ADVERTISEMENT

RPJ, here's your real history of Russians and liberals

Airport

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Dec 12, 2001
73,068
47,439
708
The Venona project (1943–80) was a counter-intelligence program initiated by the U.S. Army’s Signal Intelligence Service (later the National Security Agency).[1] The purpose of the Venona project was the decryption of messages transmitted by the intelligence agencies of the Soviet Union, e.g. the NKVD, the KGB (First Chief Directorate) and the GRU (military intelligence).[2]During the 37-year duration of the Venona project, the Signal Intelligence Service obtained approximately 3,000 Soviet messages (only some of which were ever decrypted);[3] the Signal-Intelligence yield included discovery of the Cambridge Five espionage ring in the UK[4] and Soviet espionage of the Manhattan Project in the U.S.[5] The Venona project remained secret for more than fifteen years after it concluded, and some of the decoded Soviet messages were not declassified and published until 1995.



Contents
[1Background


Background[edit]

Gene Grabeel, the first cryptoanalyst of the Venona project[6]
During the initial years of the Cold War, the Venona project was a source of information on Soviet intelligence-gathering directed at the Western military powers. Although unknown to the public, and even to Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman, these programs were of importance concerning crucial events of the early Cold War. These included the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg spying case and the defections of Donald Maclean and Guy Burgess to the Soviet Union.

Most decipherable messages were transmitted and intercepted between 1942 and 1945. Sometime in 1945, the existence of the Venona program was revealed to the Soviet Union by cryptologist-analyst Bill Weisband, an NKVD agent in the U.S. Army’s SIGINT.[7] These messages were slowly and gradually decrypted beginning in 1946 and continuing (many times at a low-level of effort in the latter years) through 1980, when the Venona program was terminated, and the remaining amount of effort that was being spent on it was moved to more important projects.

To what extent the various individuals were involved with Soviet intelligence is a topic of dispute. While a number of academics and historians assert that most of the individuals mentioned in the Venona decrypts were most likely either clandestine assets and/or contacts of Soviet intelligence agents,[8][9] others argue that many of those people probably had no malicious intentions and committed no crimes.[10][11][12]

Commencement[edit]
The Venona Project was initiated in 1943, under orders from the deputy Chief of Military Intelligence (G-2), Carter W. Clarke.[13] Clarke distrusted Joseph Stalin, and feared that the Soviet Union would sign a separate peace with the Third Reich, allowing Germany to focus its military forces against Great Britain and the United States.[14] Code-breakers of the US Army's Signal Intelligence Service (commonly called Arlington Hall) analyzed encrypted high-level Soviet diplomatic intelligence messages intercepted in large volumes during and immediately after World War II by American, British, and Australian listening posts.[15]

Decryption[edit]
This message traffic, which was encrypted with a one-time pad system, was stored and analyzed in relative secrecy by hundreds of cryptanalysts over a 40-year period starting in the early 1940s. Due to a serious blunder on the part of the Soviets, some of this traffic was vulnerable to cryptanalysis. The Soviet company that manufactured the one-time pads produced around 35,000 pages of duplicate key numbers, as a result of pressures brought about by the German advance on Moscow during World War II. The duplication—which undermines the security of a one-time system—was discovered and attempts to lessen its impact were made by sending the duplicates to widely separated users.[16] Despite this, the reuse was detected by cryptologists in the US.

Breakthrough[edit]

Genevieve Feinstein[17]
The Soviet systems in general used a code to convert words and letters into numbers, to which additive keys (from one-time pads) were added, encrypting the content. When used correctly so that the plain text is of equal or lesser length to a random key, one-time pad encryption is unbreakable.[18] However, cryptanalysis by American and British code-breakers revealed that some of the one-time pad material had incorrectly been reused by the Soviets (specifically, entire pages, although not complete books), which allowed decryption (sometimes only partial) of a small part of the traffic.

Generating the one-time pads was a slow and labor-intensive process, and the outbreak of war with Germany in June 1941 caused a sudden increase in the need for coded messages. It is probable that the Soviet code generators started duplicating cipher pages in order to keep up with demand.

It was Arlington Hall's Lieutenant Richard Hallock, working on Soviet "Trade" traffic (so called because these messages dealt with Soviet trade issues), who first discovered that the Soviets were reusing pages. Hallock and his colleagues, amongst whom were Genevieve Feinstein, Cecil Phillips, Frank Lewis, Frank Wanat, and Lucille Campbell, went on to break into a significant amount of Trade traffic, recovering many one-time pad additive key tables in the process.


