PDA

View Full Version : Ronald Reagan, the Great American SOCIALIST!



FORD
03-20-2009, 06:38 PM
Reagan: The Great American Socialist

Friday 20 March 2009

by: Ravi Batra, t r u t h o u t | Perspective



Socialism has been much in the news for some months. Recently, some GOP stalwarts charged President Obama with preaching the heresy. John Boehner, the House minority leader, characterized Obama's stimulus package as, "one big down payment on a new American socialist experiment."

"Socialism" is a pejorative term in American politics and needs to be carefully examined. It usually refers to increased government control over the economy, or policies that promote the redistribution of wealth. There is no doubt that President Obama's economic measures, passed and proposed, will raise tax rates on the richest Americans to pay for increased government funding of health care, green energy and education. So the new president is indeed a redistributionist, but so was Ronald Reagan, except that Obama's plans will transfer wealth from the rich to the poor, whereas Reagan's bills transferred wealth from the poor and the middle class to the opulent. In fact, Obama's measures are puny, whereas Reagan's were massive. If the Democrat is a "small" socialist, Reagan was the Great American Socialist.

Let's go back to the early 1980's. In 1981, Reagan signed a law that sharply reduced the income tax for the wealthiest Americans and corporations. The president asserted his program would create jobs, purge inflation and, get this, trim the budget deficit. However, following the tax cut, the deficit soared from 2.5 percent of GDP to over 6 percent, alarming financial markets, sending interest rates sky high, and culminating in the worst recession since the 1930's.

Soon the president realized he needed new revenues to trim the deficit, bring down interest rates and improve his chances for reelection. He would not rescind the income tax cut, but other taxes were acceptable. In 1982, taxes were raised on gasoline and cigarettes, but the deficit hardly budged. In 1983, the president signed the biggest tax rise on payrolls, promising to create a surplus in the Social Security system, while knowing all along that the new revenue would be used to finance the deficit.

The retirement system was looted from the first day the Social Security surplus came into being, because the legislation itself gave the president a free hand to spend the surplus in any way he liked. Thus began a massive transfer of wealth from the poor and the middle class, especially the self-employed small businessman, to the wealthy. The self-employment tax jumped as much as 66 percent.

In 1986, Reagan slashed the top tax rate further. His redistributionist obsession led to a perversity in the law. The wealthiest faced a 28 percent tax rate, while those with lower incomes faced a 33 percent rate; in addition, the bottom rate climbed from 11 percent to 15 percent. For the first time in history, the top rate fell and the bottom rate rose simultaneously. Even unemployment compensation was not spared. The jobless had to pay income tax on their benefits. A year later, the man who would not spare unemployment compensation from taxation called for a cut in the capital gains tax. Thus, Reagan was a staunch socialist, totally committed to his cause of wealth redistribution towards the affluent.

How much wealth transfer has occurred through Reagan's policies? At least $3 trillion.

The Social Security hike generated over $2 trillion in surplus between 1984 and 2007, and if it had been properly invested, say, in AAA corporate bonds it could have earned another trillion by now. At present, the fund is empty, because it has been used up to finance the federal deficits resulting from frequent cuts in income tax rates. If this is not redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich, what else is?

Thus, Reagan was the first Republican socialist - and a great one, because his wealth transfer occurred on a massive scale. His accomplishment dwarfs even FDR's, and if today the small businessman suffers a crippling tax burden, he must thank Reagan the redistributionist. However, FDR took pains to help the poor, while Reagan took pains to help the wealthiest like himself.

Reagan's measures were similar to those that the Republicans adopted during the 1920's, which were followed by the catastrophic Depression. More recently, such policies were mimicked by President George W. Bush and they are about to plunge the world into a depression as well. Ironically, the Reagan-style socialism or wealth redistribution is about to destroy monopoly capitalism, the very system that he wanted to preserve and enrich.

Wake up America and elect leaders with a heart - not those who would tax your unemployment benefits and cut the capital gains tax.

