Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eGMNI It shows the "occupiers" keeping a civil rights hero from addressing the "assembly". Everything you need to know one thing about these people can be learned from watching.

listen to them speak: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50rpJ7EQWuI&feature=related

EPA regulations create jobs? Does Ellison consider prison labor on a Louisiana prison farm to be gainful employment? Is it another "Saved" or "Created" job. I see Muslims are suing Catholic University in D.C. to remove crucifixes because they are offended. How can anyone be so stupid? The EPA should check the intellectual environment of mosques. They can pose a hazard to your health.

Does "EPA regulations create Jobs"? Yes, it has actually, and it has made it possible to address things like safe drinking water from your faucet. Things like scientists finding the right amount of chemicals and what chemicals that help prevent bacteria in the waste water treatment plants, the materials created to do so, the new materials used in our everyday lives that make it possible to have safer technologies, which also provides new jobs. I could go on and on here if you want.

EPA regulations have done more to damage this country than help it. It has cost innumerable jobs, and has driven many businesses out of the country. Local problems have become national issues needlessly. Unprofitable, destructive industries and practices are for the best of intentions creating havoc and suffering. Off shore oil drilling,deep sea fishing, limits on mining etc. have bee deeply harmed by the EPA. Just because Satan offers you an apple doesn't mean the results are worthwhile. On another note, students being abused by excessive tuition should take their grievance to the schools. Home owners who have negative equity weren't complaining about unearned equity. The Constitutional limits and responsibilities of elected officials and judges is not being exercised,for that we should all be enraged.

College tuition rates have soared since federally student loans became available. If students didn't have the means to pay such exhorbitant rates tuition rates would likely be much lower. I also believe at the U of M, the cost of becoming a research center has unfairly been placed on the backs, or wallets of students, who do not directly benefit from the research departments. If the EPA is such a purveyor of truth and justice, please tell me why women's birth control chemicals are stealthily causing so much damage to water and aquatic life? Selective vision seems to run rampant in liberal circles. Dogs run in circles too,when chasing their tails.

A woman died recently at Planned Parenthood during a botched abortion. Are you willing to put a moratorium on abortions? Who ever considered the employment possibilities directly related to degrees in Social Sciences, History,Theater, English Lit, Women's Studies or Black History? The only ones might have been instructors in these fields. There is an axiom that if you aren't a liberal in your twenties you have no heart, and if you aren't a Conservative in your forties you have no brain. Think about it.

Amy, I am very familiar with rising tuition costs. If the Madoff affair helped increase costs, are you saying they were decreasing previously? State cuts are needed to get back to a balanced budget. The cuts primarily affect additional construction, not tuition. Federal student loans have everything to do with increased tuition. Education is a product with a cost, and consumers with the desire and the ability to buy. Name one product or service where government intervention has lowered costs? Health care,housing, roads, water, milk, automobiles, planes, trains, fuel are all being brought to us with increased costs directly attributable to government intervention. This is not to say government is evil. What I am saying is that a diminished demand or a price that is beyond the ability of consumers drives costs down. What is the incentive to lower tuition? Pell Grants and over valued scholarships also help to increase tuition rates. The availability of money keeps costs high. Government provides the money, or makes it available. Eliminate this intervention and tuition rates will decline.

I don't have to be defined as a "party" mind. That type of mentality is hurting this nation.
As citizens we should be defining what is true and rational to fix our problems. Abortion is always used politically, and you can go to many sites on the internet and find anything you want to support one way or another, in fact - you could do the same on cable tv. I prefer to use my skills and experience finding out what the real problems are, and how to go about finding solutions. It would be more beneficial if others did that. We could get more done. Kevin, if you want to know where to find info, and are not sure - I can help. Things like reviewing bills, understanding language in those bills, or perhaps where to get non biased information and you want it and need help, just say so - and I will help. We have a lot to do as citizens. Political duels costs us plenty and gets us nowhere.

If individuals define what is true and rational, reality will become a figment of one's imagination.The truth is discovered, not created. You may be an Independent, yet you seem to look to the government for solutions. I somewhat agree with President Reagan that government is the problem, at least a substantial part of the problem. A non-biased opinion might begin with a grasp of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. If government stayed within its' limits things would be more clearly defined, and better. As an example, if what the government collects from taxpayers towards education alone were left with the individual states, the governmental costs would be reduced 40%. Of one hundred dollars collected by the Federal Gov't only 60% comes back to our local communities. The rest is wasted in administrative black holes. You seem to believe government should do more. I believe government should do less. i believe local communities and individuals can do more, and do it more effectively. If you rely on WCCO, The Star trib, MPR , and TPT for your facts, you might want to check elsewhere. Perception determines preference, which dictates performance. We all need to check our filters regularly and carefully. An incomplete truth will take us in the wrong direction, as surely as a total error would.