Meredith Gardner (far left); most of the other code breakers were young women.
A young Meredith Gardner then used this material to break into what turned out to be NKVD (and later GRU) traffic by reconstructing the code used to convert text to numbers. Samuel Chew and Cecil Phillips also made valuable contributions. On 20 December 1946, Gardner made the first break into the code, revealing the existence of Soviet espionage in the Manhattan Project.[19] Venona messages also indicated that Soviet spies worked in Washington in the State Department, Treasury, Office of Strategic Services, and even the White House. Very slowly, using assorted techniques ranging from traffic analysis to defector information, more of the messages were decrypted.

Claims have been made that information from the physical recovery of code books (a partially burned one was obtained by the Finns) to bugging embassy rooms in which text was entered into encrypting devices (analyzing the keystrokes by listening to them being punched in) contributed to recovering much of the plaintext. These latter claims are less than fully supported in the open literature.

One significant aid (mentioned by the NSA) in the early stages may have been work done in cooperation between the Japanese and Finnish cryptanalysis organizations; when the Americans broke into Japanese codes during World War II, they gained access to this information. There are also reports that copies of signals purloined from Soviet offices by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) were helpful in the cryptanalysis. The Finnish radio intelligence sold much of its material concerning Soviet codes to OSS in 1944 during Operation Stella Polaris, including the partially burned code book.[20]

Results[edit]
NSA reported that (according to the serial numbers of the Venona cables) thousands of cables were sent, but only a fraction were available to the cryptanalysts. Approximately 2,200 messages were decrypted and translated; about half for the 1943 GRU-Naval Washington to Moscow messages were broken, but none for any other year, although several thousand were sent between 1941 and 1945. The decryption rate of the NKVD cables was as follows:

  • 1942 1.8%
  • 1943 15.0%
  • 1944 49.0%
  • 1945 1.5%
Out of some hundreds of thousands of intercepted encrypted texts, it is claimed under 3,000 have been partially or wholly decrypted. All the duplicate one-time pad pages were produced in 1942, and almost all of them had been used by the end of 1945, with a few being used as late as 1948. After this, Soviet message traffic reverted to being completely unreadable.[21]

The existence of Venona decryption became known to the Soviets within a few years of the first breaks.[citation needed] It is not clear whether the Soviets knew how much of the message traffic or which messages had been successfully decrypted. At least one Soviet penetration agent, British Secret Intelligence Service representative to the U.S. Kim Philby, was told about the project in 1949, as part of his job as liaison between British and U.S. intelligence. Since all of the duplicate one-time pad pages had been used by this time, the Soviets apparently did not make any changes to their cryptographic procedures after they learned of Venona. However, this information allowed them to alert those of their agents who might be at risk of exposure due to the decryption.

Significance[edit]
The decrypted messages gave important insights into Soviet behavior in the period during which duplicate one-time pads were used. With the first break into the code, Venona revealed the existence of Soviet espionage[22] at Los Alamos National Laboratories.[23] Identities soon emerged of American, Canadian, Australian, and British spies in service to the Soviet government, including Klaus Fuchs, Alan Nunn May, and Donald Maclean. Others worked in Washington in the State Department, the Treasury, Office of Strategic Services,[24] and even the White House.

The decrypts show the U.S. and other nations were targeted in major espionage campaigns by the Soviet Union as early as 1942. Among those identified are Julius and Ethel Rosenberg; Alger Hiss; Harry Dexter White,[13] the second-highest official in the Treasury Department; Lauchlin Currie,[25] a personal aide to Franklin Roosevelt; and Maurice Halperin,[26] a section head in the Office of Strategic Services.

The identification of individuals mentioned in Venona transcripts is sometimes problematic, since people with a "covert relationship" with Soviet intelligence are referenced by cryptonyms.[27]Further complicating matters is the fact the same person sometimes had different cryptonyms at different times, and the same cryptonym was sometimes reused for different individuals. In some cases, notably Hiss, the matching of a Venona cryptonym to an individual is disputed. In many other cases, a Venona cryptonym has not yet been linked to any person. According to authors John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, the Venona transcripts identify approximately 349 Americans whom they claim had a covert relationship with Soviet intelligence, though fewer than half of these have been matched to real-name identities.[28] However, not every agent may have been communicating directly with Soviet intelligence. Each of those 349 persons may have had many others working for, and reporting only to, them.

The Office of Strategic Services, the predecessor to the CIA, housed at one time or another between fifteen and twenty Soviet spies.[29] Duncan Lee, Donald Wheeler, Jane Foster Zlatowski, and Maurice Halperin passed information to Moscow. The War Production Board, the Board of Economic Warfare, the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs and the Office of War Information, included at least half a dozen Soviet sources each among their employees.

Bearing of Venona on particular cases[edit]
Venona has added information—some unequivocal, some ambiguous—to several espionage cases. Some known spies, including Theodore Hall, were neither prosecuted nor publicly implicated, because the Venona evidence against them was withheld.

