My critics in Chicago are pathetic cowards. Deleted entry #4.

Newsflash. I wrote the 'flat-foot' and 'psychological trick' entries. (Nationwide.)

I'm well within my rights to copy and paste my own work. I will do so at will. Not that I'm afraid of a real-time debate with you or any other critic. I'm not. In fact, if you're a die-hard partisan or even sharply partisan, then it will be a walk in the park for me. I've debated people like you many times without breaking a sweat. Often drawing exclusively from that which I've memorized. For you people have become utterly predictable. You continue to make the same dumb mistakes over and over and over and over.

For example, you refer to US casualties in Afghanistan under Obama, blaming him for those casualties without even considering the fact that the trend of higher US casualties in Afghanistan began three years before Obama took office, that it grew annually, and that the trend was finally reversed under Obama. It's a profound oversight on your part.

Another example of profound ignorance was just submitted this afternoon by the partisan puppet moron who presumes me to be a loyal leftist with faith and trust in the Democratic party. I'm far from it. I'm an unaffiliated die-hard free thinker who agrees more with the right on some issues, more with the left on others, and with NO ONE that I know of on several. Not that I trust ANY high level politician to put the issues before their own desire to benefit or profit from them. I don't. I am by far, the most skeptical person I've ever known. The difference between me and the majority of political skeptics is that I have enough sense to realize that both major political parties are horribly corrupt. Not primarily one or the other. The same goes for their sold-out pundits on TV, the web, and talk radio.

So it's a given that my latest critic couldn't psychoanalyze his way out of a wet paper bag. I on the other hand, can easy psychoanalyze virtually all of my critics. I've done it many times. The majority are die-hard partisans. In particular, die-hard conservatives. They are the type most likely to respond to my entries. They are the type most likely to hate me. They have been and remain the type utterly predictable on virtually every issue.

The mistake made by this particular die-hard conservative partisan puppet this afternoon, in addition to that referred to above, is that Obama in particular, is responsible for the obscene concentration of wealth the majority now suffer from. If he had removed his red tinted glasses before doing his partisan puppet research, he would have known that the concentration of wealth the majority of Americans now suffer from began to concentrate in 1976. Probably, the 3rd of 4th quarter of 1976. Also that it accelerated under Reagan, slowed under Clinton, and accelerated again under Bush Jr.

It's not that I blame politicians in particular for that concentration of wealth or the misery, hardship, and economic instability resulting from it. You see, I'm not a moron and I refuse to act like a moron just to get along with the majority. That being said, those politicians are in large part to blame but so are the idiot masses. The consumers of America. They have literally encouraged all of the corrupt methods used to concentrate that wealth with their celebrity worshiping, drug and doctor, 'gotta have it', consumer junkie moron spending habits over the last 35+ years. Otherwise, the wealth never would have become anywhere near so concentrated.

The de-industrialization, the outsourcing, the downsizing, the commercial re-development of farmland, the practice of testing, diagnosing, and drugging men, women, and children FAR more often than necessary, the sub-prime lending, the tax avoiding and evading, the corporate influence, the backroom deals, ect. The idiot consumers of America are at the very least 1/2 responsible for all of it.

Now, with all of the above submitted to smash through the latest but still utterly predictable characterization of me like a runaway train through a picket fence, I invite the both of you (possibly one in the same) to a serious debate on ANY of the issues that I'm passionate about. In particular, economics, global warming, and gun control. I'm not terribly passionate on the issues of foreign policy, immigration, gay marriage, abortion, religion, or voter registration but I can hold my own with no regard whatsoever for party loyalty. For I have none.

So if you're willing and courageous enough to flush that dum-fuk assumption that I'm just another liberal down the toilet right now, let me know and we'll debate the issues right here. In fact, because of the delays and posting limits inherent with this site, I'm willing to create a special Blogspot debate page allowing comments to be posted immediately and anonymously with no restrictions whatsoever. The link will be posted here as well.

Tell you what. You can respond to my 'flat-foot' entry regarding the half-wit partisan puppet criticism of Obama's foreign policy or the following if you prefer. It's an oldie but a goody and simple enough to be understood by even the most partisan of puppets:

Have you ever played a game of Monopoly? Tell me. What happens when one player owns 3/4 of the board? What happens when that 'money supply' becomes concentrated?

The lower ranking players drop off like flies. That's what. The economic activity slows down, growth is reversed, and the game stops.

Whats that you say? Its not that simple?

True, but it's close enough for the purpose of this discussion. Check this out:

"The income gap between the rich and the rest of the US population has become so wide, and is growing so fast, that it might eventually threaten the stability of democratic capitalism itself." -Allen Greenspan testifying before congress in spring of '05'.

"Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society." -Albert Einstein 1949

"The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions." -Albert Einstein 1949

"The United States economy is like a poker game where the chips have become concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, and where the other fellows can stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit runs out the game will stop." -Mariner Eccles Chairman of the Federal Reserve under FDR

Robert Reich and a dozen more prominent economists have gone on record with similar views.

You're probably wondering. If these guys were/are right and the wealth was heavily concentrated just prior to the Great Depression, how did we recover?

That's easy and very simple but not well known.

There was a partial but very significant redistribution of wealth which took place from the mid '30's to the mid '70's.

So why are we in this mess all over again?

Again, very simple but not well known. The wealth has become concentrated all over again. We have allowed the rich to become too rich. Now, we are paying for it.

There you go partisan puppets. Another short piece written by me for you to respond to. Just do yourself a favor. Don't make yet another dum-fuk assumption and assume that by 'wealth', I'm referring to a single pie of predetermined size. I'm not and I never have. I'm referring to the very concept of wealth and it's distribution under a wide variety of circumstances.

Once again, you're welcome to respond with your best argument.

Ready, set, GO!

Update: There you go again. Assuming that I'm just another liberal all for illegal immigration. I'm not. What I am for is securing the entire southern border with as much force necessary except for a single doorway allowing legal immigration under certain conditions. One of which being the ability to read, write, and speak basic English.

Please critics, do yourselves a favor. Stop being so utterly predictable. You're only proving my point regarding die-hard partisanship. OK. Let's try this one more time.