2. Move the letters back one so 2c is political liberalism.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:30 pmwatchdog Says:
Do you know how large AIG is? And who is this ultra rich you speak of?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.
Where to start? I don’t know, is there a coloring book lying around?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:31 pmwatchdog Says:
“Although I have made a fortune in the financial markets, I now fear that the untrammeled intensification of laissez-faire capitalism and the spread of market values into all areas of life is endangering our open and democratic society”
By George Soros
Untrammeled – not confined or limited
laissez-faire – an economic doctrine that opposes governmental regulation of or interference in commerce beyond the minimum necessary for a free-enterprise system to operate according to its own economic laws
Watchdog, through your own posts you again display an astonishing lack of reading comprehension (as many TP’ers have pointed out). Once the Cons were able to declaw regulation and oversight to BELOW what should be the accepted minimum to provide some sort of fairness to the open market, things began to nosedive.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:31 pmWill Ferrell is out of a job too now that Bush is gone.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:32 pmMaybe the RNC could hire some of those unemployed Iraqis to troll progressive websites and defend the bush occupation…they’d be better than the current crop of trolls we have here.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:33 pmWhy do the trolls like law and order that keeps murders and such off the street, support law enforcement (other than they get a woodie over guns) yet think it is totally cool to allow someone to scam billions of dollars with impunity?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:35 pmApologies to Henney…”Take my pension plan…please!”
February 16th, 2009 at 1:38 pmHoodathunk said: management that doesn’t recognize that without their workers, they are nothing
This is the basis of my disgust everytime I hear a “trickle downer” talk about how the entrepeneurs should get the tax breaks because they are the ones creating jobs and making the economy work. Entrepeneurs and management make money primarily off the labor of the middle class workers. It should be a symbiotic relationship but, instead, the management looks at the workers as no more than another piece of machinery to use and abuse if they choose. (Disclaimer: I recognize that there are exceptions to this description of management and I also recognize that there are lazy workers.)
February 16th, 2009 at 1:39 pmwatchdog,Do you even understand SOCIALISM and how it works in the 21 st century?It actually means health care, welfare, food stamps amd much much more, and in case you didn`t know it, in the southern states from S.Carolina to Texas recieve more gov`t money(socialized) than blue states when it come to these entitlements.I call it RED STATE SOCIALISM/ GOV`T MONEY what would you call as a conservative re-puke that wants a small gov`t and be fiscally responsible.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:40 pmMorning, keltoi.
As far as the defintion t’ing goes, swatchdog just got on my nerves w/ that BS.
Trolls just love to come her and sneer “you Libs” over and over and over. It’s so vague as to be meaningless and certainly doesn’t address the range of opinions people express here. It’s generally used as some sort of generic put down that has no REAL meaning.
I would go so far as to say what I was attempting was to show how different REAL definitions can be from a troll’s self-serving one. One of the bigger mistakes people made over the last twenty years or so was to let the righties get away controlling definitions. They’ve tried to make words like “liberal” and “progressive” as toxic as possible, which in turn produced results like Michael Savage and Jim Atkisson.
It’s a complicated issue.
Love to stick around and play “Kick the can” but I’m late… I’m late… for a very important date.
Later, all! Make sure ya’ll give swatchy one last swift one for me!
February 16th, 2009 at 1:40 pmBobwurst Says:
Maybe the RNC could hire some of those unemployed Iraqis to troll progressive websites and defend the bush occupation…they’d be better than the current crop of trolls we have here.
“Hey libs, I lost my mother and father, both brothers and my nephew, but this new theme park made it worthwhile.”
February 16th, 2009 at 1:45 pmLater TRoS, stay safe.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:45 pmKeltoi at Night Says:
The Republic of Stupidity Says:
——————————————————————————–
From Merriam-Webster online:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/liberalism
Main Entry:
lib·er·al·ism
Pronunciation:
\?li-b(?-)r?-?li-z?m\
1: the quality or state of being liberal
2 a often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity
b: a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard c: a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties dcapitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal party
I would say, TRoS, that in the vernacular of political debate, item a. is redundant, item b. irrelevant (and weird to find as the second definition) the third is specifically geared toward economics and sounds like it is referencing Libertarianism more than Progressive Liberalism (certainly the stimulus Bill doesn’t fit this definition in any respect) and item d. is the classic definition of Liberalism as used in American politics. Or at least it used to be, until it was rebranded as Progressivism, a bit of semantic judo that never ceases to puzzle as to its motivation.