The identity of Soviet source cryptonymed '19' remains unclear. According to British writer Nigel West, '19' was president of Czechoslovak government-in-exile Edvard Beneš.[30] Military historian Eduard Mark[31] and American authors Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel concluded it was Roosevelt's aide Harry Hopkins.[32] According to American authors John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, source code-named '19' could be someone from the British delegation to the Washington Conference in May 1943.[33] Moreover, they argue no evidence of Hopkins as an agent has been found in other archives, and the partial message relating to "19" does not indicate if this source was a spy.[34]

However, Vasily Mitrokhin was a KGB archivist who defected from the Soviet Union with copies of KGB files. He claimed Harry Hopkins was a secret Russian agent.[35] Moreover, Oleg Gordievsky, a high-level KGB officer who also defected from the Soviet Union, reported that Iskhak Akhmerov, the KGB officer who controlled the clandestine Soviet agents in the U.S. during the war, had said Hopkins was "the most important of all Soviet wartime agents in the United States."[36]

Alexander Vassiliev's notes identified source code-named '19' as Laurence Duggan.[37]

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg[edit]
Main article: Julius and Ethel Rosenberg
Venona has added significant information to the case of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, making it clear Julius was guilty of espionage, and also showing that Ethel, while not acting as a principal, still acted as an accessory, had full knowledge of Julius's espionage activity and played the main role in the recruitment of her brother for atomic espionage.[38]

Venona and other recent information has shown, while the content of Julius' atomic espionage was not as vital to the Soviets as alleged at the time of his espionage activities, in other fields it was extensive. The information Rosenberg passed to the Soviets concerned the proximity fuze, design and production information on the Lockheed P-80 jet fighter, and thousands of classified reports from Emerson Radio.

The Venona evidence indicates unidentified sources code-named "Quantum" and "Pers" who facilitated transfer of nuclear weapons technology to the Soviet Union from positions within the Manhattan Project. According to Alexander Vassiliev's notes from KGB archive, "Quantum" was Boris Podolsky and "Pers" was Russell W. McNutt, an engineer from the uranium processing plant in Oak Ridge.[39][40]

Klaus Fuchs[edit]
Main article: Klaus Fuchs
The Venona decryptions were also important in the exposure of the atomic spy Klaus Fuchs. Some of the earliest messages decrypted concerned information from a scientist at the Manhattan Project, who was referred to by the code names of CHARLES and REST.[41] One such message from Moscow to New York, dated April 10, 1945, called information provided by CHARLES "of great value." Noting that the information included "data on the atomic mass of the nuclear explosive" and "details on the explosive method of actuating" the atomic bomb, the message requested further technical details from CHARLES. [42] Investigations based on the VENONA decryptions eventually identified CHARLES and REST as Fuchs in 1949.[43]

Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White[edit]
Main articles: Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White
According to the Moynihan Commission on Government Secrecy, the complicity of both Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White is conclusively proven by Venona,[44][45] stating "The complicity of Alger Hiss of the State Department seems settled. As does that of Harry Dexter White of the Treasury Department.".[46] In his 1998 book, Senator Moynihan expressed certainty about Hiss's identification by Venona as a Soviet spy, writing "Hiss was indeed a Soviet agent and appears to have been regarded by Moscow as its most important."[47]

Several current authors, researchers, and archivists consider the Venona evidence on Hiss to be inconclusive.[48]

Donald Maclean and Guy Burgess[edit]
Kim Philby had access to CIA and FBI files, and more damaging, access to Venona Project briefings. When Philby learned of Venona in 1949, he obtained advance warning that his fellow Soviet spy Donald Maclean was in danger of being exposed. The FBI told Philby about an agent cryptonymed 'Homer', whose 1945 message to Moscow had been decoded. As it had been sent from New York and had its origins in the British Embassy in Washington, Philby, who would not have known Maclean's cryptonym, deduced the sender's identity. By early 1951, Philby knew U.S. intelligence would soon also conclude Maclean was the sender, and advised Moscow to recall Maclean.[clarification needed] This led to Maclean and Guy Burgess' flight to Russia in May 1951.[49]

Soviet espionage in Australia[edit]
In addition to British and American operatives, Australians collected Venona intercepts at a remote base in the Outback.[citation needed] The Soviets remained unaware of this base as late as 1950.[50]

The founding of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation by Labor Prime Minister Ben Chifley in 1949 was considered highly controversial within Chifley's own party.[citation needed] Until then, the left-leaning Australian Labor Party had been hostile to domestic intelligence agencies on civil-liberties grounds and a Labor government founding one seemed a surprising about-face.[citation needed] But the presentation of Venona material to Chifley, revealing evidence of Soviet agents operating in Australia, brought this about. As well as Australian diplomat suspects abroad, Venona had revealed Walter Seddon Clayton (cryptonym 'KLOD'), a leading official within the Communist Party of Australia (CPA), as the chief organiser of Soviet intelligence gathering in Australia.[51] Investigation revealed that Clayton formed an underground network within the CPA so that the party could continue to operate if it were banned.[citation needed]

