This Is Not A Democracy, It's A Republic........
Hey - does that count as a silver lining to the whole Obama thing?
FASCISM WINS AGAIN!!!!!!!!!111
I'm sick to death of facists stealing every American election!!!111
Get the right judges in Barak and this will NEVER happen again!!!111
so now they have to get one GOP senator to vote with them
http://kaosradioaustin.org:8959/...59/kaos-
128.m3u
tom woods author of politically incorrect guide to america on this radio show at noon 15
Jenn, I have a personal favor to ask you. Would you please read the first article on my site and repost it here? I would never ask such a thing for myself, but this is not for my benefit at all.
http://www.judgingtruth.com
Thank you.
Crap! I see the insane one has posted here. Dang - it hasn't sullied this site in quite a while.
Les - would you prefer a one party rule in DC with absolutely NO checks to its power whatsoever?
no, i"m just saying all they have to do is get one repubilcan to vote with them. the GOP having virtually no leadership at this point I don't think it will be that hard. look at the bailout. GOP folded in 5 seconds on that.
jenn, I also have a personal favor to ask you
Well I'm glad an Obama victory isn't a total loss for Americans because there Obama isn't going to have a filibuster proof senate. Yippee!
I hope we have not only enough senators in the Republican Party but enough who have the guts to stand up to the "historical" candidate!
Lester, before you run your mouth off making stupid comments about my post, maybe you should read the content of the article in question.
If you still find it a joking matter, maybe you should look over your shoulder when walking in dark places. That sinking sense of dread will be karma sneaking up on your ass to give you what you diserve.
no offense meant cc
Sorry, it is a sensitive subject for me right now. I cannot donate blood due to an illness I had a few years ago (Hepatitus A - the food poisoning one). The only thing I can do is to ask for others to help save this young man's life.
That seemed to be a dig at my request for help. If it was not, then excuse the comment.
Chambliss received 57.4 percent of the vote to 42.6 percent for Martin...that's fascism?
CC I will post it no problem, in fact basically you already have, may I suggest you try Texas Fred? He's down there in Texas and has a ton of Texas readers.
What a horrific accident I am so very sorry for him.
Fred has it up dear. Thank you.
Chambliss received 57.4 percent of the vote to 42.6 percent for Martin...that's fascism?
Well, sure, in the topsy-turvy world of the leftist-thinkers. You see, while that kind of a margin is an historical landmark when Obama is elected, the same type of margin is grounds for challenges when it comes to ideals that the left cannot stand - you know, like one man, one woman marriage; a Republican win...
I have it up and sent it to over 100 bloggers and nearly 200 emails asking folks to forward it and repost it, so far, a few have posted it...
All help would be seriously appreciated, even if you're NOT in the D/FW area, maybe some reader IS, and that may be the one to give the pint of blood that makes all the difference!!
And send it to ALL your email buddies too, it's that important!!
And it costs you a bit of time, time that may save a life!
My thoughts and prayers to him and his family. I'm sorry to hear of the loss of his brother.
Chambliss received 57.4 percent of the vote to 42.6 percent for Martin...that's fascism? Jenn
Quite frankly I'm getting pretty sick of the obvious theft of the election in Michigan. More miracle ballots found - in dem counties, of course.
Unfortunately, Les is pretty much correct. And with a couple of weak kneed 'Moderates' look for Increased Government, Increased taxes, and decreased defense budget.
The one thing the federal government is charged with, Natioanl Security, will be diminished.
Yay for the moonbats!
Someone on Crush Liberalism asked for this so I posted it to the end of my article as well. When I get the final deatils I will update it.
If you are unable to give blood, donations can be made in his name to:
Parkland Burn Unit
c/o Parkland Health & Hospital System
5201 Harry Hines Blvd.
Dallas, TX 75235
(214) 590-8000
They are suposed to get back to me with exact details on where the donations should go. I will update the article with that information as soon as it becomes available.
Witness, how come 'one party rule in DC with absolutely NO checks to its power whatsoever' is just fine when it's the Republicans in charge?
And isn't it peculiar that a 57.4% - 42.6% win for the GOP isn't fascism, but a similar win for Obama is? What Daniel meant by Fascism Wins Again is not that Chambliss's win is an example of fascism per se, although you guys have wasted no time in reminding the left that 'Hitler was democratically elected too' (which he wasn't), just that the GOP are fascists, which they are.
And Cary, is the Chambliss victory being challenged? Please, tell me more...