*
there’s funny semantics for you.
*
missed your “semantics” on this post:
Bush trying to beat ‘bad environment’ for fundraising by enlisting his dad and Karl Rove for help.
too cowardly to put your money where
your mouth is and help out the 42nd best
president in u.s. history k?
*
February 16th, 2009 at 1:45 pmwatchdog Says:
According to all progressives and liberals alike capitalism is a doomed economic system
Sorry to all progressive and nice folks here. But I agree with watchdog.
I don’t think he really understands what Capitalism is, but I agree with what he said.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:47 pmThis unemployment goes back to the Bush administration. The man Bush appointed right after the first weeks, Paul Bremer fired everyone in the Army and those that ran the infrastructure. So there was no one left except lousy contractors to work and badly re-build.
As the war has continued, it is worse. With no jobs of course it threatens the little stability there is. Typical planning that was no planning. Pointless and stupid.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:49 pmMcWars,
February 16th, 2009 at 1:52 pmWho, what thread did one of the Trolls claim (paraphrased)our losses personally and nationally on 9/11 justified its/thier bigotry and hate of anything Middle Eastern.
Do you recall, Was that BM?
watchdog Says:
“Although I have made a fortune in the financial markets, I now fear that the untrammeled intensification of laissez-faire capitalism and the spread of market values into all areas of life is endangering our open and democratic society”
By George Soros
February 16th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Did you even read this quote, dingbat?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:58 pmYeesh, what are they griping about. Only those Iraqis not dead or horribly maimed are out of work. Look at how many jobless we helped get rid of. /snark
February 16th, 2009 at 1:59 pmWhy are we not doing anything about this problem?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:59 pmOh, I forgot.. Everything is peachy in Iraq!
I hope to hear how our new President plans to address this. Yes, it is the Repugs Chimpees mess on ALL Fronts. It is up to President Obama (Flows from Fingers) to do everything within his power to bring this Nation forward positively.
So far, the man has not dissapointed.
50 – The union concept dates all the way back to medieval European guild system. It ensured that the people doing skilled jobs actually had the skills to do the jobs well.
Union Electricians today, for instance, wire things so that soldiers taking showers are not electrocuted. That’s a benefit that accrues in both directions – toward the customer who wants their money’s worth and a job professionally done, and to the skilled tradesperson who is fairly compensated for their knowledge and skill.
Whereas I would definitely have a union plumber do my new home, I would never have joe the plumber do my new home, even if he were 50% cheaper.
Doctors have their AMA. Lawyers have their Bar Association. There is no good, rational reason that others in skilled trades cannot have a professional association to belong to that bestows accreditation and provides benefits to its members.
Righties who oppose unions make themselves mere attack dogs for their Elitist masters.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:11 pmComing soon to a country near you.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:11 pmJuan C, pure, ideally performed Capitalism is a pretty fancy idea. Full private ownership of enterprise. This would mean that the owner of a company would recognize that each worker they employ has ‘private ownership’ of their efforts and labors and should be fully compensated for said labors, commensurate to the profit derived as a result.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:11 pmif our unemployment rate in this country doesn’t improve we’re going to have a problem in the united states. time we start worrying about the welfare of our nation. afterall, iraq’s government had an 80 billion dollar surplus last year.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:14 pmJuan, you can agree with dogwash all you want, and you’ll both still be fundamentally mistaken.
It is not a binary proposition, of the form “A or notA”.
Skim a freshman logic text. It will help you a lot.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:14 pmKeltoi at Night Says:
Or at least it used to be, until it was rebranded as Progressivism, a bit of semantic judo that never ceases to puzzle as to its motivation.
Seriously? Where were you when the Right succeeded in making “liberal” a dirty word? Yeeps, I thought you were more observant than that.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:21 pmtombaker
I think Juan is just saying that capitalism is doomed…..in the long run he is right. Eventually, we will not need the bobbles and chains of capitalism. Our interests will be survival and other mental exercises to move mankind forward…..if we don’t destroy ourselves first.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:21 pmHoodathunk Says:
Full private ownership of enterprise.
I don’t think Capitalism has anything to do with public or private ownership. Wall Street doesn’t despise at all the State. They really want a strong and active participation of the State, but only when it works for them.
tombaker Says:
Juan, you can agree with dogwash all you want, and you’ll both still be fundamentally mistaken.