Public disclosure[edit]
For much of its history, knowledge of Venona was restricted even from the highest levels of government. Senior army officers, in consultation with the FBI and CIA, made the decision to restrict knowledge of Venona within the government (even the CIA was not made an active partner until 1952). Army Chief of Staff Omar Bradley, concerned about the White House's history of leaking sensitive information, decided to deny President Truman direct knowledge of the project. The president received the substance of the material only through FBI, Justice Department, and CIA reports on counterintelligence and intelligence matters. He was not told the material came from decoded Soviet ciphers. To some degree this secrecy was counter-productive; Truman was distrustful of FBI head J. Edgar Hoover and suspected the reports were exaggerated for political purposes.

Some of the earliest detailed public knowledge that Soviet code messages from World War II had been broken came with the release of Robert Lamphere's book, The FBI-KGB War, in 1986. Lamphere had been the FBI liaison to the code-breaking activity, had considerable knowledge of Venona and the counter-intelligence work that resulted from it. MI5 assistant director Peter Wright's 1987 memoir, Spycatcher, however, was the first detailed account of the Venona project, identifying it by name and making clear its long-term implications in post-war espionage.

Many inside the NSA had argued internally that the time had come to publicly release the details of the Venona project, but it was not until 1995 that the bipartisan Commission on Government Secrecy, with Senator Moynihan as chairman, released Venona project materials. Moynihan wrote:

"[The] secrecy system has systematically denied American historians access to the records of American history. Of late we find ourselves relying on archives of the former Soviet Union in Moscow to resolve questions of what was going on in Washington at mid-century. [...] the Venona intercepts contained overwhelming proof of the activities of Soviet spy networks in America, complete with names, dates, places, and deeds."[52]

One of the considerations in releasing Venona translations was the privacy interests of the individuals mentioned, referenced, or identified in the translations. Some names were not released because to do so would constitute an invasion of privacy.[53] However, in at least one case, independent researchers identified one of the subjects whose name had been obscured by the NSA.

The dearth of reliable information available to the public—or even to the President and Congress—may have helped to polarize debates of the 1950s over the extent and danger of Soviet espionage in the United States. Anti-Communists suspected many spies remained at large, perhaps including some known to the government. Those who criticized the governmental and non-governmental efforts to root out and expose communists felt these efforts were an overreaction (in addition to other reservations about McCarthyism). Public access—or broader governmental access—to the Venona evidence would certainly have affected this debate, as it is affecting the retrospective debate among historians and others now. As the Moynihan Commission wrote in its final report:

"A balanced history of this period is now beginning to appear; the Venona messages will surely supply a great cache of facts to bring the matter to some closure. But at the time, the American Government, much less the American public, was confronted with possibilities and charges, at once baffling and terrifying."

The National Cryptologic Museum features an exhibit on the Venona project in its "Cold War/Information Age" gallery.
 
It is interesting that the recent (1970's until now)Dems have always loved the Soviets/Russians. Now they hate them. I wonder why?

JFK was a renowned anti-communist that viewed the Soviets as our enemy. But that changed in the Dem party starting in the late 60's.
 
It is interesting that the recent (1970's until now)Dems have always loved the Soviets/Russians. Now they hate them. I wonder why?

JFK was a renowned anti-communist that viewed the Soviets as our enemy. But that changed in the Dem party starting in the late 60's.

Did you know about Venona? The love for the communist started back in the 30's with FDR.
 
Did you know about Venona? The love for the communist started back in the 30's with FDR.

Very true. Do you remember the name Walter Duranty? He was a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter for the NY Times. He routinely reported on how wonderful Joseph Stalin was and won a Pulitzer for doing so. He loved the man. He was also a big time Dem.

"In 1932 Duranty received a Pulitzer Prize for a series of reports about the Soviet Union, 11 of them published in June 1931. He was criticized then and later for his denial of widespread famine (1932–33) in the USSR,[1]most particularly the mass starvation in Ukraine. Years later, there were calls to revoke his Pulitzer; The New York Times, which submitted his work for the prize in 1932, wrote that his articles constituted "some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper."[2]
 
Looks like they were dealt with according to the law, your turn.
Not the point, liberals have always had close ties to communism and socialism. Info wasn't even shared with truman because of the inability to keep secrets and the fact that the exec branch was full of communists.
 
Do you ever tire of posting nonsense? Apparently not.
Apparently facts bother you. All the guy does is post facts. You folks are always first to cry foul but you do NOTHING to disapprove the FACTS. Your rebuttals are nothing more more than empty retoric based on nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atlkvb
It is interesting that the recent (1970's until now)Dems have always loved the Soviets/Russians. Now they hate them. I wonder why?