Not that Chambliss should have had a seat to defend – read this:
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/...B-29FB4107C8C1}
Here's a good bit:
'Stephen Spoonamore, a cyber security expert and lifelong Republican, has also stated that he believes that the 2002 Georgia Senate race was rigged in favor of Chambliss. "If you look at the case of Saxby Chambliss, that's ridiculous. The man was not elected. He lost that election by five points. Max Cleland won. They flipped the votes, clear as day." Spoon said in another exclusive interview posted on YouTube by VR at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S...v=SzKbigGoMoo.'
Ah hell, what would he know?
Cheers
Elroy
Who care's what you know pathetic loser.
Witness, how come 'one party rule in DC with absolutely NO checks to its power whatsoever' is just fine when it's the Republicans in charge? Void
Inaccuarate. The last time we had such a vacuum was during LBJ - and we got the "great Society." It took us 30 years to break the welfare bondage that incured. Before that is was the FDR and his "New Deal." We still have issues with that.
You are soooo uninformed it's laughable. You obviously have no idea how our government works, yet you feel quite qualified to comment upon it.
There is a little thing called a filibuster - read about it. The dems had it the ENTIRE time Bush was in office - and they USED it!
Please - do not by any stretch of the imagination try to insinuate that I have been a Bush fan. I only voted for him once (the second time) and he has been abysmal in a great many areas.
That being said, the democrats bad loser brat behavior during this time of war has been treasonous (there is no debating this) all for political gain.
Another strong point to be made is how much libs bitch about our economy and how bad things are. What they leave out is that they are the total cause for all their little ills. What they (and you) are great about is blaming the other side for their screw-ups.
Libs controls quite a bit in this country. In most states they control local/city/state legislatures. All their programs steal money out of peoples pockets to fund failed programs. Their solution? End the failed programs? Oh! No, no, no! Let's just throw more money at the problem! Please! Cry me a river.
Please note that the same libs in Canada decided they were not going to accept the will of their people:
http://www.canadafreepress.com/i...php/article/
664
Screw you people! You are about power and you will TAKE it no matter who you'll harm in the process. Be that democracy, civil rights, or freedom itself. You WILL be in control. And that's what ya'll are about aren't you? CONTROL!
‘Inaccuarate. The last time we had such a vacuum was during LBJ - and we got the "great Society."
I didn’t say it HAD happened, I merely meant that you would not, conceptually speaking, be opposed to it. Well? Would you be opposed to the Republicans controlling the senate, congress and white house?
‘It took us 30 years to break the welfare bondage that incured.’
Yeah, it’s much better now that people are homeless and starving on the streets.
Before that is was the FDR and his "New Deal." We still have issues with that.’
Grrrr! Stoopid FDR and his saving capitalism, and forty years of middle class prosperity!
‘You are soooo uninformed it's laughable. You obviously have no idea how our government works, yet you feel quite qualified to comment upon it.’
Just like you, and everybody else.
‘There is a little thing called a filibuster - read about it. The dems had it the ENTIRE time Bush was in office - and they USED it!’
And I’m sure the Repubs will use it at each and every opportunity and with monotonous regularity.
‘Please - do not by any stretch of the imagination try to insinuate that I have been a Bush fan.’
You weren’t? Why not? Too liberal?
‘I only voted for him once (the second time) and he has been abysmal in a great many areas.’
So you DID vote for him! And that was AFTER having seen what he was capable of! No excuses there, huh? So who did you vote for in 2000?
And I don’t know about ‘abysmal in a great many areas’ – I say more ‘abysmal in all areas.’
‘That being said, the democrats bad loser brat behavior…’
Ah, bad loser brat behaviour! A GOP specialty, I believe…
‘during this time of war has been treasonous (there is no debating this)’
Oh yes there is! The treason is committed when a POTUS plunges the country and the world into two unwinnable wars of aggression on spurious grounds. You should be mad at the ‘abysmal’ Bush, not those that have sought to end his folly and stem the flow of life and money.
‘…all for political gain.’
I guess if a POTUS starts 2 wars for political gain then any opposition to them will be viewed through that prism. But then again, all wars are political.
‘Another strong point to be made is how much libs bitch about our economy and how bad things are. What they leave out is that they are the total cause for all their little ills.’
Oh dear. How do you come to this conclusion? Honestly, I don’t know if you lot are ignorant, stupid or insane. How was the fiscal meltdown, the direct result of deregulation, caused by those that advocate more regulation? And please, please don’t point to Fannie and Freddie – that would be too, too funny!
‘What they (and you) are great about is blaming the other side for their screw-ups.’
What if the other side is to blame? Again, how is the meltdown liberals’ fault?