-------

Dr. Ravi Batra, a professor of economics at Southern Methodist University, Dallas, is the author of five international best sellers. He was the chairperson of his department from 1977 to 1980. This article is based on Batra's two books, "The New Golden Age" and "Greenspan's Fraud." His web site is Ravibatra.com.

t r u t h o u t | Reagan: The Great American Socialist (http://www.truthout.org/032009R)

Combat Ready
03-20-2009, 10:17 PM
Reagan: The Great American Socialist


Consider the source:

TruthOut.org is a way left leaning political website.

Some of its prominent contributors include William Rivers Pitt, Jason Leopold, Scott Galindez, David Bacon, Dean Baker, Tom Engelhardt, William Fisher, Dahr Jamail, Ray McGovern, J. Sri Raman, Norman Solomon, David Swanson and James Zogby. The organization has reported extensively on the anti-war movement and helped to put Cindy Sheehan on the map by publishing many of her writings.

PBS has a fairly accurate rundown on the Reagan years....Slightly less biased.

The American Experience | Reagan | Timeline (1978 - 1982) (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reagan/timeline/index_3.html)

Nitro Express
03-20-2009, 10:30 PM
Actually we haven't been heading towards socialism at all. We have been on the long road to fascism which is government ran by tightly controlled corporations and banks. Who did the bankers bailout help? The top tier bankers. If Bush and Obama really wanted to help the American people they could have issued vouchers through the Treasury Department to the taxpayers. The money would have been spend inside the country instead of being shipped offshore. Hell, socialism would have bought off everyones mortgage which would have cost only $1-2 Trillion instead of the $10 Trillion that has been pilfered through the Treasury by the Federal Reserve.

If you think it's socialism Reagan was about that's wrong. It's fascism and we have been heading for it in the executive branch since Kennedy. He was the last president that took the central banks on head to head.

Nitro Express
03-20-2009, 10:33 PM
Kennedy was a Democrat but if you look at his economic policies they were spot on. He was the last good president that understood banking and economics. He might have grabbed some ass and came from a crooked father but he truly tried to help his country for the better.

Nitro Express
03-20-2009, 10:36 PM
What really helped us in the 1980's what the personal computer revolution. That sparked a HUGE industry of hardware and software of which most was produced in the United States and we exported both and it brought a ton of money in to the country. That helped offset the industry we were losing.

No politician had anything to do with it.

FORD
03-20-2009, 10:40 PM
Consider the source:

TruthOut.org is a way left leaning political website.

Some of its prominent contributors include William Rivers Pitt, Jason Leopold, Scott Galindez, David Bacon, Dean Baker, Tom Engelhardt, William Fisher, Dahr Jamail, Ray McGovern, J. Sri Raman, Norman Solomon, David Swanson and James Zogby. The organization has reported extensively on the anti-war movement and helped to put Cindy Sheehan on the map by publishing many of her writings.

PBS has a fairly accurate rundown on the Reagan years....Slightly less biased.

The American Experience | Reagan | Timeline (1978 - 1982) (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reagan/timeline/index_3.html)

The SOURCE is Dr. Ravi Batra. And if you would listen to the Thom Hartmann show, like I keep telling you to, you would know that Dr. Batra's economic insights are usually dead on. It's people like him (and Robert Reich) that should be in Washington DC right now on the President's economic team instead of Timmy the Keebler Elf, and those Clinton retreads.

Combat Ready
03-20-2009, 10:43 PM
If you think it's socialism Reagan was about that's wrong. It's fascism and we have been heading for it in the executive branch since Kennedy.

Point taken Nitro, but---can't socialism and fascism be the same thing?

Here's another view:

Fascism And Socialism Explained

Have you ever wondered why the Nazis called themselves the "National Socialist Party," and why the Soviets called themselves "Socialist Republics"? In history and political science classes we were told that the Nazis were "fascists" and that the Soviets were "communists." It is not hard to come to the conclusion that people living under fascism and people living under communism seemed to be coming out in the same place....as terrified slaves (if not dead).

Properly understood, fascism and communism were, as the Soviet and German labels openly declared, actually the same thing:, just two varieties of socialism. The fascist praises the free market, but secretly works to destroy it. The communist condemns the free market and openly works to destroy it. Both tactics are tools of a monopolistic type of parasitism known as socialism. The key goal in either case is the destruction of economic market competition so that certain ruthless individuals can acquire huge wealth and power. The wars between the fascists and the communists in the 20th century have simply been wars fought between competing monopolists.