Oh dear, no gov involvement is not a solution either. Efficient gov is, no matter if local, state or federal.
Every single post you have created has been abt gov does everything wrong. My only responses are to help you understand it's not all gov problem. To do this you have to quit thinking politically in this existing political climate and start digging into real sources. Yes, it means you have to understand government, you have to understand business too. I have both because of what I have experienced in my own life. I make an effort to use these skills well. Not everyone has the same experience, so my effort to you was only in that objective. I am rightly tired of those who "think" government is all to blame and refer to the constitution for every argument because they won't do the work it requires to navigate to get things done, and to understand how to do it. I love the constitution, and it seems many only use it not to think, but as a shield for anything but it's real purpose. Kind of how people try to use religion to manipulate others politically and other wise. Religion is personal, shouldn't be in the political arena. That is in our constitution too - but many now have a different understanding because that is the way they want it. I believe in reasonable and well running gov. I think you think anyone that says anything good abt gov. is wrong. Same old.

If you truly believe that access to money has no affect on my ability to obtain something, do you also believe in Santa Claus? When the government pays, we all pay.The government's source for money is its ability to tax. Subsidies do not lessen cost. If I give you half of the price of a car, the total price of the car is unchanged. I paid the difference above what you pay. If produce cost one dollar, and it cost two to ship it, and one more to market it, the cost is four dollars. If government pays the shipping it doesn't lessen the cost, it distributes the cost among all taxpayers. Let's get Paddock out of the intellectual paddock to graze in better fields of thought. Have a nice day. This old man needs a nap. Bye !

The muslims are the ones that are leading these so called protests. They are trying to do in America what they have done in Syria, Egypt and so of the other countries. They want to destroy America and setup sharia law, they are doing it in other countries and the people in America are falling for their lies. And keith ellison and others are the one that are putting them together. The occupation orlando is being run by a muslim also and they have him on tape doing it. These occupations need to be stopped now or all of us will either be dead or have our butts in the air five times a day to a false god..Peace to all non-muslims with a brain.

Hi Amy, Kaafir writes like an Occupier who is pretending to be against the Occupation. He, (or maybe it's a she), is probably doing this to paint anyone who could be against the kooks at the Occupation as a racist or a Neanderthal. I would think that someone who is intelligent, like you, would instantly see through his/her ruse.

Ellison continues to surprise me. He is afraid of premature births, yet supports Planned Parenthood and its multi-million abortions. He supports the protesters,and they have some legitimate grivances, but assumes no responsibility for supporting policies that have created these problems. Ellison's being a Muslim has no bearing on his bid for re-election. His association with CAIR does. I have several Muslim neighbors, and have been to an introductory class at the Islamic Center on Cedar in Bloomington. You can find good and bad in any group of people. If you think OWS is peaceful, in part you are correct. It does have violent,destructive elements, Oakland being an example. We can do better without Ellison. I would have no problem voting for a Muslim who believed in the Constitution and Moral Capitalism. I don't see this in Ellison. He is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Let me help out Kevin and friends here. Moral Capitalism from the perspective of the Kochs, Norquists, O'Donovans, and other Teapublicans and Latter Day Neocons possibly is: Take the money and run, just don't share, and don't drive over any Republican babies with your get-away car, unless, of course, there's no chance they'll ID the driver.

John, Nobody is entitled to demand and expropriate the lawfully earned assets of another person. Legislators should not be allowed to practice legalized extortion, nor should they be allowed to create a "Beholden Class", that secures its livelihood on the basis of political power. Equal protection and enforcement should be expected by all. End the charade that government is a charity, or has a role in determining and redefining morality. Government should exist within its defined limits. Christian ministers should remember that there is a cross atop their churches and not a weather vane.

Kevin, I'm not sure if that trip through the weeds was intended to be an answer to the question. Perhaps my somewhat flippant post, though it was serious in that it meant to speak to the character of those who subscribe to your wandering ideology, perhaps it disrupted your train of argument. So, let me state the question again. How do you define moral capitalism?