How so?
Skim a freshman logic text. It will help you a lot.
Didn’t get it.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:27 pmRandomChaos Says:
McWars,
Who, what thread did one of the Trolls claim (paraphrased)our losses personally and nationally on 9/11 justified its/thier bigotry and hate of anything Middle Eastern.
Do you recall, Was that BM?
Yesterday BM was on a thread justifying the Hiroshima bombing by reason of “Japs” being blown away. The troll then stated that more racism in practice would do us good. As for the middle east bigotry, I don’t know of any particular post but that kind of bigotry goes on w/o saying in the reich-wing community.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:29 pmCapitalism is an economic system in which wealth, and the means of producing wealth, are privately owned and controlled rather than commonly, publicly, or state-owned and controlled
February 16th, 2009 at 2:31 pmSorry, I didn’t credit the source. It was from Wikipedia.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:32 pmJuan C. Says:
I don’t think Capitalism has anything to do with public or private ownership.
Hmmm…little tidbits like this make it hard for me to believe that you understand what capitalism even IS. Care to clarify?
February 16th, 2009 at 2:33 pmFred – 10-4 I did apparently misinterpret Juan’s comment – but I don’t think that’s what is generally believed. If so, it’s a huge oversimplification of economics.
Capitalism will always exist, just like fire will.(if you doubt that, pause to consider prostitution) It’s all about how it is used or misused that carries all the heavy sociopolitical consequences. There is no handy wholesale replacement for it, nor should there be.
If you want to talk about “Contemporary American Laissez Faire Capitalism”, then that’s another story altogether. That brand of macroCapitalism is what we see in ruin on tv every day lately, and commenting that it is doomed is just to state the obvious about an accomplished fact.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:33 pmHoodathunk Says:
Capitalism is an economic system in which wealth, and the means of producing wealth, are privately owned and controlled rather than commonly, publicly, or state-owned and controlled
I like Juan C’s “rolling” definition theory. Whatever he thinks at a certain point in time – BOOM! – capitalism!! Also, ALL Liberals think capitalism is DOOMED!!! Just ask Juan!
February 16th, 2009 at 2:35 pmtombaker Says: Capitalism will always exist, just like fire will.(if you doubt that, pause to consider prostitution)
I think you might be confusing Capitalism and free enterprise. Also, it has long been the case in prostitution that the worker is seldom independent and enjoys the ‘fruits of their labor’.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:37 pmHey guys, I just invented a new thing called a turkey sandwich! First you slice a canteloupe into 1 inch cubes, repeat this process with a watermelon, add sliced strawberries and a sliced kiwi, add pineapple slices to taste, along with nectarine sections in a large mixing bowl and VOILA!! A wholesome Trukey Sandwich!!!
February 16th, 2009 at 2:38 pmTweedster, the repugs believe it too. Why do you think they are whining so loudly?
February 16th, 2009 at 2:38 pmHoodathunk Says:
Tweedster, the repugs believe it too. Why do you think they are whining so loudly?
The more I re-read Juan’s “definition” of capitalism, the more on board I am with it. From a Cons point of view, it isn’t about who owns what, as long as at the end of the day, they have managed to swindle somebody. Doesn’t matter if the government owns it, or some other private entity does…
February 16th, 2009 at 2:43 pmgummitch Says:
——————————————————————————–
Keltoi at Night Says:
Or at least it used to be, until it was rebranded as Progressivism, a bit of semantic judo that never ceases to puzzle as to its motivation.
Seriously? Where were you when the Right succeeded in making “liberal” a dirty word? Yeeps, I thought you were more observant than that.
No, I noticed their attempt to make it a dirty word. I didn’t notice when the Left decided to cede the point. I guess when Hillary refused to call herself a Liberal but embraced Progressivism, when Air America branded itself Progressive Radio instead of Liberal Radio the signs were there…it is just that it is a fine word, especially as defined by Webster in TRoS post. I am surprised you guys decided to run away from it. ‘Course, “conservatives” are running away from “republican”, so it cut both ways.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:44 pmMaybe Juan will chime in here but as a socialist myself, I agree with Juan. Capitalism is an unnesseassary evil. In varying socialist societies there are plenty of incintives to do better and improve your life. It’s just not done by demanding a house that has been in the family for a generation in exchange for life saving medical care.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:45 pmJuan – My point about the logic is that we are not faced with an “either – or” type of choice regarding economic models. In fact, economic principles become so blended in practice that it’s extremely inaccurate to apply one-word labels to any one particular example.