JFK was a renowned anti-communist that viewed the Soviets as our enemy. But that changed in the Dem party starting in the late 60's.
Exactly.
 
Not the point, liberals have always had close ties to communism and socialism. Info wasn't even shared with truman because of the inability to keep secrets and the fact that the exec branch was full of communists.

Always is a long time ... do you care to quantify that statement
 
Always is a long time ... do you care to quantify that statement
Starting with Woodrow wilson, then FDR, the liberal mindset of taking from others and giving to others has it's roots in communism and socialism. it sounds great, taking form one and giving to the other, but it never works the way it's intended. It concentrates power in the ruling class, makes everybody below the same and you are penalized for trying to make a better life. That's why we have pandering to those who don't really contribute to society and trying to make those of us who pay the freight feel bad about what we have accomplished thru hard work.
 
Starting with Woodrow wilson, then FDR, the liberal mindset of taking from others and giving to others has it's roots in communism and socialism. it sounds great, taking form one and giving to the other, but it never works the way it's intended. It concentrates power in the ruling class, makes everybody below the same and you are penalized for trying to make a better life. That's why we have pandering to those who don't really contribute to society and trying to make those of us who pay the freight feel bad about what we have accomplished thru hard work.

For a liberal to even argue the point that socialism and communism has some sympathy and agreement among the Dem crowd and has for decades is to stick you head in the sand.
 
For a liberal to even argue the point that socialism and communism has some sympathy and agreement among the Dem crowd and has for decades is to stick you head in the sand.

I don't think you realize what you just posted.
 
Apparently facts bother you. All the guy does is post facts. You folks are always first to cry foul but you do NOTHING to disapprove the FACTS. Your rebuttals are nothing more more than empty retoric based on nothing.
Facts
 
Completely factual. And the poster is right, this started in the early 20th century in the U.S.

Re-read your post, slowly. Maybe even read it to your children and have them explain it to you.

For a liberal to even argue the point that socialism and communism has some sympathy and agreement among the Dem crowd and has for decades is to stick you head in the sand.

You are saying socialism and communism have no sympathy and agreement among the democratic crowd.
 
Re-read your post, slowly. Maybe even read it to your children and have them explain it to you.



You are saying socialism and communism have no sympathy and agreement among the democratic crowd.

Stop the word smithing. You know what I meant. Or if you didn't know, I would consider going back to school.
 
Starting with Woodrow wilson, then FDR, the liberal mindset of taking from others and giving to others has it's roots in communism and socialism. it sounds great, taking form one and giving to the other, but it never works the way it's intended. It concentrates power in the ruling class, makes everybody below the same and you are penalized for trying to make a better life. That's why we have pandering to those who don't really contribute to society and trying to make those of us who pay the freight feel bad about what we have accomplished thru hard work.

It actually has it's roots in the Bible ... love thy neighbor as thyself. Camel's through eyes of needles and all of that.

You seem to be in favor of pure capitalism which really really doesn't work and only exacerbates the very thing that you think is wrong with "socialism".

So ... let's get rid of all of our socialist programs ... all of them. No more public schools or libraries. The only people that can afford education will be the rich. Is that what's best for the country? Then you have extreme wealth and extreme poverty, and the only thing anybody learns is whatever skill they can pick up at whatever job is nearby and nothing else.

No more public roads, sidewalks or streetlights either. You either stay put or pay a toll to go ANYwhere because all of those things are privately owned and come with a fee to the owner, who charges whatever he wants because we are truly capitalistic with none of those pesky regulations.

Police? Only if you want to voluntarily pay for them. We can just count on everybody's good nature to just always do what's right.

Industry? You can look at that history yourself and see how that's worked out ... Matewan anybody? Company stores?

Firefighters? None of those in the cities, if something happens, just let it burn down. Which will happen a lot because we've gotten rid of those regulatory agencies that make sure that electrical work is done to code and buildings are safe for occupants.

Oh ... and no military either ... so we won't have to worry about any of the above for very long either.

Your views on this are very simplistic and overly shortsighted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: countryroads89
So does this mean Trump is innocent? lol, it's your boy not any Democrats getting the russkie scrutiny.
 
It actually has it's roots in the Bible ... love thy neighbor as thyself. Camel's through eyes of needles and all of that.

You seem to be in favor of pure capitalism which really really doesn't work and only exacerbates the very thing that you think is wrong with "socialism".

So ... let's get rid of all of our socialist programs ... all of them. No more public schools or libraries. The only people that can afford education will be the rich. Is that what's best for the country? Then you have extreme wealth and extreme poverty, and the only thing anybody learns is whatever skill they can pick up at whatever job is nearby and nothing else.