Moral Capitalism is offering goods and services as promised,free of coercion or deceit. Capitalism has brought the greatest advances to satisfy mankind's material needs. It requires freedom to choose. It benefits itself when the customer base grows. Fair markets promote harmony and need peace. To achieve this more people must have the means to purchase,and the intelligence to select wisely. People must exercise their freedom and bear the consequences. Governments role is to enforce a level, honest market. If through governmental interference, and its manipulation of the housing market we don't become aware of the damages of governmental power exceeding its rightful place, when will we? Successful markets need honesty, co-operation and mutual benefit.

Kevin, no social contract? No obligation to society as a whole or to the communitythe capitalist operates in? No real deal to pay enough if a wage so workers can at least buy what they produce and strengthen their place in society, raise, educate, and care for their children and elderly? No obligation to give back commensurate with their ability to do so? Just a supposed benevolent one way street with all the wealth and benevolence flowing to the top. Didn't think if you as a Calvinist.

John, We have a social contract . It is called the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We also have individual state constitutions, legislators, and a body of law. Many people recognize laws taught by their religions. A culture is developed by a shared set of beliefs, and practice. A culture begins to decline when those beliefs and practices are set aside and ignored. Sometimes this is for the good, and sometimes not. A house divided will not endure.

There is no "moral" then to the "capitalism" practiced today in this nation. At least you have yet to define it. And as for a social contract, even President Teddy Roosevelt presented that as a fair shot and a fair shake for all Americans. What we have today is the greed of the big banks and Wall Street, the self serving do nothing to help rhetoric of the GOP, and the meanness if Newt Gingrich. Kevin, it would be helpful to having a meaningful exchange if you would answer the question. Again, how do you define moral capitalism?

Moral capitalism, is Ford. Offering a product that stands on its own. Falls on its own. Will not rip or discourage, destroy the nations public interests for company gain.

Moral capitalism NOT! Solyndra, Fisker Automotive, GE, ENRON, FANNIE, AIG, FREDDIE,

John, There is "Moral Capitalism" in this country. I am not going to ignore the abuses and crimes that have been committed, nor should anyone. Conservatives work to both preserve and improve. We are not blind. We also do not subscribe to totalitarian socialist policies that are espoused by many Progressives.Decisions have consequences. You might like an inconsequential life,but to many people that is suffocating. You would sacrifice human freedom for the protection you believe that an overbearing government would provide. You must not let yourself feel that you are so weak. Realize your own potential, don't dwell on someone else's good fortune. Jealousy is a deadly poison. Don't drink it. It can paralyze you!

Moral Capitalism is exemplified by Enron, AIG, Goldman Sachs and the rest of Wall Street along with the Koch Brothers, Wells Fargo, and the other corporate gluttons of the nation's wealth, at least it seems that's where Kevin is at. But again, please give us a definition as opposed to meaningless nostrums and poster children of corporate greed.

Don't ever give capitalism both ends of the rope. there is no such thing as "moral" capitalism. It is an economy "type". People, no matter if they believe in a religion or not, can be very easily swayed into greed, as well as over- opportunistic behavior. If capitalism was in fact "moral", people like Al Capone wouldn't have loved it so much.
Furthermore, no matter how you slice the moral pie, there is always someone else deciding what is moral, and what is not. Disagreement will always be.

I do agree with Amy that it (to a degree) is a separate reality, but that to will have a common sense factor.

John and Amy, Moral Capitalism does exist. John, you have the internet, look it up. You will find that Kevin definition along with mine are correct.

Moral Capitalism may exist, just not here and just not now and what Kevin and you keep putting up as exemplar isn't it! And the perpetual incivility (and the idea that you can throw out a theory like Moral Capitalism, and not define it) from the likes of Mr. O'Donovan in no way helps either the argument in general or anyone who may care to take up your position. Charlie, to simply say something exists does not make it so. Give us a definition and then we can have a discussion.

So there is a book with the title "Moral Capitalism", yet again, you fail to offer a definition. In fact, the brief book review offered supports our argument, that of Amy and myself, that Capitalism as we know it is not moral. Let's make it easier, what are the characteristics of Moral Capitalism? And, how does our present experience under today's system measure up?

This question has been answered.

Since you can't give a definition of Moral Capitalism per se, tell us how plain capitalism most be modified to make it Moral Capitalism.