More:

Coastal Post Article - Fascism And Socialism Explained (http://www.coastalpost.com/95/10/15.htm)

FORD
03-20-2009, 10:43 PM
What really helped us in the 1980's what the personal computer revolution. That sparked a HUGE industry of hardware and software of which most was produced in the United States and we exported both and it brought a ton of money in to the country. That helped offset the industry we were losing.

No politician had anything to do with it.

Yeah, and the second stage of that, the World Wide Web in the mid 90's had a similar effect, despite the evil effects of NAFTA beginning to kick in :(

Combat Ready
03-20-2009, 10:52 PM
The SOURCE is Dr. Ravi Batra. And if you would listen to the Thom Hartmann show, like I keep telling you to, you would know that Dr. Batra's economic insights are usually dead on. It's people like him (and Robert Reich) that should be in Washington DC right now on the President's economic team instead of Timmy the Keebler Elf, and those Clinton retreads.

We agree on having no faith in Timothy Geithner, although I can't say that I"m sold on Robert Reich either. Shit--he probably couldn't be worse than Paulson or Geithner though....I'll give you that.

Thom Hartman? I might just have to give him a listen....Not opposed to hearing a different perspective.

Nitro Express
03-20-2009, 10:57 PM
Dictators use positive social sounding tittles to sell their tyranny. True socialism is where the citizens pay the majority of what they make into a government controlled pool of wealth that is then dispersed equally to help the citizens. Areas like housing, healthcare, and education are either highly subsidized or paid in full by the govt. It's a system that can work usually in smaller countries where the citizens have similar goals and lifestyles. The system fails miserably when dishonest people exploit it.

Fascism is where the corporations and banks crash economies by exporting jobs and over issuing debt. The use the depression to stir trouble and social unrest. They also buy the crashed asset back up cheap. Then they build someone up to be savior to the masses and build a street level rabble of worshippers which build on the hysteria. Then they run roughshod over the law by intimidating and killing anyone on their way and take things over. Fascism comes to power using cleaver marketing, propaganda, public relations to dupe the people into supporting a banker owned and supported con man. Then they make money off the resulting wars. The big European bankers made a fortune off such schemes.

FORD
03-20-2009, 10:59 PM
Dr. Batra is a guest on Thom's show every couple of months or so, and it's been a while, so I wouldn't be surprised if he turns up soon. Reich has been on several times as well.

And he not only has right wing guests on his show nearly every day, if you call into his show and tell the screeners you disagree with him, you get bumped to the front of the line.

So you can't lose. ;)

Nitro Express
03-20-2009, 10:59 PM
Banker instigated depressions usually usher in fascism which results in genocide and war. That's the pattern. One reason we really have to think for ourselves and look at the facts carefully. Lot's of snake oil being sold now.

Nitro Express
03-20-2009, 11:03 PM
A communist Utopia would be possible if perfect people were part of it. As soon as one person cheats the system starts to fail. It's a nice dream.

Unchecked capitalism becomes a monopoly tyranny. So fake communism and unchecked capitalism head towards the same pooch screw.

FORD
03-20-2009, 11:06 PM
Dictators use positive social sounding tittles to sell their tyranny. True socialism is where the citizens pay the majority of what they make into a government controlled pool of wealth that is then dispersed equally to help the citizens. Areas like housing, healthcare, and education are either highly subsidized or paid in full by the govt. It's a system that can work usually in smaller countries where the citizens have similar goals and lifestyles. The system fails miserably when dishonest people exploit it.

Fascism is where the corporations and banks crash economies by exporting jobs and over issuing debt. The use the depression to stir trouble and social unrest. They also buy the crashed asset back up cheap. Then they build someone up to be savior to the masses and build a street level rabble of worshippers which build on the hysteria. Then they run roughshod over the law by intimidating and killing anyone on their way and take things over. Fascism comes to power using cleaver marketing, propaganda, public relations to dupe the people into supporting a banker owned and supported con man. Then they make money off the resulting wars. The big European bankers made a fortune off such schemes.

And it would appear that the Europeans have learned the lessons from both the Nazi Germany and Soviet Communist models, as well as the unregulated capitalism orgy taking place here at the moment.