Capitalism is accomplished any time someone gets paid more for something than they paid for it. If I take a log that I bought for $50, carve it with my chainsaw into a bear, then sell it to someone for $100, I am a capitalist. Even in some post-apocalyptic world, with no governments or laws, there would be capitalism – and socialism – and communism.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:45 pmTweedster Says:
Hmmm…little tidbits like this make it hard for me to believe that you understand what capitalism even IS. Care to clarify?
Clarify? Like this?
I like Juan C’s “rolling” definition theory. Whatever he thinks at a certain point in time – BOOM! – capitalism!! Also, ALL Liberals think capitalism is DOOMED!!! Just ask Juan!
whatever.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:45 pmHooda – How does “enterprise” differ from “capitalism”?
February 16th, 2009 at 2:47 pmI’m as Lefty as they come. Union born and bred. Hell, I’m even left handed, but I don’t agree that State ownership and management of the offices and factories we work in would represent any real advantage.
Regulate and Govern – by all means.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:49 pmOwn outright? – what the hell for?
Fred – Those “socialist” countries you’re talking about are actually parliamentary democracies like ours, and they are Capitalist – they just do a lot more regulating and governing, and deliver a lot more in services to their citizens. Norway, Sweden, and France, however, are not “Socialist” countries.
We’re getting our nouns and adjectives all out of whack here folks.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:53 pmHi, Juan. How’s it going?
February 16th, 2009 at 2:55 pmtombaker Says:
Juan – My point about the logic is that we are not faced with an “either – or” type of choice regarding economic models. In fact, economic principles become so blended in practice that it’s extremely inaccurate to apply one-word labels to any one particular example.
I agree completely.
Capitalism is accomplished any time someone gets paid more for something than they paid for it. If I take a log that I bought for $50, carve it with my chainsaw into a bear, then sell it to someone for $100, I am a capitalist.
Well, yes. You just “created” wealth. But that’s a myth. Wealth can’t be created.
Even in some post-apocalyptic world, with no governments or laws, there would be capitalism – and socialism – and communism.
Or something we don’t know. Personally, I wouldn’t mind leaving in a Capitalism system IF everyone had their basic, elementary necessities fulfilled. But that’s impossible. When Reagan and Thatcher began promoting free market and no regulation, the basics of that theory was that the “good will” of the money barons would rain the wealth to the lower classes. Right.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:55 pmtombaker, It’s a good discussion though and we shouldn’t avoid it. China is socialist. They have incintives for people to get ahead for instance.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:59 pmHey, Z. Excellent in spite of being married. Heh.
:)
February 16th, 2009 at 2:59 pmSo Juan, you’re proposing a barter-only system of some kind? Any examples of the alternative you’re advocating?
February 16th, 2009 at 3:00 pmAh well, Juan, we all have our bears to cross. :D
February 16th, 2009 at 3:00 pmhttp://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/a-fraud-bigger-than-madoff-1622987.html
Check out how billions of the reconstruction money was “spent”.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:01 pmAnd joblessness leads to less affiliation with the insurrection !
Let’s compare to 1920’s Germany
High Unemployment – check
Vanquished nation – check
political vacuum – check
Lack of basic services – check
A proud country looking to regain its former glory – check
Of course, this isn’t a great analysis……
February 16th, 2009 at 3:02 pmChina is still run by their version of the Communist Party.
Yes, they have allowed a kind of capitalism to operate there, but I would not trade my albeit un-wealthy, un-insured life here for the life of a Guangdong bicycle painter for, lol, all the tea in China.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:02 pmMy 2-cents: Capitalism, with governmental regulation, is the best system for creating new goods and services. Socialism, meaning public or government ownership and control, is best for necessities, which certainly includes police, fire, military and I think basic health care.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:03 pmJuan C. Says:
Capitalism is accomplished any time someone gets paid more for something than they paid for it. If I take a log that I bought for $50, carve it with my chainsaw into a bear, then sell it to someone for $100, I am a capitalist.
Well, yes. You just “created” wealth. But that’s a myth. Wealth can’t be created.
How is this true? He is $50 dollars wealthier – his work created a $50 value that didn’t exist previously. His $50 can be exchanged for other products that are the result of others work which enhanced the raw materials they were formed of. How is it impossible to create wealth from work?