John, since you used the term Neocon I'm sure you won't have any issues with the term Libtard? I suggest you look up the term using the internet, maybe Google? Or... You can by the book Common Sense by Thomas Paine or, you can buy Glen Becks and get his and Thomas Paine's book's together. After that, please use the dictionary. Look up the words moral + capitalism. There you have, moral capitalism! Lol John, this is like "modifying" Keith X, or Barry to make them moral. Some people will never have morals therefore they can never be moral. Companies, while can be modified the people tuning them can not.

It's funny you mention Goldman Sachs

Goldman Sachs personnel in the ObamaWhite House

Lael Brainard: Brainard is the United States Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs in the administration of Obama

Gregory Craig: Former White House Counsel, Recently hired by Goldman Sachs

Thomas Donilon: Deputy National Security Adviser(despite having a career that is mostly involved with domestic politics). Donilon was a lawyer at O’Melveny and Myers and made almost $4 million representing meltdown clients including Penny Pritzker (of Chicago) and Goldman.

William C. Dudley : president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, partner and managing director at Goldman, Sachs and was the firm’s chief U.S. economist for a decade

Douglas Elmendorf: Obama Director of the Congressional Budget Office in January 2009, replaced Furman as Director of the Hamilton Project (Note that the Hamilton Project was funded by Robert Rubin and Goldman Sachs)

Rahm Emanuel: Obama Chief of staff, on the payroll of Goldman Sachs, receiving $3,000 per month from the firm to “introduce us to people,” in the words of one Goldman partner at the time.

Dianna Farrell: Obama Administration: Deputy Director, National Economic Council, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Financial Analyst

Stephen Friedman: Obama Administration: Chairman, President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005

Michael Frohman: Robert Rubin’s Chief of Staff while Rubin served as Secretary of the Treasury and an Obama “head hunter” according to “Rubin Proteges Change Their Tune as They Join Obama’s Team” in the New York Times.

Anne Fudge: appointed Fudge to Obama budget deficit reduction committee. Fudge has been the PR craftsman for some of America’s largest corporations. She sits,according to the Washington Post, as a Trustee of the Brookings Institution within which the Hamilton Project is embedded.

Jason Furman: directed economic policy for the Obama Presidential Campaign, served as the second Director of the Hamilton Project after Peter Orszag’s departure for the Obama administration

Mark Gallogly: Sits on the Hamilton Project’s advisory council. He is also, according to Wikipedia, currently a member of Obama’s President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board.

Timothy Geithner: Secretary of the Treasury, a former managing director of Goldman Sachs

Gary Gensler: Obama Administration: Commissioner, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and Co-head of Finance

Michael Greenstone: the 4th Director of the Hamilton Project. Just as attorney Craig went from advising Obama to defending Goldman Sachs against the SEC complaint, Greenstone has used the revolving door to go from went an economic adviser position to Obama to one of the Goldman Sachs outlets, in this case its think tank embedded in the Brookings Institution and funded by Goldman and Robert Rubin. All 3 previous Directors of the Hamilton Project work in the Obama administration.

Robert Hormats: Obama Administration: Undersecretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, State DepartmentFormer Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs Group

Neel Kashkari: served under Treasury Secretary Paulson and was kept on by Obama after his inauguration for a limited period to work on TARP oversight, former Vice President of Goldman Sachs in San Francisco where he where he led Goldman’s Information Technology Security Investment Banking practice.

Karen Kornbluh: (sometimes called "Obama’s brain") Obama Ambassador to the OECD, was Deputy Chief of Staff to Mr. Goldman Sachs, Robert Rubin

Jacob (AKA "Jack") Lew: the United States Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources. According to Wikipedia, Lew sits on the Brookings-Rubin funded Hamilton Project Advisory Board. He also served with Robert Rubin in Bill Clinton’s cabinet as Director of OMB.