That's why you see them going towards a "Social Democracy" model, which seems the only sane way to go.

Companies that make something tangible should remain privatized, and I don't think you would find anyone in this country that would argue different.

But banking, infrastructure, defense, energy, education, and yes, health care these are things that belong to all of us, and we've seen the disastrous outcome when they become "for profit" businesses.

Nitro Express
03-20-2009, 11:37 PM
Americans have had it good for so long that they have forgotten what freedom is all about. Freedom isn't getting into huge amounts of debt to bankers and being bought off with entertainment and trinkets. The thing is The European Union is ran by bankers and has fucked them too. Not too mention European countries bought the so called AAA securities full of junk mortgages. It's a worldwide ponzi scheme. I really don't see a good system anywhere now.

I'm typically a more indapendant I'll take care of myself thank you very much person. The problem with run crazy banks and big govt. is the taxes and prices get so expensive they start reeling you in.

I mean in Norway sure you will get govt. paid for dental care but a hot dog costs $25 because of the value added take. You have no extra money to make choices with. I guess it's a good system if you like what the govt. provides. I like choices myself.

swage33
03-21-2009, 10:13 PM
And it would appear that the Europeans have learned the lessons from both the Nazi Germany and Soviet Communist models, as well as the unregulated capitalism orgy taking place here at the moment.

That's why you see them going towards a "Social Democracy" model, which seems the only sane way to go.

Companies that make something tangible should remain privatized, and I don't think you would find anyone in this country that would argue different.

But banking, infrastructure, defense, energy, education, and yes, health care these are things that belong to all of us, and we've seen the disastrous outcome when they become "for profit" businesses.

Europe and Canada can behave as they do because there is an AMERICA. If we dump all of our capital into being them, who is going to save us?

FORD
03-21-2009, 10:44 PM
If we end corporatism, we'll save ourselves. If we don't, not even JC Himself will be able to save us.

swage33
03-21-2009, 11:02 PM
If we end corporatism, we'll save ourselves. If we don't, not even JC Himself will be able to save us.

corporatism? I'm honestly curious...what is it that you propose. Is there an existing model that you would like the US to emulate? Is there a theoretical model? Please don't read this wrong...I'm not trying to be a smart-ass. I am asking an honest question...please give me an honest answer.

FORD
03-21-2009, 11:43 PM
The US wasn't that bad before 1980. Rolling every law and regulation having to do with any economic, financial, or tax policy to what it was then would be a good start.

Overturning the ridiculous misinterpretation of the 14th amendment that allowed corporations to have the same rights as human beings would be the next move.

Nitro Express
03-22-2009, 12:00 AM
If we end corporatism, we'll save ourselves. If we don't, not even JC Himself will be able to save us.

Don't you mean globalism and central banking? There's nothing wrong with a regulated stock exchange and banks. Why we are in the mess we are is the laws that kept the exchanges in check were repeals. Investment banking could get involved in commercial banking. Derivatives became legal. Good assets and bad assets could be mixed into salad and sold as AAA bonds.

The globalism is nothing more than ditching regulations and taxes and few fat cats get fatter. Then the wealth gets consolidated. Hell. The fat cats have gotten so fat they are trying to consolidate entire countries now.

Nitro Express
03-22-2009, 12:05 AM
The US wasn't that bad before 1980. Rolling every law and regulation having to do with any economic, financial, or tax policy to what it was then would be a good start.

Overturning the ridiculous misinterpretation of the 14th amendment that allowed corporations to have the same rights as human beings would be the next move.

Actually the US started going downhill with Lyndon Johnson and Nixon made things worse by continuing the Vietnam war and taking us off the gold standard so he could print money to pay for it. Reagan ran up huge deficits to rebuild the military. Deregulation began with Reagan. Deregulation of the stock market and banks happened under Clinton and all went to shit under George W. Bush with more war, banking, and wall street fraud.

The military industrial complex is a major reason the US has hit the skids.

Nitro Express
03-22-2009, 12:11 AM
What pulled the US out of the Carter era recession was the personal computer revolution. That was a HUGE economic boom for the United States out of nowhere. It was bigger than the internet revolution because most of the products were designed and manufactured in the US. By the time the internet happened the manufacturing and programming had been outsourced like other industries.