No more public roads, sidewalks or streetlights either. You either stay put or pay a toll to go ANYwhere because all of those things are privately owned and come with a fee to the owner, who charges whatever he wants because we are truly capitalistic with none of those pesky regulations.

Police? Only if you want to voluntarily pay for them. We can just count on everybody's good nature to just always do what's right.

Industry? You can look at that history yourself and see how that's worked out ... Matewan anybody? Company stores?

Firefighters? None of those in the cities, if something happens, just let it burn down. Which will happen a lot because we've gotten rid of those regulatory agencies that make sure that electrical work is done to code and buildings are safe for occupants.

Oh ... and no military either ... so we won't have to worry about any of the above for very long either.

Your views on this are very simplistic and overly shortsighted.

You know that I'm not against police, public roads, schools etc. I am against govt controlled health ins, welfare that perpetuates a culture that isn't conducive to a healthy country. I'm against unfettered growth of our govt which concentrates power in DC and takes it away from you, the individual and the states. Capitalism gave us the greatest country and standard of living that the world has ever seen. As we have strayed from that model, over the last 20 years, our children are living in their parents homes, coming out of college with debts they cannot payback, medicare payents are strained, SS/disability have become a racket, drugs have become a blight on our society, welfare payments have concentrated groups of people in the inner city where their children don't thrive and are as likely to be killed as go to college. As a side note, the govt wanted all 401k's to add to their power over you. Were you in favor of that?
 
So does this mean Trump is innocent? lol, it's your boy not any Democrats getting the russkie scrutiny.

Democrats beliefs have a long history of being close to communism and socialism. Own it, it's the truth. Be proud that you don't want people to achieve.
 
It actually has it's roots in the Bible ... love thy neighbor as thyself. Camel's through eyes of needles and all of that.

You seem to be in favor of pure capitalism which really really doesn't work and only exacerbates the very thing that you think is wrong with "socialism".

So ... let's get rid of all of our socialist programs ... all of them. No more public schools or libraries. The only people that can afford education will be the rich. Is that what's best for the country? Then you have extreme wealth and extreme poverty, and the only thing anybody learns is whatever skill they can pick up at whatever job is nearby and nothing else.

No more public roads, sidewalks or streetlights either. You either stay put or pay a toll to go ANYwhere because all of those things are privately owned and come with a fee to the owner, who charges whatever he wants because we are truly capitalistic with none of those pesky regulations.

Police? Only if you want to voluntarily pay for them. We can just count on everybody's good nature to just always do what's right.

Industry? You can look at that history yourself and see how that's worked out ... Matewan anybody? Company stores?

Firefighters? None of those in the cities, if something happens, just let it burn down. Which will happen a lot because we've gotten rid of those regulatory agencies that make sure that electrical work is done to code and buildings are safe for occupants.

Oh ... and no military either ... so we won't have to worry about any of the above for very long either.

Your views on this are very simplistic and overly shortsighted.
One of the most complete strawman arguments I've ever seen. Congrats.
 
Then you need to get out of the GOP and join the Libertarian party.
I'm a conservative Repub, I believe that we should help our neighbor but not at the expense of our country which is what we have been headed to since 1965. Mass welfare does not work. Sooner or later, you run out of other people's money. You need to do more than read the bible, you need to under stand what some of the passages meant. Give a man a fish he'll eat for a day, teach him to fish, require him too, he'll eat the rest of his life. The parable of the talents isn't about getting free stuff from the government.
 
It actually has it's roots in the Bible ... love thy neighbor as thyself. Camel's through eyes of needles and all of that.

It's a warped sense of the Bible then. We are supposed to do those things, not the government. Sympathy and relationships are not created when the government taxes some and gives to others.

Let me take you on one of our homeless supply runs, or BBQ giveaway, or when we take food to the school backpack program.
 
I'm a conservative Repub, I believe that we should help our neighbor but not at the expense of our country which is what we have been headed to since 1965. Mass welfare does not work. Sooner or later, you run out of other people's money. You need to do more than read the bible, you need to under stand what some of the passages meant. Give a man a fish he'll eat for a day, teach him to fish, require him too, he'll eat the rest of his life. The parable of the talents isn't about getting free stuff from the government.

That's not from the bible, it's from a Chinese parable.

I see people say all the time that we should take care of our own people before we spend another dime helping other countries. But then as soon as you start talking about anything that would actually help our own people, they start screaming "communism" or "socialism".

My point, which was obviously missed by some wasn't to say that socialism is inherently good and we need more of it ... only that ALL of one thing or another is bad for society. Pure capitalism would be an absolute disaster. People motivated only by profit are only going to care about the profit and nothing else. Not the welfare of the workers, not for the environment, nothing. That's why we have many of the regulations we do.