David Lipton: now at Obama’s National Economic Council and the National Security Council. Lipton -worked with Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner, on the US response to the Asian financial crisis of the 1990’s. MergeFoundations reports that Lipton worked closely with Robert Rubin:

Emil Michael: White House Fellow, former investment banker with Goldman Sachs

Eric Mindich: Former chief strategy officer of New York- based Goldman Sachs, started Eton Park in 2004 with $3.5 billion, at the time one of the biggest hedge-fund launches ever. .....Hank Paulson Tipped Off The Goldman-Led "Plunge Protection Team" About Fannie Bankruptcy 7 Weeks In Advance (2007): Goldman operative Eric Mindich in the hierarchy of the Asset Managers' committee of the President's Working Group on Capital Markets, better known of course as the PPT (in 2009)

Philip Murphy: Obama Administration: Ambassador to Germany, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Head of Goldman Sachs, Frankfurt

Barack Obama: Obama owes his career to Goldman Sachs which was not only his biggest financial contributor when he ran for the presidency but also his biggest contributor when he ran for the Senate

Peter Orszag,Obama Budget Director, founding director of the Hamilton Project, funded by Goldman Sachs and Robert Rubin. Wikipedia indicates that Robert Rubin, Goldman’s ex-head, was one of Orszag’s mentors.

Mark Patterson: Obama Administration: Chief of Staff to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner, Former Goldman Sachs Title: Lobbyist 2005-2008; Vice President for Government Relations

Mark Peterson: Chief of staff to Timothy Geithner, Goldman Sachs vice president and lobbyist

Steve Ratner: the shady billionaire financier who Obama appointed as his “car czar” and who resigned after it was revealed that his company, the Quadrangle Group, was apparently involved in “pay to play” for a billion dollars or so of New York State pension funds, and was under possible indictment by the New York AG and the SEC, also sits on the Advisory Council of the Goldman funded Hamilton Project

Robert Reischauer: a member of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission from 2000-2009 and was its vice chair from 2001-2008. He too sits on the Hamilton Project’s advisory board.

Alice Rivlin: Obama named Alice Rivlin to his so called deficit reduction commission.

James Rubin: Son of Robert Rubin. Served as a headhunter for Obama per the New York Times article, "Rubin Proteges Change Their Tune as They Join Obama’s Team"

Gene Sperling: advisor to Timothy Geithner on bailouts, Sperling paid by Goldman Sachs for one year of consulting work.

Adam Storch: Obama Managing Executive of the Security and Exchange Commission’s Division of Enforcement Vice President in the Goldman Sachs Business Intelligence Group

Larry Summers: Obama chief economic adviser and head of the National Economic Counsel, Worked under Robert Rubin at Goldman Sachs

John Thain: Obama Administration: Advisor to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner, Former Goldman Sachs Title: President and Chief Operating Officer (1999-2003)

Good ideas and great writing must be in the Dickens family genes. The PATCH again provides a vehicle for good information and sources. OWS seems like an incomplete thought put into action. It seems to be emotionally driven, and offers no solutions. It seems to expect government solutions. We need to look in the mirror first. You can't have a "Great Society" without great people.

You should see the poor actions of people of power in all countries trying to use the idea of capitalism, often without the idea that those in charge will look out for their country interests, and the people of that country. Ethical does not necessarily mean "Moral". We have good examples of that. "Ethical" is being legal in most people's minds in business. If you find a way to go around those ethics, like the banks did in the housing market by dubious splitting of mortgages, it was "ethical" because they found a legal way to do it. Moral and Ethical are not the same thing. There is no such thing as Moral Capitalism, you can write a book about it, but most will only do what they think is "moral" or ethical enough. Checks and balances are important because of this. Greed is part of human nature and this is not the first time we have seen this take place. If I wanted to make sure that I knew how those who had a part in the downfall of the economy, I would hire those who knew who had a part in that downfall, to help me find the issues and make them do it.

This listing that Charles puts down, only tends to make it seem that all were part of that problem, instead of looking at what was accomplished. Companies often do this as a way to fight their competitors. I know.

There isn't any such think as "moral capitalism". You can make it sound good, but it doesn't exist in reality.

And Goldman Sachs supplied a similar list of personnel to the Bush Administration. So what's your point? The fact is there is no Moral Capitalism operating in the US today, Kevin knows it and Charlie, regardless of what name he hides behind, knows it too.

It does exists, two competitors. Ford and GM. Yes Amy, John, Bush did have Goldman Sachs people, so did Clinton. However Bush did not hire them during/after the subprime shutdown! No, if you have a group of narcissistic people that (as Amy pointed out) are out for only themselves you don't ask them to be in your administration. Ford is a great example of moral capitalism! Didn't want the money, stock went down to less than a dollar, sold 3 of its companies and shut down other two. The CEO took a dollar for salary while he drove to Washington. GM took their private jet, DC took their private jet, maybe Gore was with them talking carbon footprints?Their is a TON of smaller companies that are ma and pa shops in comparison that also show moral capitalism! You don't like my last name? Don't worry the admin's can see it.