‘Libs controls quite a bit in this country. In most states they control local/city/state legislatures.’
So much for ‘America is a centre-right country’!
‘All their programs steal money out of peoples pockets to fund failed programs.’
You never quite got on board with that whole ‘paying tax’ thing, did you? But tell me, what are these ‘programs’ specifically? And did you ever stop to wonder why those ‘programs’ are even necessary in the first place?
‘Their solution? End the failed programs? Oh! No, no, no! Let's just throw more money at the problem!’
Money-throwing! One of conservatives’ favorite sports! Star wars missile defense, the Pentagon, Wall Street – roll up for the cheese!
‘Please note that the same libs in Canada decided they were not going to accept the will of their people’
Please note that the parliament of Canada is perfectly within its constitutional rights to call a vote of no confidence – that’s how the system works, it allows ineffective leaders to be replaced. It’s called democracy. If Harper had the majority, he would not lose. He doesn’t, so…
You are soooo uninformed it's laughable. You obviously have no idea how the Westminster system works, yet you feel quite qualified to comment upon it.
‘Screw you people!’
Not exhibiting some bad loser brat behaviour, are we?
‘You are about power and you will TAKE it no matter who you'll harm in the process.’
The Canadian coalition is doing what the system requires of it. The Conservatives would do the exact same thing. And the Dems won the election – they didn’t TAKE anything.
‘Be that democracy, civil rights, or freedom itself. You WILL be in control. And that's what ya'll are about aren't you? CONTROL.’
Democracy, civil rights, and freedom itself have been severely damaged these past eight years – the PATRIOT Act, Homeland Security, wiretaps, Diebold etc etc – but that’s alright with you. Bizarre.
I see you fail to comment on the Chambliss 2004 election whistleblower – what a surprise.
Cheers
Elroy
"Yeah, it’s much better now that people are homeless and starving on the streets"
There have always been "homeless" people. Always. Go to any foodbank in America and the people that show up to get food could live off their stored reserves for weeks.
Since FDR countless social programs have been implemented with the intent of "solving" problems that for the most part, people create themselves. Trillions of dollars have been taken from working people and spent in an apparently vain effort.
Since the goal of these programs was to do away with problems, isn't it odd that these problems not only didn't go away ... but got worse?
In addition, "liberal" policies concerning education have produced an army of drones who know nothing. The "fix" of course that liberals want is even more money pumped into a failed system.
Helping people is a noble goal but what must be understood is that once those who have a propensity to live off the goodwill of others have their needs taken care of they will never make the effort to become self sufficient. A helping hand is fine, a care free lifestyle is not.
Government intervention invariably makes problems worse. It's so inevitable that it should be recognized as one of natures laws.
At best, help should come from family first, charity and church. Religious organizations help anyone, regardless of faith. Government intervention should be restricted to the local level ... communities themselves should be allowed to handle social issues as they see fit. State and federal governments should be banned from interfering.
As a side note ... it's overwhemlingly the religious and conservative who give to charity and volunteer to take care of the needy. Liberals rarley lift a finger except to scream for the government to take more money from working people.
Why don't you and your fellow liberals put your money and your sweat where your mouth is. Quit talking and start doing. Give your money away, or pay extra taxes. Do everything you leave to others to do.
Well, his long winded bloviating comments make all the much easier to ignore.
Sod off Aussie.
"Government intervention invariably makes problems worse."
tell bush that. he intervenes in foreign countries, into the economy and spies on people
tell bush that. he intervenes in foreign countries, into the economy and spies on people
lester
This isn't a tit-for-tat contest! Nobody wanted ANY bailouts. Please get a clue!
Also, we don't "spy" on people. That was Clinton (Project Echelon). Our security agencies only intercept OVERSEAS communication originating from known hostiles INTO the US.
Congress ok'd that. They blocked us being able to listen in on calls between two hostiles (Iran and Syria for example), which if you think about we could do since all fiber optics run through the US since we are the originator of the service.
Calling it domestic spying is a misnomer and is a lie - a misleading statement.
yeah growing the scope of government is really conservative. your right th patriot act contains absoutely no constitutionally objectable material. what was i thinking
‘There have always been "homeless" people. Always.’
So? Does that make it OK? But the point is that there are more now than ever before, perfectly respectable middle class families living in their cars living in their cars because their full-time jobs don’t pay enough to cover rent, bills, food, medical etc.
Over the course of a year there are 3.5 million homeless people in America, which is 1% of the population or 10% of US citizens living in poverty. Conversely, there are 100,000 homeless people in Australia, or 0.5% of the population, or half the rate of the US.