February 16th, 2009 at 3:11 pmtombaker, how about Aruba, all business on the island is owned by Aruba. The refinery is called CARC Coastal Aruba Refining Company. The tourism is all owned by Aruba. The residents live well and lack nothing.
How about Venesuala? and many other South American countries. The little violence many of them see is a result of US actions in the area to try to stop the advance of socialism…
February 16th, 2009 at 3:11 pmWe need to be distinguishing between capital-ism and capital-istic; social-ism and social-istic. We’re missing all kinds of bandwidth between the poles on this topic.
PLC’s got the vibe. Some concepts work better for particular endeavors than others. The goal should be to come up with the best blend for a given set of circumstances. Clearly, the USA needs to swing to the socialist side more than it has in a long time – that doesn’t mean that the very idea of capitalism is “vanquished” or “obsolete” or that 100%, capitol S Socialism is the one brand of medicine best for whatever ails you.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:11 pmCapitalism, Socialism, Communism, Republicanism, Democraticism, Progressivism. As long as we keep working real hard at classifying and labeling things with terms dating back 150+ years, can we bring back powdered wigs? Knee pants? Candles on Xmas trees?
February 16th, 2009 at 3:12 pmtombaker Says:
So Juan, you’re proposing a barter-only system of some kind? Any examples of the alternative you’re advocating?
Sorry, if I sound like a wiseass. I’m not trying to do that. I know as much as anybody, but my impression is that there is a lot of ambiguity around Capitalism and Communism concepts. For example, there is the idea that under Communism you can’t express your individuality, you can’t progress, you are stuck and whatever, but under Capitalism you can be whatever you want, just look at Will Smith being a broker, blah, blah, blah. I don’t think economic terms describe social or political frames precisely.
Now, China, how can that be a communist or socialist country when 20 million people have more money than the 1 billion rest?
I am an anarchist, if you ask, but people tend to think about riots and disorder and etc. And I’m a Steelers fan also. :)
February 16th, 2009 at 3:12 pmOhhhhhhh, candles on Xmas trees. Lots of warmth for the family. Very exciting!
February 16th, 2009 at 3:14 pmKeltoi your confusion stems from your understanding that things are worth what you can get out of them…..it’s a republican notion.
It is used to salve their consienses when they have just robbed some poor old lady.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:14 pmKeltoi Says:
How is it impossible to create wealth from work?
You took it from somebody else. As simple as that.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:15 pmThose are good examples of alternatives in action Fred. You won’t find me defending the American economic status quo against any-and-all other ideas.
Remember though, that as long as we have people in charge of political and economic institutions there will be flaws and failures as well as organized corruption and graft. It doesn’t matter what political uniform they wear to work.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:16 pmKeltoi at Night Says:
February 16th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
If you really think about it, Keltoi, that wealth is re-distributed, not created.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:16 pmHow are you, Z?
How is everybody at the Zoo? I miss trueblue.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:17 pmWealth has a very slippery definition. Anyone know what caused the collapse of the Spanish Empire back in the 15th century?
February 16th, 2009 at 3:19 pm“You took it from somebody else. As simple as that.”
No. Not really. Whoever bought my chainsaw bear would do so of their own free will.
Are you suggesting I’d be mugging someone then putting the bear in their trunk as an apology for mugging them? I’ve never seen that happen in real life.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:20 pmThings are good, Juan. Studying more than ever. Stop by the Zoo sometime, we’d love to know how the PhD program is going, and married life (that seems really weird). trueblue isn’t around as much. I think Miniblue monopolizes the computer.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:20 pmSee health insurance industry.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:23 pmZ points to another important distinction: “wealth” v. “worth”
February 16th, 2009 at 3:24 pmtombaker Says:
Are you suggesting I’d be mugging someone then putting the bear in their trunk as an apology for mugging them? I’ve never seen that happen in real life.