US made software and hardware went around the globe in the 1980's and the money came in. That industry had a huge trade surplus and created domestic jobs by the millions.

Nitro Express
03-22-2009, 12:17 AM
Reagan was the typical Republican. They usually deregulate industry and spend a shit load on the military. He did a better acting job as president than he did in his Hollywood movies. He was complicated actually. Nobody really knew the real Ronald Reagan. Not even his own kids. He never really wore cowboy hats or rode western style. He rode English style and lived a posh Bel Air lifestyle. Ronald Reagan was far from main street USA but played the part like he did. I think he was more Hollywood than people would like to admit.

Coyote
03-22-2009, 08:04 AM
And it would appear that the Europeans have learned the lessons from both the Nazi Germany and Soviet Communist models, as well as the unregulated capitalism orgy taking place here at the moment.

That's why you see them going towards a "Social Democracy" model, which seems the only sane way to go.

Oh, we learned from it alright... The bigwigs in Brussels wanted to turn an already oversized "free trade zone" into The United States of Europe, in late 2007.
The proposed EU Constitution was turned down twice, first by the French and the Dutch.

Then, after the bigwigs tweaked it, turning it into a "treaty" by neatly removing a few lines from the original constitution-draft, it got knocked down by the Irish.

And, IIRC, Brussels will hammer it through... Even if they have to kick out the Irish for not complying.



So yeah, I'm quite happy in this Fourth Reich called Europe...

Nickdfresh
03-22-2009, 08:09 AM
Point taken Nitro, but---can't socialism and fascism be the same thing?

No.


Here's another view:

Fascism And Socialism Explained

Have you ever wondered why the Nazis called themselves the "National Socialist Party," and why the Soviets called themselves "Socialist Republics"? In history and political science classes we were told that the Nazis were "fascists" and that the Soviets were "communists." It is not hard to come to the conclusion that people living under fascism and people living under communism seemed to be coming out in the same place....as terrified slaves (if not dead).

Properly understood, fascism and communism were, as the Soviet and German labels openly declared, actually the same thing:, just two varieties of socialism. The fascist praises the free market, but secretly works to destroy it. The communist condemns the free market and openly works to destroy it. Both tactics are tools of a monopolistic type of parasitism known as socialism. The key goal in either case is the destruction of economic market competition so that certain ruthless individuals can acquire huge wealth and power. The wars between the fascists and the communists in the 20th century have simply been wars fought between competing monopolists.

More:

Coastal Post Article - Fascism And Socialism Explained (http://www.coastalpost.com/95/10/15.htm)


Right wing ideological horseshit and red herrings...Hitler and the Nazis were extremely anti-communist and very friendly with capitalists....

And it's not nice to call Reagan a Nazi...

Coyote
03-22-2009, 08:19 AM
Right wing ideological horseshit and red herrings...Hitler and the Nazis were extremely anti-communist and very friendly with capitalists....

Follow the money.




And it's not nice to call Reagan a Nazi...

What about Bush? Ok to call him a nazi?

FORD
03-22-2009, 02:22 PM
Follow the money.





What about Bush? Ok to call him a nazi?

Yes. Because his grandpa funded Hitler, and his family still lives off the concentration camp profits, so it's literally true.

Nickdfresh
03-22-2009, 02:27 PM
Incidently, if there was a die-hard "socialist," left wing of the Nazi Party, Hitler had them all killed or exiled after the "Night of the Long Knives."

Nazism is essentially a right wing movement, but a revolutionary one that has nothing in common with democratic socialism as they were enemies of the democratic socialists in Germany, then later in France and Britain...

Nitro Express
03-22-2009, 03:08 PM
Yes. Because his grandpa funded Hitler, and his family still lives off the concentration camp profits, so it's literally true.

The American and European financial elite funded Hitler. You bet. Both granddaddy Bush and Joseph Kennedy backed Hitler and hoped he would win because then they reap the rewards. The Bushes still tow the fascist line as does the Rockefeller family and other prominent old money elites in Europe and America. They still control and fuck us.