And with the galloping foreclosure rate and rising unemployment, this figure is guaranteed to rise. The fact is, Darwin, that a 40-hour week the minimum wage does not cover rent bills, food, medical etc, so is a person working minimum wage free? Or a serf?
‘Go to any foodbank in America and the people that show up to get food could live off their stored reserves for weeks.’
Oh, here we go. Poor people are fat because they eat cheap food which is full of carbs and/or High Fructose Corn Syrup and/or salt etc. Obesity and diabetes kill more people than tobacco, but cheap processed food is all the poor can afford or, when working two jobs, or shift work, all they can get or have time for. Fat, my friend, is a capitalist issue.
But tell me, how thin are people supposed to get before they should be eligible for Foodbank aid? Would they need to queue up for a BMI assessment before being told whether they get to eat? And what would be the cut-off point? How hungry is not hungry enough?
‘Since FDR countless social programs have been implemented with the intent of "solving" problems that for the most part, people create themselves.’
Yes, the Great Depression was caused by the rank and file working classes. Of course it was. Silly me.
‘Trillions of dollars have been taken from working people and spent in an apparently vain effort…’
…on working people. Your problem?
But your statement begs the question of what would the US look like if those ‘trillions of dollars’ had not been spent?
‘Since the goal of these programs was to do away with problems, isn't it odd that these problems not only didn't go away ... but got worse?’
That merely shows that not enough was spent, doesn’t it? Or does it show that such programs are merely band-aids and that poverty and hunger are the inevitable by-products, or even the deliberate intention, of capitalism? And that they will not be eradicated while this philosophy holds sway?
‘In addition, "liberal" policies concerning education have produced an army of drones who know nothing. The "fix" of course that liberals want is even more money pumped into a failed system’
Schools have been run into the ground and under it by falling state tax revenues, NCLB and sundry other snafus. It is not necessarily ‘ib’ruls’’ fault, as conservatives have a well documented loathing of public schools and are, IMHU, indu I don’t know how else you pay for new schools and teachers if you don’t pump money into the education system– do you?
‘Helping people is a noble goal…’
Yes, yes it is. Thank you.
‘…but what must be understood is that once those who have a propensity to live off the goodwill of others have their needs taken care of they will never make the effort to become self sufficient.’
Twaddle. This conservative canard is always trotted out when discussions of welfare are at hand, but it’s just not true. I have yet to see any statistics to prove it. What is true is that in countries without a welfare safety net, the poor become even poorer. Ever been to Asia? Africa? South and Central America? Is that what you want? A third/developing world USA?
And what do you call ‘self-sufficient’? Growing your own food? Being at the mercy of employers? What?
‘A helping hand is fine, a care free lifestyle is not.’
As the requirement for eligibility for welfare in, say. Georgia, is an income 130% below the poverty line, I don’t the think the poor and homeless are in any danger of enjoying a care-free lifestyle at the expense of the tax-payer. The CEO of, say, Halliburton on the other hand…
‘Government intervention invariably makes problems worse.’
Nonsense. It’s horses for courses. Look what happened to power industry when it was deregulated – Enron, California brownouts etc – and without the government the US would no longer have a railroad, passenger or freight.
‘It's so inevitable that it should be recognized as one of natures laws.’
No, what should be recognized as one of natures laws is, due to the fact that humans have only made it this far due to co-operation and sharing, that socialism is inevitable. People share. People help people. The downward redistribution of wealth by the state is merely a wholesale and more efficient way of ‘sharing’ in a modern industrial/post environment.
‘At best, help should come from family first, charity and church.
What about the Amish when they have a barn-raising? Are they members of a community giving each other a neighborly helping hand? Or dangerous communists? What about not-for=profit co-ops organized by communities to help themselves? After all, they are somewhat, ahem, ‘socialistic’? Are they good? Or bad? Are they good? Or bad?
Oops! Looks like they’re bad!
http://www.thecompletepatient.co...he-real-
wa.html
‘Religious organizations help anyone, regardless of faith.’
You think so? You don’t think that recipients might be required to swallow a little bit of religion with that soup?
‘Government intervention should be restricted to the local level ... communities themselves should be allowed to handle social issues as they see fit.’
See above link. But please, expand on your vision…where do communities end and local government start? And how big are they? State? And what about Federal government? What would its responsibilities be? It doesn’t sound like you are much of a Federalist – would you prefer a resumption of the colonies?
‘State and federal governments should be banned from interfering.’