But socialism isn't inherently bad either. And I know you've said that you want to get rid of all subsidies, but mostly you just rail on the programs that help the poor and don't voluntarily comment on the corporate welfare which far outspends the welfare for the poor. In any system, people are going to find away around the rules to abuse them. Whether it be for more profits, or just to be lazy. There's no way to get rid of that.

But I don't see how letting people freeze to death or starve makes the country any stronger either. In our efforts to not let that happen, people will find a way to abuse it ... my brother is married to an illiterate multi-generational welfare case ... so yeah, it happens. But I also know a lot of people that had to use food stamps or whatever while getting through college or nursing school or whatever until they could make it on their own. The coal mine shut down so they had to go to DHHR for help with electric and water bills, etc.

There are a lot of people that are one bad choice or one bad break away from poverty. I was one of them. I don't mean this as an insult, but since you played enough golf to be on the golf team at WVU, I'm guessing you weren't. So, it is probably hard for you to understand just how precarious the path can be for some. A clutch or transmission failure on their car is enough to put them into ruin with no safety net as far as family is concerned.

It's funny, I have a friend who is probably more conservative than just about anybody on this board. He was adopted, but is super smart and was adopted by a father with an MBA who was an executive in a company. He had any number of f' ups he could have endured with a family that could help him out until he learned. He was telling me a girl he dated once stayed friends with his parents and she had fallen on hard times and he and his parents loaned her some money to help her get on her feet ... like you, he was a staunch opponent of government programs ... and I pointed out that the government programs do exactly what he and his dad just did, only for people that don't know people like he and his dad that they can go to.
 
It's a warped sense of the Bible then. We are supposed to do those things, not the government. Sympathy and relationships are not created when the government taxes some and gives to others.

Let me take you on one of our homeless supply runs, or BBQ giveaway, or when we take food to the school backpack program.

I agree with that ... but there aren't enough people that will voluntarily do that ... even with all of the so-called Christians in this country. (again, I'll point out that I never caveat you with "so called" or anything like that ... you truly walk the walk ... not enough do)

I have done those things as well, both with church I was involved in, or on my own. I volunteer for a Christian based organization now, but their mission is slightly different than that.
 
That's not from the bible, it's from a Chinese parable.

I see people say all the time that we should take care of our own people before we spend another dime helping other countries. But then as soon as you start talking about anything that would actually help our own people, they start screaming "communism" or "socialism".

My point, which was obviously missed by some wasn't to say that socialism is inherently good and we need more of it ... only that ALL of one thing or another is bad for society. Pure capitalism would be an absolute disaster. People motivated only by profit are only going to care about the profit and nothing else. Not the welfare of the workers, not for the environment, nothing. That's why we have many of the regulations we do.

But socialism isn't inherently bad either. And I know you've said that you want to get rid of all subsidies, but mostly you just rail on the programs that help the poor and don't voluntarily comment on the corporate welfare which far outspends the welfare for the poor. In any system, people are going to find away around the rules to abuse them. Whether it be for more profits, or just to be lazy. There's no way to get rid of that.

But I don't see how letting people freeze to death or starve makes the country any stronger either. In our efforts to not let that happen, people will find a way to abuse it ... my brother is married to an illiterate multi-generational welfare case ... so yeah, it happens. But I also know a lot of people that had to use food stamps or whatever while getting through college or nursing school or whatever until they could make it on their own. The coal mine shut down so they had to go to DHHR for help with electric and water bills, etc.

There are a lot of people that are one bad choice or one bad break away from poverty. I was one of them. I don't mean this as an insult, but since you played enough golf to be on the golf team at WVU, I'm guessing you weren't. So, it is probably hard for you to understand just how precarious the path can be for some. A clutch or transmission failure on their car is enough to put them into ruin with no safety net as far as family is concerned.

It's funny, I have a friend who is probably more conservative than just about anybody on this board. He was adopted, but is super smart and was adopted by a father with an MBA who was an executive in a company. He had any number of f' ups he could have endured with a family that could help him out until he learned. He was telling me a girl he dated once stayed friends with his parents and she had fallen on hard times and he and his parents loaned her some money to help her get on her feet ... like you, he was a staunch opponent of government programs ... and I pointed out that the government programs do exactly what he and his dad just did, only for people that don't know people like he and his dad that they can go to.

You can't save everybody.( I was never good enough to be on a golf team. I got really good after I reach 40 years of age.I'm better now at 62 than I was at 40. Hard to believe). Government programs do not "loan" and quit. People keep coming back for more and more, year after year. That's the inherit problem with govt, the inability to tell people no. I can get behind block grants to states for them to use in medicaid, etc. It's hard in a few sentences to say how you really think about a problem. If welfare had time limits and generation limits, we would all be better off.
 