Do you think Wal-Mart should apologize for giving such low wages? For breaking the law and forbidding any attempt of labor union? For breaking the law in other countries by using exploited labor hands and child labor? Why would they? They don’t put a gun in your head in order to go to the store.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:26 pmI’d never say that insurance-for-profit, or even banking-for-profit are anything but parasitic enterprises that add little-to-no value, but that’s a matter for regulation, not ideological re-orientation.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:26 pmeconomic crisis in whole world not only in iraq, we had 2,5 million people got jobless in 2008, we look in usa first then others
February 16th, 2009 at 3:28 pmI don’t shop at wal-mart Fred, and not because I’ve got a lot of money.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:28 pmUnless it’s not regulated and then you are left with exactly what you said you had never seen. A mugging. Give me your money or your life.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:30 pmJuan (post 126), you are using examples of unregulated capitalism to define and oppose the whole idea of capitalism. This would be the equivalent of using the actions of an unpunished criminal to define and oppose the idea of individual freedom and free will.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:31 pmI think we can survive if we will just accept a few more socialist ideals into our society. We already have some but Americans at large don’t recognize them for what they are, only the benefits we receive from them.
Captitalism, I think, with correct balance of regulations is workable…as you stated earlier, many nations are doing it successfully now..Denmark, Sweden, France, etc.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:33 pmCapitalism was created by bankers and people who practiced commerce that didn’t want to see any involvement of regulation by feudal lords or feudal states. Capitalism in its true form wouldn’t survive 5 minutes.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:34 pmJuan C. Says:
I am an anarchist, if you ask, but people tend to think about riots and disorder and etc.
Of the informed 19th century philosophical type, I assume.
And I’m a Steelers fan also. :)
A bond that bridges all political divides, Brother. Don’t you live in Spain, though? Didn’t think they’d be real big there…
February 16th, 2009 at 3:34 pmtombaker, I don’t shop at wal mart for the same reasons as you.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:35 pmI live in Mexico. I think there are more Steelers fan here than in the US.
Later, folks.
Take care.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:38 pmAs to the $50 chainsaw Bear, it is a free exchange, so I don’t see the compulsion. Yes, perhaps it is just wealth being redistributed, but there is a value created by the work of making the product that wasn’t there before the work was done. In that sense, “wealth” is created. Anyone in the Service sector, be they police, teachers or politicians, receive wealth for their work. Without the work, no wealth. It seems like basic John Locke/Adam Smith to me…if you can’t create wealth, where does wealth come from?
February 16th, 2009 at 3:38 pmJuan C. Says:
Capitalism was created by bankers and people
Bartering is capitalism, and much older than banking. Again, Juan, you are pounding on the misuse of a tool as a reason for the tool not to be accepted or used at all.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:38 pmand Fred – how is my chainsaw bear anything at all like the insurance industry??
February 16th, 2009 at 3:39 pmI’m sure the Iraqis are thrilled at the new freedom they are enjoying. I mean they must be so grateful to US for freeing them. I guess our war was successful.. right?
Hey check out my new blog at http://plunditry.com
Thanks!
February 16th, 2009 at 3:40 pmcapitalism was created the first time someone got paid for something, and no one alive could know when or where in the distant recesses of human history that took place.
Tribal bride-wealth is capitalism in action, so not even in a tribal anarchic uptopia can we find an example that suits your purposes.
Usury is a different thing, Juan, and usury is what you’re talking about.
somebody get a goddamned dictionary out.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:42 pmThanks PLC.
And ironic thanks to you Keltoi. I know I’ve harassed you on certain ideas in the past, and it’s nice to find some common ground with a good sport such as yourself.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:44 pm6. watchdog Says: yada yada yada
Does this troll have any idea how stupid his posts are? Definitely a poster child for “you can’t cure stupid”.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:44 pm@132 we’re in full-on agreement Fred.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:46 pmtombaker Says: Thanks PLC.
I’m not sure for what, you held your own and posted some very informative and thoughtful information. I was particularly struck by the capitalistic/ism and socialistic/ism distinction – the labels do help (when they don’t hinder!).
February 16th, 2009 at 3:50 pmwiley Says:
http://www.independent.co.uk/ news/ world/ americas/ a-fraud-bigger-than-madoff-1622987.html
Check out how billions of the reconstruction money was “spent”.
The only place that “reconstruction” money was meant to be spent was into the pockets of the Bush Crime Family & Friends.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:52 pmtombaker Says:
And ironic thanks to you Keltoi. I know I’ve harassed you on certain ideas in the past, and it’s nice to find some common ground with a good sport such as yourself.
Ditto, I am not an ideologue. Some of my ideas are anathema to the Left, but, like economic systems, people’s views are often complicated blends.
Now – where are you on the Steeler Nation? :)
February 16th, 2009 at 3:53 pmIt was an example of someone getting mugged for a product..
health care is the bear. It gets down to the republican “things are worth what you can get out of them” mentality.