Nitro Express
03-22-2009, 03:13 PM
Incidently, if there was a die-hard "socialist," left wing of the Nazi Party, Hitler had them all killed or exiled after the "Night of the Long Knives."

Nazism is essentially a right wing movement, but a revolutionary one that has nothing in common with democratic socialism as they were enemies of the democratic socialists in Germany, then later in France and Britain...

Exactly. Fascism needs a critical mass of followers at the grass roots level to get into power. What happens is the financial elite back a person that has a huge amount of celebrity and emotional power over the masses. This cult of personality worship builds to such levels and is organized to where it runs right over the nations laws and elected leaders. Then organized thugs in the movement seize power through murder and intimidation. Once control is secured the less desirable of the backers are eliminated. In fascism, many of the supporters get axed; even though, they helped bring the dictator to power.

Nitro Express
03-22-2009, 03:17 PM
The main difference between fascism and communism is fascism is a tool of the corporate elite and allows privately held businesses. Communists kill the banking elite and consolidate everything under the govt. Both systems kill lots of people and enrich the few at the top. Two different systems with the same result. Mass murder and no freedom.

FORD
03-22-2009, 03:48 PM
I'm no communist, but right now, killing the banking elite sounds like a damn good idea.

Coyote
03-22-2009, 04:43 PM
Ok, so, if the fascist emblem is this (called a fasci, BTW):
http://www.feastofhateandfear.com/images/fasci8_2.jpg

why is the fasci placed in the Congress Hall? (Flanking the flag...)
http://rastareason.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/decent-fasci-pic.jpg

FORD
03-22-2009, 04:53 PM
:eek:

Blaze
03-22-2009, 05:48 PM
Every system fails when corruption is allowed to go unchecked.

Nickdfresh
03-22-2009, 05:56 PM
The American and European financial elite funded Hitler. You bet. Both granddaddy Bush and Joseph Kennedy backed Hitler and hoped he would win because then they reap the rewards. The Bushes still tow the fascist line as does the Rockefeller family and other prominent old money elites in Europe and America. They still control and fuck us.

I don't think it is correct to say that the financial elite "funded Hitler." I do believe they went into business to make money off Hitler and to provide Nazism goods and services they would later parley into mass murder...

Nickdfresh
03-22-2009, 05:58 PM
Ok, so, if the fascist emblem is this (called a fasci, BTW):
http://www.feastofhateandfear.com/images/fasci8_2.jpg

why is the fasci placed in the Congress Hall? (Flanking the flag...)
http://rastareason.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/decent-fasci-pic.jpg

The funny thing is that both fascism and faggotry involve a "bundle of sticks." :)

Coyote
03-22-2009, 06:02 PM
The funny thing is that both fascism and faggotry involve a "bundle of sticks." :)

Thank you for that gruesome mental image concerning American politics...

:puking-smiley:

ULTRAMAN VH
03-23-2009, 07:48 AM
Exactly. Fascism needs a critical mass of followers at the grass roots level to get into power. What happens is the financial elite back a person that has a huge amount of celebrity and emotional power over the masses. This cult of personality worship builds to such levels and is organized to where it runs right over the nations laws and elected leaders. Then organized thugs in the movement seize power through murder and intimidation. Once control is secured the less desirable of the backers are eliminated. In fascism, many of the supporters get axed; even though, they helped bring the dictator to power.

Well we have not gotten to the (organized thugs seize power) part of the program yet, but the above post sure smells of our current leader and his future machinations.

FORD
03-23-2009, 11:55 AM
Well we have not gotten to the (organized thugs seize power) part of the program yet,

You got a short memory, don't you Ultravag? Uh.... Florida.....2000?

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/preppy_riot.jpg

swage33
03-23-2009, 08:47 PM
I love Kevin Smith's movies. (No. 4)

FORD
03-23-2009, 08:54 PM
Pretty sure it ain't the same guy.

A Republican never would have included a blatantly anti-corpratism scene like this in one of his movies.........

<object width="480" height="295"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jWshPH_jsjQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jWshPH_jsjQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="295"></embed></object>

FORD
03-24-2009, 02:03 PM
Here's an explanation of why trickle down economics don't work. And from a most ironic source..........

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uJDhS4oUm0M&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uJDhS4oUm0M&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>