Charlie, for the last time, define moral capitalism. Ford was a businessman and inventor who was a moral person in the context of his time and generally, by any standard, conducted his business in a moral, socially responsible manner. A capitalist is a personin who lives off the return on his investment, not off the earnings of a business he may operate or the earnngs of an invention. Bush's Goldman Sachs team helped lead us into our present economy. Those that are in now haven't helped. But again, while there are indeed moral people who are capitalists, that does not mean we are in or that there exists a system that can be called moral capitalism. Give us a definition.

there isn't people who really believe in responsible or "moral" capitalism. Not anymore. In order to exist in the market, there are people who set the markers, and that means in order to exist in the market, you end up playing the same game. It used to be quite common to have drinks at lunch and share stock trading information. I remember this. I also know that JP Morgan, S&P and many others are so deep in making bucks that they use any reason to obtain them. They justify it by saying "hey, it's business". What we are seeing know is no way, in any form "moral". Ethical only because they found a way to do it legally, and some "not so legal" ways by keeping people confused. Then there are those who have their own idea of what "moral" is, which is usually far departed from what the common person usually thinks. If you are an honest business person, you are constantly coming up against those who are dishonest and who will do anything to compete, including what I consider personally not "moral". Larger companies will actually lobby for "certain" regulation to make it harder for the smaller companies to compete. Tax breaks for larger companies are always given, while those in independent, smaller businesses are over looked. Tell me where any of this is moral? Most will just say "it's business" .

What we had in this country is a social contract where everyone was treated fairly and paid their own way according to their ability to do so. What the Radical Right now wants is laissez-faire capitalism, which is essentially let the rich do what they want without obligation to the society that made them rich or to those who by their won hard work and sacrifice built that society. On the one hand there is the Radical Right, servants to the rich, who are engaging in class warfare to make their masters richer. On the other is the Reasonable and Responsible Center working diligently for all of society and especially for the middle class and the poor and those others who need help, especially now, namely our children, and our elderly, and our sick, and our disabled. What the Radical Right chooses to ignore is that we are all in this together and, as Paul Wellstone said, we are all better off when we are all better off.

John, Moral capitalism is offering and delivering goods and services as described, free of coercion and deceit. Consumers pick and choose. Consumers decide what they are willing to pay. Suppliers try and meet that challenge and if they are successful they are rewarded with a profit. Your picture of a happy world went the way of Stalin. Ask immigrants from the Ukraine,Poland,and Russia,how sweet it was. If you want to live in a place that provides you with your basic necessities, at the cost of your freedom, because that is the price established in Soviet markets, prisons, slave plantations, and mental hospitals, I'm sure that you and Amy have options. If you hope for both material improvement and freedom, you only have one option, and that is Capitalism. Get an education, develop a marketable skill, and get a job. Develop yourself in a way that is beneficial to others in your community. Create wealth. Pay for your own things and help other people along the way. Consumers create the market. In the Obamanation and under Communism the government dictates the market, what is available, what is enough, and finally the price. Merry Christmas.

It seems incivility and rude language and behavior are all core values of the Right. as is, apparently, ignoring the question. Enjoy the Winter Solstice, one and all, and may the New Year bring peace and a generous and caring spirit to everyone, including both Kevin and Charlie. Namaste.

I guess John does have a problem with the same language he uses, as well as not understanding an answer several times. Topical double standard of the wondering left.

This question has been answered.

Lol, you should talk John. Hey Chris, I'm on Hopkins patch.... And maybe your liberal baby sitting of john should look both ways.

neocon Morally idealistic conservatatives. neocon is short for neo-conservative. Neocons separate themselves from Republicans that are traditionally fiscal conservative. Slang - Crusading republican. Slang - Neocons exist separated into two very distinct groups. Thelargest, group one, are the people below the 99th income percentile. They are religous and/or war-mongering blowhard lemmings who follow the second group; The second group is made up of the top one percent. They cut taxes for themselves, borrow trillions (second term pending), and their behavior is largely the subject of this blog. Of necessity, they pay Rove to pipe tabloid for the Rats. Lemmings rather. Whichever, they both work. Vlugar - White bible thumping trash.