See above link again. And state and federal governments should be banned from interfering in what, exactly? Is government to be administered at what, a county level? So much for economies of scale! I thought you guys were supposed to be the economic geniuses! And what would that do for your precious ‘Free Trade™’? Don’t y’all keep bleating that ‘Free markets free people’?
Talking about interfering, what about this book?
http://www.nannystatebook.com/thebook/
I think there’s something in that for everyone!
‘As a side note ... it's overwhemlingly the religious and conservative who give to charity and volunteer to take care of the needy.’
The poor are not a plaything, a scratching post against which the religious and conservative can itch their consciences – they are real, hungry, desperate people who do not deserve the humiliation of having to beg for alms.
Charity is all very well, but it’s like putting buckets under a leaky ceiling – it might stop the house from flooding, but surely those resources spent on buying individual buckets would be better pooled and spent on fixing the roof.
You might feel all pious about having bought a bucket, but it what happens when it is full? Do you empty it and start again? Isn’t this hopelessly inefficient? And is there ever going to be enough buckets?
The same goes for third world aid. The right hate giving aid to the third world but refuse to do what is necessary to wean them off it, and cannot fathom that, at times, the aid IS the problem.
And finally, does it not occur to you that this system of private and personal giving is doomed to collapse at the very time is most needed? With the economy heading for Tierra del Fuego, home foreclosures, business collapse, the credit freeze and rocketing unemployment, the army of the dispossessed will grow exponentially – in fact, that army will include those that once used to ‘give’, and when people move from one side of the ledger to the other the system falls apart as you now have more people clamouring for less resources.
‘Liberals rarley lift a finger except to scream for the government to take more money from working people.’
Liberals understand that there will never be enough buckets to stop the house from flooding and so they agitate for fixing the roof – conservatives, however, hate the idea of getting together to fix the roof as this is socialism and so would rather just keep filling the buckets.
Addressing the systemic inequality that passes for an organizational philosophy in the USA will take more than making you feel good about yourself when the collection plate comes around, and more than sticking a bucket under a leak before returning to your own water-tight abode.
I might further add that many liberals are the very poor conservatives supposedly ‘help’ – maybe they are too busy ensuring that charity begins at home?
Anyhoo, liberals don’t scream that more money be taken from working people, quite the opposite – they insist that more money be taken from the wildly rich, the absurdly wealthy, the obscenely affluent. Don’t you be misrepresenting the left’s position in order to bolster your propaganda!
‘Why don't you and your fellow liberals put your money and your sweat where your mouth is.’
We do. All the time.
‘Quit talking and start doing.’
We do both.
‘Give your money away, or pay extra taxes. Do everything you leave to others to do’
‘Pay extra taxes’ – sounds like someone’s been at the Hannity again! It’s not a matter of liberals paying extra taxes, it’s a matter of everyone paying their fair share, something conservatives do not, will not or cannot understand.
Saying ‘Oh, the rich give to charity!’ is all very well, but what this amounts to is optional and discretionary tax. Why should they get to choose where their taxes go and how much they pay? Workers don’t have that luxury, so why should the owner class be granted it? Why does it have special rights?
Cheers
Elroy
Anyone else read his tripe?
Oh HELL no!!! He says the same thing over and over again and I'm in no mood to read his boring self righteous bloviating bilge.
"Anyhoo, liberals don’t scream that more money be taken from working people, quite the opposite – they insist that more money be taken from the wildly rich, the absurdly wealthy, the obscenely affluent."
Maybe you just don't understand how things work. For starters, "rich" people that own corporations, companies or provide services to people simply pass any tax increase onto ... guess who ... the working class, the middle class, whatever you want to call it. The people who buy the majority of whatever it is they're selling. You can see this in action when they raised the minimum wage here, or when gas prices went up. EVERYTHING, and I mean everything went up in price, and not by just a few pennies either.
Any tax increase is absorbed by the people you're so hard pressed to protect.
Secondly, when product sales drop because of the high prices the companies charge because the government is "protecting the working man", these same companies look for other ways to stay afloat ... namely by cutting jobs and wages.
So in effect everytime liberals stick their nose where it doesn't belong for the "common good", they hurt the people they claim to be concerned for.
Now thirdly, the liberal leadership knows this but they don't care. Many people just haven't figured this out and continue to vote against their self interest by electing thieving and immoral democrats and liberals.
Fourthly, yes liberals do scream "take money from the working man". They scream about raising gas prices to "save the earth" knowing full well how much an impact increased gas prices have.
In short ... today's liberals do more to hurt the average working man than anyone.
Commenting by HaloScan