In these hard times a local furniture company was offering thier product on tv for half price. The interviewer asked if they would still make a profit. the storeowner said yes.
I was outraged. You mean you can cut your prices in half and still make a profit? this is the problem with unregulated protit taking. It is exactly why we are in the crisis we are in today.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:00 pmSounds like economically we’re beginning to emulate Iraq instead of vice versa.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:00 pmJust a thought, tombaker, but maybe capitalism got side tracked when people who hadn’t made something sold it and figured because they sold it the ones who made it sort of disappeared.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:03 pmFred – I see and agree with your point re: unregulated markets.
Still, chainsaw bears are not essential to life in the way emergency appendectomies are. In real life, I wouldn’t have made dick for profit carving that bear, unless I could do it in an hour or less.
These buy-sell, worth-profit, supply-demand questions are built-in to human life on earth whether we like or want them or not. The mind-bogglingly complex effort to rid us of them would likely cause more harm than they already do themselves.
More regulation. More fairness. More parity.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:09 pmLet’s agree on those things and be happy if we can make some progress on them.
Fred Says: I was outraged. You mean you can cut your prices in half and still make a profit?
You want to hear a major squeal? Have Congress pass a law that caps profits at 20%. All industries, across the board.
You will get the 10% flat tax before you get that one.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:11 pmAnd if you could somehow get it passed, you would see our economy stabilize in 12 months.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:12 pmI agree Hooda,
February 16th, 2009 at 4:17 pmthe republican “things are worth what you can get out of them” mentality or the “market will bear” method of setting prices is what creates…..”bubbles” or things being overvalued.
150 – People get sidetracked. Ideas or concepts just exist. Evolution doesn’t happen for any particular purpose, it just happens.
That’s like saying that fire got sidetracked when it started burning down homes instead of just cooking food.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:19 pmAnd- before anyone takes offense – Fred and Hooda – I agree, and I think some form of price controls would be very effective in warding off these extreme boom-and-bust cycles.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:19 pmEquating a force of nature like fire with a totally controllable thing like prices and integrity is disingenuous.
And sort of silly since man did learn how to contain fire…most of the time. If you want to go with the comparison, yes, fire can be dangerous. It can also be very beneficial when controlled.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:24 pmexactly. which is why i compared it to capitalism.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:41 pmprices and integrity can be managed, but they can’t be controlled.
ice cubes will always be more valuable in Alabama than Anchorage.
mankind is also a force of nature. individuals and groups of people have throughout history done stuff that no one could no more control than predict or even suspect.
can’t make a spreadsheet that covers all that, all the time.
a more managed, or better managed economy would be awesome, and is necessary at this point in our history, but that doesn’t mean that a 100% managed economy would do us any better than this one has. in fact, i’d say that 100% managed economies are not even realistic or possible other than on paper.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:50 pmExplain this
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleid=415415
Iraq needs 10,000 foreign workers?!
Bremer sold the country from underneath them.
February 16th, 2009 at 5:35 pmWhat, has Obama stopped the Bush policy of paying iraqis 300$ a month to stop shooting at us?
February 16th, 2009 at 6:45 pm“An idiot Says: Labor unions are labors own worst enemy. For the little good they have done over the years they have done fare more damage to labors than good.”
I realize this thread is basically kaput, but….
My daughter’s future father-in-law is owns a fairly sizeable plumbing contracting firm in California. He’s a DIE HARD Republican (Everet Dirksen, old school…we tend to have friendly debates a lot) who will NOT vote for a Democrat..EVER. This year he just didn’t vote.
His company, however, will only hire sub-contractors who use union labor. In his words: “At least I know I’ll get the best work they have to give. No guess work. It’s MY Rep on the line.”
February 16th, 2009 at 7:21 pmBush is responsible for the problems in Iraq.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
ONLINE, ANTI-BUSH, EDUCATIONAL, SCHOLASTIC RESEARCH: LISTING OF MAJOR ISSUES
http://andrewyu-jenwang.blogspot.com/2009/01/online-anti-bush-educational-scholastic.html
February 17th, 2009 at 1:16 amHi Andrew. I thought I might find you here. I was wondering, where did you go to school?
February 17th, 2009 at 6:12 amgreat
sikis
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:22 pmporno izle
porno videolar
porn videos