" John Haluska 1:49 pm on Monday, December 5, 2011 Let me help out Kevin and friends here. Moral Capitalism from the perspective of the Kochs, Norquists, O'Donovans, and other Teapublicans and Latter Day Neocons possibly is: Take the moneyand run, just don't share, and don't drive over any Republican babies with your get-away car, unless, of course, there's no chance they'll ID the driver. "

John needs a time line on WHY we are here, along with a mirror and a copy of Glen necks Common Sense

Amy, I think everybody can feel the same sense of frustration that you have. I do think laws and agreements have been broken, and that very few seem to have been held responsible. Capitalism is the best system to lift people up to a higher standard of living. There are solutions to the problems we face, but they are too complex for slogans. In a way though I think we can all agree that decisions made in a panic can have unforseen consequences. Laws against, fraud and theft have been broken. People bought more than they could afford. Insurance companies sold coverage that they had inadequate assets to cover. Stocks are being gambled on, instead of invested in. Too many people are trying to suck on hind teat and live off the fat ( A southern expression for laziness and indolence). The government over promises, and over regulates. It is a ship that has exceeded its capacity,and at the helm is an incompetent navigator. We don't have to mutiny or jump ship but we do have to survive the storm. Soon we'll replace the captain and crew. Then we begin a new journey.

For those who need some help in deciding if NEOCON is pejorative consider for those who follow American politics above the bumper sticker level it’s shorthand for Neo-Conservative or Neo-Conservatism of the American variant. In this country it got its start in the 20's or 30's from what most call the far left (many attribute its start to the Trotskyite concept of permanent revolution). Eventually it was taken up by the Radical Right, who found it much of its theory valuable in assembling its rationale for the U. S. foreign policy of G.W. Bush - things like preemptive war and imposing democracy. En-route to Bush's administration was a stop in Reagan's administration in the guise of Jean Kirkpatrick, a strong NEOCON. Between Reagan and Bush II Neo -conservative thought also picked up an bad dose of Social Darwinism that in turn has attracted those who inject religion (i. e. a shortcut to the Rapture) into politics and have a fear of what they don't understand, such as science. Think of the modern NEOCON movement as a disease of the Right and realize that those who carry it display not just an ignorance of things such as political history and theory, economics, science, geography (excepting Michele Bachmann), and government, among basics, but also xenophobia, ultra nationalism, social elitism, etc., not to mention incivility, rudeness and an inability to carry on a rational discussion without being racist and bigoted. Fortunately only a few who post here are infected.

John, I have no idea what that first sentence is supposed to say! Punctuation is a great thing, so quit making bumper stickers.

Again, if you choose to insult that's fine. Just don't whine about it.

Yes, John. You can't carry a rational discussion without being a racist or bigoted. After all, twas you who cast the first stone!

Neocon, and Libtard are just like moral capitalism are on the internet for you to look up, and it doesn't matter where it came from. It matters only how you use it and what it means.

Here's another one. The Libtroll spreads guilt complexes by invoking flaky sociological theories with no basis in reality. If you're not sure whether someone is a Libtroll, politely disagree and see if he calls you a racist. Libtrolls can also be identified by their hatred of the West, their liberal accent, and the overpowering stench of white guilt.

http://m.urbandictionary.com/#define?term=neocon

I guess I forgot two other characteristics of the Right. First, it seems they may be a sensitive lot. Second, they evidently turn to non-standard references when faced with a word with which they aren't familiar. While I usually consult a reference librarian, in the case of Neo-conservatism there is nothing wrong with Wikipedia's presentation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism). I avoid the Urban dictionary. It tends to be simplistic and vulgar, but perhaps that's appealing to some?

Yes, but then wiki did not define the word either! I guess you can't figure out how to use wiki to define moral capitalism? Must not have been on a bumper sticker.

Well, this certainly is an opportunity to grow our vocabulary - Libtard?, Libtroll? I wonder where those are defined?

Want links John, then you can look up Neocon as well.

The previous two comments were deleted because they violate Patch's terms of service, which state users may not post or upload content that is "defamatory, abusive, obscene, profane or offensive."

At the end of the movies "As Good As It Gets" and Monty Python's "Life of Brian there is a closing song "Always Look On the Bright Side of Life".It occured to me that this would be a great theme song for a flash mob, sing along, accompanying OWS. A sense of humor is more appealing than a steady, simmering rage.