You can't save everybody.( I was never good enough to be on a golf team. I got really good after I reach 40 years of age.I'm better now at 62 than I was at 40. Hard to believe). Government programs do not "loan" and quit. People keep coming back for more and more, year after year. That's the inherit problem with govt, the inability to tell people no. I can get behind block grants to states for them to use in medicaid, etc. It's hard in a few sentences to say how you really think about a problem. If welfare had time limits and generation limits, we would all be better off.

Sorry, I thought you were on the golf team at WVU with the way you talked about knowing the old coaches or whatever ... or maybe I even misunderstood that part as well.

I do agree that something needs to be done with welfare that will try to eliminate the generational dependence on it ... but I'm not sure how big of a problem that really is.

One of the big problems that I see with it (and here comes all the complaints about raising minimum wage) is that in a lot of places, WV being one of them, the welfare benefit comes out to $12+/hour and the minimum wage is $8.50/hour. Why go work at McDonalds when you can make more doing nothing? Also, it's as much a cultural thing as a family thing in some areas. If you go to Mingo or McDowell county where the mines shut down and there hasn't been anything for decades, you have entire communities with no jobs and everybody on welfare. They put mobile homes on creeks that flood all the time so they get the FEMA checks too. I don't know how you fix all of that without punishing the people that don't abuse it.

I think there should be some kind of community service or a trade training program that should be mandatory if you're getting welfare. I can't even get a plumber or electrician to my house around here because there aren't enough of them ... there are a lot of opportunities and needs that could be met.
 
Since it's creator was an atheist I doubt that.

This guy is an atheist? Who knew?

th


(I used the Caucasian version for you right wingers.)
 
Sorry, I thought you were on the golf team at WVU with the way you talked about knowing the old coaches or whatever ... or maybe I even misunderstood that part as well.

I do agree that something needs to be done with welfare that will try to eliminate the generational dependence on it ... but I'm not sure how big of a problem that really is.

One of the big problems that I see with it (and here comes all the complaints about raising minimum wage) is that in a lot of places, WV being one of them, the welfare benefit comes out to $12+/hour and the minimum wage is $8.50/hour. Why go work at McDonalds when you can make more doing nothing? Also, it's as much a cultural thing as a family thing in some areas. If you go to Mingo or McDowell county where the mines shut down and there hasn't been anything for decades, you have entire communities with no jobs and everybody on welfare. They put mobile homes on creeks that flood all the time so they get the FEMA checks too. I don't know how you fix all of that without punishing the people that don't abuse it.

I think there should be some kind of community service or a trade training program that should be mandatory if you're getting welfare. I can't even get a plumber or electrician to my house around here because there aren't enough of them ... there are a lot of opportunities and needs that could be met.

RPJ played golf, I couldn't sniff a position back then. If the generational thing isn't so big, why did you include the problems in Mingo and McDowell about minimum wage and that it was better to be on welfare. When I was practicing down there 80-84, you already had several generation already on them. It's now about 6-7 and that's true in the inner cities and everywhere else. Welfare should never be more than min wage and shouldn't increase after two children. There are always people who get off wlefare and become something other than a burden. The trouble is, too many voluntarily stay on them and they need to be driven off. I'm not opposed to welfare as a temporary helping hand, I'm opposed to it becoming a way of life and one party cultivating them as a vote source when they bring nothing to the table of our great country. Just ask yourself, the next time there's a riot and a lot of property is destroyed, how many would do it if it was their property or they stood to lose property from being convicted of participating in those riots. I'm not opposed to govt helping, I'm opposed to it handing out goodies to get votes.
 
Just ask yourself, the next time there's a riot and a lot of property is destroyed, how many would do it if it was their property or they stood to lose property from being convicted of participating in those riots. I'm not opposed to govt helping, I'm opposed to it handing out goodies to get votes.

That's a great idea. I would love me some of those $150 sneakers and $35 flat-billed hats.

(Before you accuse me of being racist, it's a joke).
 
That's a great idea. I would love me some of those $150 sneakers and $35 flat-billed hats.

(Before you accuse me of being racist, it's a joke).

That's also the reason no work boots were taken in Ferguson! It's a joke, sorta!:wink:
 
If the generational thing isn't so big, why did you include the problems in Mingo and McDowell about minimum wage and that it was better to be on welfare

That's not exactly what I meant. I know it goes on and even admitted as much with my SIL's family. I agree that it's a problem ... what I'm not sure of is exactly how big of a problem it is. Percentage-wise, how many that use it are generational and how many have just fallen on hard times and get off of it. Clearly there are pockets where that's all people do, but the country is a big place. Is that the norm or the exception?

In some of the conversations with RPJ, it seemed like you guys knew all the same people associated with WVU golf, so I mistakenly made a connection that you played also.

I'm also all for prosecution of people destroying things in riots ... however, you seem to think that people are engaging in rational thought and reasoning out the pros and cons of their actions. They aren't, they are either mad about social injustices ... or celebrating a Stanley Cup win.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT