Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- satatom on ACORN stole election?
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/21
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/21
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/21
- JWink on Will GOP contenders be nice to Obama?
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/21
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/21
- Regular on ACORN stole election?
198 Comments
SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea says North Korea has fired a seventh missile off its eastern coast, a violation of U.N. resolutions and an apparent message of defiance to the United States on its Independence Day.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff say six missiles were fired earlier Saturday and the seventh around 5:40 p.m. (4:40 a.m. EDT, 0840 GMT).
WWOD?
“The Founding Fathers left one legacy not celebrated on Independence Day but which affects us all. It’s the national debt.
The country first got into debt to help pay for the Revolutionary War. Growing ever since, the debt stands today at a staggering $11.5 trillion — equivalent to over $37,000 for each and every American. And it’s expanding by over $1 trillion a year.
The mountain of debt easily could become the next full-fledged economic crisis without firm action from Washington, economists of all stripes warn.
Higher taxes, or reduced federal benefits and services — or a combination of both — may be the inevitable consequences.
The debt is complicating efforts by President Barack Obama and Congress to cope with the worst recession in decades as stimulus and bailout spending combine with lower tax revenues to widen the gap.
Interest payments on the debt alone cost $452 billion last year — the largest federal spending category after Medicare-Medicaid, Social Security and defense. It’s quickly crowding out all other government spending. And the Treasury is finding it harder to find new lenders.
This year’s deficit is now estimated at about $1.85 trillion.
The overall debt is now slightly over 80 percent of the annual output of the entire U.S. economy, as measured by the gross domestic product.
as the U.S. spends trillions to stabilize the recession-wracked economy, helping to force down the value of the dollar, the securities become less attractive as investments. Some major foreign lenders are already paring back on their purchases of U.S. bonds and other securities.
And if major holders of U.S. debt were to flee, it would send shock waves through the global economy — and sharply force up U.S. interest rates. “ Fox
The Congressional Budget Office said that the national debt under the president’s budget will be $2.3 trillion deeper than the White House estimates.
The key metric [as per Capn America] , when determining if a deficit is controllable, is looking at the ratio of the debt to the country’s GDP. If this ratio is shrinking, then the debt is manageable. The White House said this would happen by 2013. The CBO says this will not happen, even by 2019.
Bring on some more of that FREE MONEY!!!!!
Obama’s not spending the money fast enough!
National Debt:
01/21/2009 $10,625,053,544,309.79
07/02/2009 $11,489,560,999,310.74
- US Treasury
Check out the Obama record spending going back to JFK.
So, would President Obama’s budget plan really increase deficit spending much more than other modern presidents? Well, yeah, to the tune of seven times more, measured as a percentage of economic output, than under President Kennedy over 45 years ago — as you can see in this chart.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/12/obama-spending-tax-trends-charted/
Obama: Worst President Ever.
While the US Media remains infatuated with Obama, the arab world can see right through Obama’s charades. Obama = Bush.
“Obama is acutely aware of the real reason why he cannot be too forceful in supporting the millions of Iranians demanding to have their votes counted.
The problem is not with US administrations long past, but with the policies of the current administration.
The fact is that the US counts as its closest allies in the Middle East regimes who routinely rig elections – if they even bother to hold them at all – which produce governments that are far less legitimate than Ahmadinejad’s today.
The substance of Obama’s foreign policies in the Middle East and North Africa remain in many key areas strikingly similar to, and are in some cases more aggressive than, those of George Bush, his predecessor.
Saudi Arabia remains our most crucial Arab ally despite the fact that its government is among the world’s most repressive and undemocratic (about which Obama has had nothing to say since becoming president ).
Rather than encourage Arab democrats, the Obama administration is improving ties with Libya and returning an ambassador to Syria, where today we are courting Bashar al-Assad as a “key player” in the region, despite his country’s abysmal record on human rights and democracy.
Undemocratic election techniques
In Cairo, where Obama made only a fleeting allusion to democracy during his “historic” speech last month, Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president, won his most recent re-election bid by deploying the usual assortment of undemocratic techniques.” (see photo of Obama smiling with Mubarak – best buddies)
“Then he jailed his main opponent, Ayman Nour, for more than three years for election fraud just to make sure everyone got his point.
Yet the Obama administration, like its predecessors, regularly celebrates him as a key ally and a crucial mediator in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Consider what would happen if, instead of staying on the sidelines in Iran while playing softball with Israel and trying to woo other autocratic regimes into our orbit, Obama could look the Iranian leadership in the eyes and make the same demand of them that he should be making of all the leaders of the region: democratise and grant freedom to the peoples under your control.
At least then the brave Iranians risking their lives for democracy, and the long-repressed peoples of the region more broadly, would know that the US stands up for them.
Ultimately, it is the reality of the Obama administration’s support for a discredited status quo across the region, and not the actions of the Eisenhower administration half a century ago, that makes it impossible for the US to play a forceful role advocating for democracy in Iran at this crucial moment in the history of the Islamic Republic, and ours as well.” Al Jazeera
Happy Independence Day to all you conservatives, libertarians, and independents!!
Happy Dependence Day to all you libs slobbering at the federal trough and screaming, I WANT MORE FREE MONEY!! I WANT MORE gubermint in my life!!!
You are getting your wish.
Worst recession since the Great Depression. Most all economists agree that a massive intervention is necessary, silly.
Happy Independence Day Americans.
This great country gives us the opportunity to succeed. It allows us to fail. In other words, a chance. Can person ask for much more?
We Americans have always been the independent sort. We built the greatest country in the history of mankind. Let’s not lapse into the “what can government do for me” of socialism.
People clamor for the chance to live here, for the opportunities. Yet we have citizens who show disdain for their country. How about a trade?
Let’s celebrate our heritage today and always remember that, to the world, America spells opportunity. And thank God we are Americans.
Amway wrote:
“Growing ever since, the debt stands today at a staggering $11.5 trillion — equivalent to over $37,000 for each and every American.”
_______
Add unfunded liabilities in Medicare/SS/Fed Pensions and the #’s something like $455,000 per person…
Outlander – great post!
DavidB – told myself it’s the 4th, so no smart azzedness…but can’t help it.
Can you even name an “economist” (since apparently “most all” agree), or maybe discuss some finer points about economic theory than lame talking points from politicians? Do “most all” still agree? If this is the “worst since the Great Depression”, how much did we spend on stimulus in the Great Depression, since apparently that was the magic pill that got us out? Some say WWII got us out of the Depression, since FDR’s your model, are you suggesting if it lasts much longer that WWIII is launched? Can you name a single instance, where any entity that was massively in debt (basically insolvent), found itself in a recession, and cured its ails by spending/printing/borrowing even more money that it didn’t have?? Just one?
On this date, Jul 4th, record setting temperatures for Wichita Kansas
High: 110 °F (1980)
Low: 53 °F (1892)
I hope everybody has a great and glorious fourth, regardless of their beliefs.
I was watching Fox news, and some girl came on singing the National Anthem. I stood, as I always do, with my hand over my heart, and Fox cut her off in the middle. That, to me, is about as disrespectful as they can be. Way to go, Fox.
JMWalker
Posted July 4, 2009 at 8:36 am | Permalink
I hope everybody has a great and glorious fourth, regardless of their beliefs.
I was watching Fox news, and some girl came on singing the National Anthem. I stood, as I always do, with my hand over my heart, and Fox cut her off in the middle. That, to me, is about as disrespectful as they can be
=================================================
Yeah Walker, but not quite as disrespectful as this:
And to think, XXX gets fired up when someone makes comments about his wife, but has no hesitation making comments about somebody else’s wife.
JMWalker
Posted July 3, 2009 at 11:35 pm
===============================================
re: The Palin Thread
===============================================
XXX
Posted July 3, 2009 at 10:56 pm
4. Someone has a picture of Sarah having sex with a moose.
===================================================
JMWalker
Posted July 3, 2009 at 11:35 pm
6. Someone has a picture of a moose having sex with Sarah.
“Happy Dependence Day to all you libs slobbering at the federal trough and screaming, I WANT MORE FREE MONEY!! I WANT MORE gubermint in my life!!!”
Nice AmWay, real nice, classy in fact.
This life-long liberal doesn’t receive any Federal money whatsoever. None.
Honestly, on this day, I would have though you would be a little more respectful of your fellow Americans, such as Outlander’s post.
I guess I gave you a little too much credit.
“Happy Dependence Day to all you libs slobbering at the federal trough and screaming, I WANT MORE FREE MONEY!! I WANT MORE gubermint in my life!!!”
Nice AmWay, real nice, classy in fact.
This life-long liberal doesn’t receive any Federal money whatsoever. None.
Honestly, on this day, I would have though you would be a little more respectful of your fellow Americans, such as Outlander’s post.
I guess I gave you a little too much credit.
Sorry, forgot to add great post! Can’t wait to see your next post!
I dunno Clark, perhaps you can do another 4th July – invite, uninvite all in the same sentence like you did the other day to show your – you know – respect.
This life-long liberal doesn’t receive any Federal money whatsoever. None.
—————————————————-
Ah. So you’re of the elitist set who thinks he knows what’s best for everyone and their money.
Thanks for the claification.
WS Clark,
Is there some discernable pattern to your calls for respect or civility?
Because if there is, I can’t figure it out.
One day you talk about civility the next day you are one of the most uncivil posters here.
The next day you are calling for us to come together as Americans, end the divisiveness and be civil. Then you are right back to being divisive and uncivil.
Here you are again, saying that today is a day we should be respectful.
Can you share your calendar with the rest of us on what days you actually want civility and respect here so that we can keep up?
Thank you.
so, WS…you receive absolutely no federal money? So, you have never consumed any dairy product in your life? Never eaten US Beef? Never driven on an Interstate Highway? Never consumed anything made of corn? Never purchased anything made of cotton? Never consumed anything made of soybeans? Never used/purchased anything that comes from petroleum?
All of the above (and many, many others) benefit from massive government subsidies. For you to say you have never received any Federal money is just naive.
“Nathaniel” –
Just a hypothetical question here, mind you:
If someone were to come over to your place tonight and fire, say, a dozen or so Roman Candles at your dog, would that qualify as “shooting?”
#
Regular
Posted July 4, 2009 at 8:45 am | Permalink
JMWalker
Posted July 4, 2009 at 8:36 am | Permalink
I hope everybody has a great and glorious fourth, regardless of their beliefs.
I was watching Fox news, and some girl came on singing the National Anthem. I stood, as I always do, with my hand over my heart, and Fox cut her off in the middle. That, to me, is about as disrespectful as they can be
=================================================
Yeah Walker, but not quite as disrespectful as this:
And to think, XXX gets fired up when someone makes comments about his wife, but has no hesitation making comments about somebody else’s wife.
===============================================
There you go again, bozo. There is a difference between bagging some politician, something you do regularly (Ever got on Hank when he bags Obama’s wife? Thought not, hypocrite), and disrespecting the National Anthem. But I doubt you’d understand. Have an excellent fourth anyway.
#
JMWalker
Posted July 4, 2009 at 9:46 am
There you go again, bozo. There is a difference between bagging some politician, something you do regularly (Ever got on Hank when he bags Obama’s wife? Thought not, hypocrite), and disrespecting the National Anthem. But I doubt you’d understand. Have an excellent fourth anyway.
==========================
Really? There is a difference about making comments about someone’s wife having s3x with a moose?
Perhaps you’d like to explain that to Todd Palin while you stand face to face?
Joe,
Why don’t you come over and find out?
#
Monkeyhawk
Posted July 4, 2009 at 9:45 am | Permalink
“Nathaniel” –
Just a hypothetical question here, mind you:
If someone were to come over to your place tonight and fire, say, a dozen or so Roman Candles at your dog, would that qualify as “shooting?”
————————————–
Animal cruelty is one of the first psychological signs of deranged, psychotic behavior. No doubt that MonkeyHock demonstrates this type of behavior time and again on this Blog.
Just like Nathaniel to always be inviting strange men over to his place.
LOL
Come out of the closet Nathaniel…it’s past time!
“This life-long liberal doesn’t receive any Federal money whatsoever.”
There is a significant difference, Raptor, between receiving Federal funds and benefiting from Federal programs.
“Ah. So you’re of the elitist set who thinks he knows what’s best for everyone and their money.”
Perhaps, Mr. KIA, you can show me where I have stated that I know what’s best for everyone and their money.
“There is a significant difference, Raptor, between receiving Federal funds and benefiting from Federal programs”
Oh really? I am sorry, I missed that one. What is the ’significant difference”? Let’s see, both use federal funds, both provide direct benefits to the citizens, both come from federal programs.
Care to educate me on the significant differences? Dollars are dollars, regardless of where they are first spent.
#
Regular
Posted July 4, 2009 at 9:49 am | Permalink
Really? There is a difference about making comments about someone’s wife having s3x with a moose?
Perhaps you’d like to explain that to Todd Palin while you stand face to face?
===============================================
Perhaps you’d like to stand and face Obama and tell him his wife has a fat bu*t. Oops, sorry: you can’t stand.
So, I guess disrespecting the National Anthem is okay, but bagging some politician is bad in your book. Why am I not surprised. Your Limbaugh logic is showing.
#
JMWalker
Posted July 4, 2009 at 10:02 am | Permalink
#
Regular
Posted July 4, 2009 at 9:49 am | Permalink
Really? There is a difference about making comments about someone’s wife having s3x with a moose?
Perhaps you’d like to explain that to Todd Palin while you stand face to face?
===============================================
Perhaps you’d like to stand and face Obama and tell him his wife has a fat bu*t. Oops, sorry: you can’t stand.
——————————————
I’ve never said anything about Michelle O’Bama’s butt.
Here’s a song for you – ‘Baby Got Back’
oops, the link to Baby got Back
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNQU-tVSuw4
“Care to educate me on the significant differences? Dollars are dollars, regardless of where they are first spent.”
Gladly, Raptor, the post was in response to this:
“Happy Dependence Day to all you libs slobbering at the federal trough and screaming, I WANT MORE FREE MONEY!! I WANT MORE gubermint in my life!!!”
And my response was that I did not receive any Federal payments, not that I did not benefit from Federal programs.
If your point is that by benefiting from Federal programs is receiving Federal funds, then apparently we are all “libs slobbering at the federal trough and screaming, I WANT MORE FREE MONEY!! I WANT MORE gubermint in my life!!!”
Clark has inherited the ‘Stroke Finger’ from Chas…
Do you ALWAYS start drinking this early Reguliar?!?
Now THAT is a disability!
Gee.
And all this time I thought the reference was about Todd having sex with a moose.
I’m so naive.
” Most all economists agree that a massive intervention is necessary, silly.” DavidB
“We can’t keep on just borrowing from China,” Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt.”
Holders of U.S. debt will eventually “get tired” of buying it, causing interest rates on everything from auto loans to home mortgages to increase, Obama said. “It will have a dampening effect on our economy.”
- Barack Obama
au contraire, ws. I do not want more government in my life. I do not want federal health care. I do not want federally owned auto companies. I do not want 90% of the subsidies that are currently being provided. Do I have the ability or power to STOP any of this nonsense? Only by my voting, but I obviously have no direct control over this idiocy.
The difference between most libs and everyone else is the libs WANT more of this government control of so much…and everyone else does not. Most of us non-libs do not think that more government control is the answer to all our ills.
I think WS means he has never benefitted directly, i.e., transfer payments or government dollars deposited in his bank account via bank draft.
FFS, if Raptor can define gubmint benefits so loosely, then we all suckle at the teat of government because we all benefit from our military spending. It’s like, omg we ARE commies.
Yall are cuckoo for cocoa puffs sometimes.
Obama and his lackey democrats controlling congress are spending money faster than a drunken sailor on shore leave (no offense Hank).
The only thing Obama has proposed cutting from the budget is healthcare for seniors and disabled Americans.
pendant..thank you for reading ws’s mind and clearing up what he wrote. I was responding only to the words written, since I do not have the clairvoyant abilities you seem to possess.
Raptor
Posted July 4, 2009 at 10:18 am | Permalink
pendant..thank you for reading ws’s mind and clearing up what he wrote. I was responding only to the words written, since I do not have the clairvoyant abilities you seem to possess.
—
And thank you for being a bigger pedant than I this morning. ;)
“If Raptor can define gubmint benefits so loosely, then we all suckle at the teat of government because we all benefit (period)”
I wish I could count the many times libs on this blog have thrown, “You have fire service dontcha?”
“You drive on roads dontcha?” “You have police protections dontcha?”
It is understandable that we have an identity crises here for liberals. They have been listening to Obama double-talk. On one hand, he talks crap about “pay go” and “the deficit keeping him awake”, but in reality he cannot stop spending. He is like an addict.
Democrats want to “pretend” or perhaps better dream about being fiscally conservative. They have a hard time facing the reality.
Terms like “social” conservativism or “compassionate” conservatism are just terms used by all politicians to spend money for each of their individual social whims.
Republicans want to “pretend” to be conservative too, but they lost any right to carry that flag with this voter. But at least they are facing that reality. Democrats are still in la-la land on their spending high.
“Republicans want to “pretend” to be conservative too, but they lost any right to carry that flag with this voter. But at least they are facing that reality.”
lol
Only when it fits their political ends, silly.
Like I said, yall are cuckoo for cocoa puffs sometimes.
Joe,
So why do you keep threatening violence to my dog?
You do realize this is a criminal activity don’t you?
“I will end legalized abortion.”
“I will repeal Roe v Wade.”
“I will cut government spending.”
“I will cut the size of government.”
—
Today’s Republics are suckers for all 4 “promises.”
Nathaniel
Posted July 4, 2009 at 10:35 am | Permalink
Joe,
So why do you keep threatening violence to my dog?
You do realize this is a criminal activity don’t you?
********************************************************
Why do you keep inviting men over?
In some states that is a criminal activity.
Pedant,
I am not sure I know of anyone who has “promised” to end Abortion or Repeal Roe V Wade.
As far as cutting spending and the size of government, there are many who do hold to this and have in the past.
Amway…you put it more succinctly than I. Thanks…there are certain services that are obvious and natural government functions. Like providing for the common defense, providing roads, fire and police protection. I doubt anyone has a problem with that.
The differentiation comes when government tells us we must have health insurance or pay a $1,000 fine (like in MA, and what ted is pushing on a federal level) or government ownership of auto manufacturers. Or the feds telling the states they must have seat belt laws. Or any of hundreds of federal mandates that usurp the power of the individual and the states.
Nathaniel
Posted July 4, 2009 at 10:41 am | Permalink
As far as cutting spending and the size of government, there are many who do hold to this and have in the past.
—
uh huh
The GOP was in control of Congress and the White House from 2000-2006.
—
President Bush and some of his supporters have argued that one purpose of the tax cuts is to “starve the beast,” that is, to contain or reduce the size of government by depriving it of revenue. It is true that, in the long run, simple arithmetic dictates that the government’s spending must equal its revenue. Thus, if taxes are cut (or at least never increase), government spending must eventually decline. In practice, however, the Bush tax cuts have been accompanied by an acceleration in spending, both in inflation-adjusted dollars and in proportion to the economy, which means that the tax cuts have not led to lower government spending but have instead increased the budget deficit.
In practice, neither tax cuts in general nor the Bush tax cuts in particular seem especially effective in restraining spending. The data over the past twenty-five years appear much more consistent with the view that once fiscal discipline erodes on the tax side of the budget, it tends to erode on the spending side, too.
Since the Bush tax cuts were enacted, government spending has increased significantly in all major categories: defense spending, domestic spending, and entitlement spending. As a proportion of the economy, total government spending has gradually increased over President Bush’s tenure, from 18.4 percent of GDP in 2000 to 20.3 percent of GDP in 2006.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/bush-tax-cuts/government.cfm
—
Like I said, empty promises.
Let me repeat the most salient conclusion above:
…once fiscal discipline erodes on the tax side of the budget, it tends to erode on the spending side, too.
So true Raptor.
On principle I am totally against government intervention in my life decisions. On the other hand, I understand basics in terms of services.
With mixed emotions, I am anxious for government to force employees – even the working poor, to pay something ANYTHING, for their own healthcare. Mandatory deductions? I’ve bemoaned FICA and Medicare for years. A mandatory healthcare deduction (for the stupid peoples own good), might make them realize how I’ve felt.
That in a nutshell is the GOP’s biggest hurdle. How to overcome spending discipline when one has already capitulated to insanity by cutting taxes in the face of current deficit spending.
The GOP has missed this point since 1994. I don’t exactly expect yall to get it now, either.
Pedant,
If your argument is that the Republicans (as a whole in general) and Bush grew government and didn’t control spending better, then I agree.
That was not your original point though.
There are indeed Republicans (Conservatives) who do hold to reducing spending and the expansion of government.
As for your other two assertions about promises to end abortion or overturn Roe V Wade? Can you find where the Republicans have promised such a thing?
Pedant,
So which is better then, Republicans who grow government and spend money or Democrats who do it twice as much?
What is your point?
#
Regular
Posted July 4, 2009 at 10:06 am | Permalink
I’ve never said anything about Michelle O’Bama’s butt.
================================================
Butt you never got on Hank for doing the same, hypocrite.
You also never said anything about disrespecting the National Anthem. That was the gist of my first post. Is that somehow above your head? Need another explanation, or is disrespecting it okay with you. Come on, boy, take your meds and stay on track.
The problem Pedant is our politicians are afraid to say, “NO”.
No one wants to be labeled the bad guy. No one wants to take the risk of offending. No one can therefore seriously commit to making real cuts in programs.
Republicans believe they can stop the spending madness by cutting the revenue, hoping democrats will feel constrained by fiscal reality and cut spending.
Democrats believe they can increase spending, hoping republicans will feel constrained by the same fiscal reality and increase taxes.
I don’t see an end in sight.
Get outside, be free, observe nature!
Nathaniel
Posted July 4, 2009 at 10:55 am | Permalink
If your argument is that the Republicans (as a whole in general) and Bush grew government and didn’t control spending better, then I agree.
That was not your original point though.
—
My original point was the the GOP promises to cut spending and the size of government to get elected.
When they are elected, these promises are ignored.
The point stands.
JM Walker,
A Hypocrite is basically someone who does something contrary to what they are telling others not to do.
Selectively choosing to comment on conflicting statements that you make and not someone else doesn’t make someone a Hypocrite.
Nathaniel posted July 4, 2009 at 10:35 am
You do realize this is a criminal activity don’t you?
—————-
So is “disappearing” a person and their car.
What gets lost among all the sordid details is how the Repubic Party and CONs in general judge pick their political stars.
Last August, the Repubic Party and John McCain decided the Moose-Dresser was the 2nd-most-qualified person on the planet to become President of the United States.
She just beat out Mark Sanford because she looked hot after the Repubic Party financed a $250,000 shopping spree at Sax 5th Avenue.
Then we get John Ensign who was considered an up-and-comer until he started boinking the help.
“Hey! It worked for Strom Thurmond!”
Then we get David Vitter, a strong supporter of “Traditional Marriage,” between one man and one woman and a hooker who’ll dress you in diapers.
CONs defended Larry “Wide Stance” Craig with, “Hey! It could happen to anyone!”
And after a while you begin to suspect the quality of judgment that comes from CONs.
This isn’t about individuals.
This is about how political people make their decisions.
Elliot Spitzer was a fool. Canned.
Gary Condit wasn’t all that liberal and probably was guilty of nothing more than extra-curricular boinking. But after Chanra Levy? Canned.
Sanford expresses traditional Repubic Party “Family Values” with a trans-continental boinkfest with his Argentinia concubine. Still in office.
Rush Limbaugh returns from a “sex-ation” to the Dominican Republic with half a prescription of Viagra (gender optional, but “If they’re underage, fuc# ‘em”)).
Bill-O the Clown makes lewd phone calls to a subordinate about chick-peas and/or fava beans, and his the Fux News Channel’s biggest star.
C’mon, CONs.
I’ve met up with some of you and you generally seem to be relatively functional human beings.
But these are your political heroes?
You might think about that.
Back to work.
Teach your kids about the outdoors.
RE:
Regular
Posted July 4, 2009 at 8:45 am |
Once again, Regular sets a new low point for the blog last night.
_______________
Regular
Posted July 3, 2009 at 11:02 pm | Permalink
Speculation and rumor, duh Libs love it like a cheap thrill ‘Jerry Springer’ substitute.
They are probably running safety pins through their nipples as we speak – while yodeling a Janis Joplin oldie – all the while wearing silk panties and getting an erection staring at Al Gore photos.
Yep, duh Libs love lapping up ‘dog vomit’ commentary in the nether regions of society. Someone has to do it I suppose – we’ll just sneak by quietly and let duh Libs carry on with their sewer dwelling and vomit imbibing.
________________
I put that one on file. Can’t wait for the next time a Con posts about hateful Libs.
“There are indeed Republicans (Conservatives) who do hold to reducing spending and the expansion of government.”
In fairness, and a possible positive sign, there are a growing number of Blue Dog Democrats in the Blue Dog Coalition who voice conservative values.
(I know talk is cheap.). They may be of more interest with the clear majorities in both houses of congress. There is some hope.
http://www.bluedogdems.com/what.html
Pedant,
To prove that you have to actually show where those promises were made by those individual Republicans in Congress at the time of your example.
The GOP merely consists of hundreds of individuals who are elected by their local areas.
I doubt that very many of them made any promises to cut spending or reduce the size of the government.
Maybe some did, but then we would have to look at their individual voting records to see if they held true to their promises or not.
Such things actually involve work though and it is much easier to make broad stereotyping generalizations…
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 10:58 am | Permalink
Republicans believe they can stop the spending madness by cutting the revenue, hoping democrats will feel constrained by fiscal reality and cut spending.
—
The problem is that to get elected the GOP promises to cut spending and taxes both, but ends up cutting only taxes. This is irresponsible. The public debt grows as a result.
—
Democrats believe they can increase spending, hoping republicans will feel constrained by the same fiscal reality and increase taxes.
—
While far from perfect, the Democrats generally recognize that fiscal responsiblity begins with recognizing that taxes must be increased if spending increases. The public debt remains stable as a result.
Obviously the current situation facing the US is an exception ( a deflationary trap). But again, the Democrats are behaving more responsibly than the GOP with respect to fiscal policy because the GOP refuses to acknowledge either the existence or the consequences of the deflationary trap we currently face.
Nathaniel
Posted July 4, 2009 at 11:06 am | Permalink
The GOP merely consists of hundreds of individuals who are elected by their local areas.
—
So it’s not their fault, really. They’re nothing more than a congregation of individuals. For the GOP, the whole is somehow less than the sum of its parts.
Remind me again why anybody would ever vote such a party into a position of responsibility again?
Cosmos,
The difference is that I am not still going around making comments about this like Joe is.
It appears to be a weekly thing for Joe to threaten my dog now.
“Nathaniel” informs us –
“The GOP merely consists of hundreds of individuals….”
That many?!
Pedant,
“So it’s not their fault, really. They’re nothing more than a congregation of individuals. For the GOP, the whole is somehow less than the sum of its parts.”
=================================================
Nice strawman argument. How about actually responding to what I actually said?
Or how about answering my question, where was this “promise” made that you keep talking about?
There were at least 6 or 7 of ‘em yesterday at Palin’s press conference!
Why yes Joe, in Congress.
I will be more specific for you in the future…
From the Republican Party 2008 Platform:
Maintaining The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life
Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity and dignity of innocent human life.
Nathaniel posted July 4, 2009 at 11:11 am
The difference is that I am not still going around making comments about this like Joe is.
————————-
But “disappearing” a person and their car is still a criminal activity.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Have a happy Independence Day everybody (you too, Nathan, but try to open your eyes before you shoot stuff off).
Off to the Y, then HarborFest beckons. Tall ships are here and the weather is fine.
Have a good un yall!
Excepting of course AFTER they are born…then Republicans can ship them off to die alone in a foreign country.
“Nathaniel” offers –
“I will be more specific for you in the future…”
I dunno…
That line seems to me a bit… no, “creepy” doesn’t explain it.
Perhaps a tad… “threatening?” Nah, there’s no rational reason “Nathaniel” would threaten me.
How ’bout (sorry to use the technical term here) “ookie?!”
“I will be more specific for you in the future…”
Just what do you have in mind?
As a sidebar, my favorite Star Spangled Banner rendition is Jimi Hendrix. Very emotional. Real.
Cosmos,
Context. It could be a magic trick for all you know and perfectly legal.
Constantly threatening my dog though? Not legal.
Joe,
I am not sure why you have such a problem with reading into everything like you do.
Perhaps you should start with simply grasping the meaning of what is actually presented to you before jumping into the realm of endless speculation on what it could have meant.
“Nathaniel posits –
“Constantly threatening my dog though? Not legal.”
Really?!
OMG, I had no idea!
Cite the statute.
“Democrats generally recognize that fiscal responsiblity begins with recognizing that taxes must be increased if spending increases.”
Except when they don’t.
I promise I will not raise taxes on 95% of Americans.
Nathaniel,
Yes, it’s about “context”.
It was obvious from context that Nathaniel only meant he’d perform a harmless, legal magic trick, to “disappear” a person and their car /sarcasm OFF
Excepting of course AFTER they are born…then Democrats can ship them off to die alone in a foreign country.
Vietnam
Iraq
Iran
Afghanistan
THIS is NOT a promise according to Nathaniel:
Ban abortion with Constitutional amendment
We say the unborn child has a fundamental right to life. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation that the 14th Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions. We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect the sanctity of innocent human life.
Source: Republican Platform adopted at GOP National Convention Aug 12, 2000
Keep dancing Republicans!
Have a happy and blessed Fourth of July.
Palin/Sanford in 2012!!!!!!!
satatom=chas
Yes Joe, what you are threatening is illegal:
K.S.A. 21-4310 – Cruelty to animals
Cruelty to animals is:
a.
1.Intentionally and maliciously killing, injuring, maiming, torturing, burning or mutilating any animal;
….
Cruelty to animals as described in subsection (a)(1) is a nonperson felony. Upon conviction of this subsection, a person shall be sentenced to not less than 30 days or more than one year’s imprisonment and be fined not less than $500 nor more than $5,000. During the mandatory 30 days imprisonment, such offender shall have a psychological evaluation prepared for the court to assist the court in determining conditions of probation. Such conditions shall include, but not be limited to, the completion of an anger management program
Ameircan_Way,
Oh no, my money is on satatom being Apophis.
satatom,
Are you the liberal supposed pastor “Chas”?
Sounds like your spewage.
Oh yeah! Motivating.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2bGUeDnqPY
WSClark
Posted July 4, 2009 at 9:26 am | Permalink
“Happy Dependence Day to all you libs slobbering at the federal trough and screaming, I WANT MORE FREE MONEY!! I WANT MORE gubermint in my life!!!”
Nice AmWay, real nice, classy in fact.
This life-long liberal doesn’t receive any Federal money whatsoever. None.
—————————
Ahhh, Clark falls into the “Do-Gooder Rich Guy Socialist” category:
Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism
A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.
To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.
The Socialistic bourgeois want all the advantages of modern social conditions without the struggles and dangers necessarily resulting therefrom. They desire the existing state of society, minus its revolutionary and disintegrating elements. They wish for a bourgeoisie without a proletariat. The bourgeoisie naturally conceives the world in which it is supreme to be the best; and bourgeois Socialism develops this comfortable conception into various more or less complete systems. In requiring the proletariat to carry out such a system, and thereby to march straightway into the social New Jerusalem, it but requires in reality, that the proletariat should remain within the bounds of existing society, but should cast away all its hateful ideas concerning the bourgeoisie.
Total Tax Burden Is Rising to Highest Level in History
(The attack on the Bourgeoisie has begun!)
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/BudgetChartBook/Total-Tax-Burden-Rising-To-Highest-Level-in-History.aspx
Obama’s Pay-Go Flameout
Robert J. Samuelson
If President Obama thought he’d score some easy political points by endorsing new PAYGO legislation to control deficit spending, he was sadly mistaken. Although PAYGO–budget-speak for “pay-as-you-go”–seems to limit Congress’ ability to cut taxes or raise spending, the initial reviews were unkind and sometimes harsh.
“This is like qutting drinking, but making an exception for beer and hard liquor,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, an advocacy group.
Don Wolfensberger, head of the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson Center noted that 48 percent of Americans already disapprove of Obama’s handling of budget deficits (46 percent approve). “Obama will have to convince lawmakers that his own legislative ambitions will not exceed their political will or ability to increase taxes or cut entitlement benefits,” he said.
But even Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND), chairman of the Budget Committee, was unenthusiastic. PayGo, he said, “does not address the deficits and debt projected under existing policy.”
Why doesn’t PAYGO work? For starters, the Obama proposal has huge loopholes. It would exempt a) renewing the 2001/2003 Bush tax cuts; b) patching the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT); c) updating doctors’ Medicare payments; and d) changing the estate tax. It was these ommissions that inspired MacGuineas’ objection. “Exempting these measure from PAYGO would increase the ten-year deficit by over $2.5 trillion,” she said. With interest, the figure could be $4 trillion, according to Conrad.
But even without Obama’s exceptions, PAYGO is often toothless against budget deficts.
For starters, it applies only to tax cuts and and entitlement spending–programs like Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, agricultural subsidies or unemployment insurance when recipients automatically qualify for benefits by fulfilling eligibility requirements (by being unemployed, for instance). Totally exempted is “discretionary spending” for defense, education, environmental protection and many other programs. In 2008, discretionary spending totaled $1.135 trillion, or 38 percent of federal spending.
Next, normal increases in entitlement spending (more beneficiaries, higher health costs, etc.) also aren’t covered. So, for example, most of the increase in Social Security and Medicare spending resulting from the impending retirement of baby boomers doesn’t count for PAYGO. All that counts are increased benefit levels from existing legislation: If Congress raised Social Security benefits, those increases would presumably be subject to PAYGO.
Finally, when PAYGO becomes a political nuisance, Congress suspends it.
The Top 10 Percent of Income Earners Paid 71 Percent of Federal Income Tax
(Nice interactive graph by income and by year!)
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/BudgetChartBook/-Progressive-Taxes-Interactive-Chart.aspx
2ND Tenant of Marxism:
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
“The Socialistic bourgeois want all the advantages of modern social conditions without the struggles and dangers necessarily resulting therefrom.”
I’m not sure JimJohnson. You think WSClark is that smart? Nothing personal toward the poster, but I don’t see him posting lofty ideals. Most of the time he is four letter words with small glimpses of
paranoid illusions and periodically imagining he is respectful or the voice of civility.
Classic symptoms of mental illness and/or substance abuse. Read his posts early morning and compare them to evening hours sometimes. It’s an eye opener.
I see XXX is whining again. Perhaps he’s not getting enough moose s3x.
Oh AmWAy, Clark thinks he’s smart. And Clark does seem to strongly support:
#2, #3, #5, #6, #7, #10.
Tenants of Marxism:
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.
Sorry, “Nathaniel” –
You said:
“Constantly threatening my dog. Not legal.”
I can threaten your dog all I want.
Or maybe can you cite a law against that.
JJ you’ve pretty well nailed the libs on their communist characteristics. I’m afraid they are still trying to absorb the truth. Like deer in the headlights….
“Or maybe can you cite a law against that.”
Nathan, I wouldn’t bother engaging in discussions on the law with sea lawyers.
I’d suggest you instead communicate a perceived threat with your local law enforcement agency at your earliest convenience. I’m sure they will know.
#
Nathaniel
Posted July 4, 2009 at 11:02 am | Permalink
JM Walker,
A Hypocrite is basically someone who does something contrary to what they are telling others not to do.
Selectively choosing to comment on conflicting statements that you make and not someone else doesn’t make someone a Hypocrite.
==============================================
Oh, boy, we got Nathan logic on this fine morning. A hypocrite is also someone who tells someone not to do one thing but refuses to tell someone else not to do the same thing, all based on party politics.
You can call it selective if you want, but if the shoe fits and all that.
And I noticed bozo dropped out of explaining why dissing the national Anthem is not a bad thing in his book, but finds the time to dis XXX. So not only a hypocrite, but a hypocrite that hates the United States of America. Happy fourth, Nathan.
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:26 pm | Permalink
JJ you’ve pretty well nailed the libs on their communist characteristics. I’m afraid they are still trying to absorb the truth. Like deer in the headlights….
————————–
It’s the Progressive approach.
First, make them understand and accept the fact that they are Socialists. (Some even brag about being Socialists now, when before, they would bow their head in shame.)
Next, make them understand how they have gone even further LEFT of Socialism. They are now officially Marxists.
Oh, they will resist at first, just like they did before taking on the label of Socialist.
But I’m sure, they will soon come around and admit that a spade is a spade.
Joe,
So why do you keep threatening to break the law then?
(It’s called the “WE” Blog for gosh sakes. How can they NOT know they are Marxists?)
JMWalker, you sound awful angry. I’ve noticed it in most of your posts all the time.
Anger management classes are just a phone call away.
If you get in early, it may prevent some irrational criminal act.
Gee jj, didn’t you forget taking all your guns away; placing all conservatives in concentration camps; killing all unborn babies . . .and eating them; forbidding conservatives the right to vote; creating a ’secret’ army of spies to inform on conservatives and get them fired from their jobs; using conservatives in secret experiments to test deadly viruses and gasses?
Hell, jj, if your going to make us into monsters, might as well go all the way, huh?
“To this section belong economists, philanthro-pists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.” [JimJohnson]
I guess you realize that this list includes almost ALL Christian denominations, and almost ALL Jewish Synagogues in this nation??
SO, in your opinion all of religion is socialist??? WOW, what a goofball!!
#
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:34 pm | Permalink
JMWalker, you sound awful angry. I’ve noticed it in most of your posts all the time.
Anger management classes are just a phone call away.
If you get in early, it may prevent some irrational criminal act.
=================================================
Actually, I’m doing my usual side-line chuckle. It’s the fourth; Progressives just want to have fun.
But who was it that wrote, “Happy Dependence Day to all you libs slobbering at the federal trough and screaming, I WANT MORE FREE MONEY!! I WANT MORE gubermint in my life!!!”
Oh, that was you wasn’t it. That sounds a bit angry to me. Maybe you should take your own advice and check out those anger management courses. No need to shout.
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:34 pm | Permalink
JMWalker, you sound awful angry. I’ve noticed it in most of your posts all the time.
Anger management classes are just a phone call away.
If you get in early, it may prevent some irrational criminal act.
——————————-
I agree. If JM would click this link and sing along with Sandler and Nicholson, he’d really feel better about himself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kmv3WlKa6U8
“if your going to make us into monsters, might as well go all the way, huh?”
Don’t exaggerate Walker. Socialists. Not monsters.
Chas,
YOU can sing this version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye7PIyIcCro&feature=related
JM Walker,
“Oh, boy, we got Nathan logic on this fine morning. A hypocrite is also someone who tells someone not to do one thing but refuses to tell someone else not to do the same thing, all based on party politics.”
===============================================
Once again you are wrong. The definition of a Hypocrite doesn’t include what you just said:
Hypocrite:
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypocrite
“You can call it selective if you want, but if the shoe fits and all that.”
===============================================
In this case, the shoe doesn’t fit. You simply don’t know the meaning of several things like what a strawman argument is or what a hypocrite is.
“And I noticed bozo dropped out of explaining why dissing the national Anthem is not a bad thing in his book, but finds the time to dis XXX. So not only a hypocrite, but a hypocrite that hates the United States of America. Happy fourth, Nathan.”
First of all, it is your opinion that Fox news was dissing the National Anthem.
Again, pointing out the fallacy of your comments and not the comments of someone else doesn’t make someone a hypocrite.
Even if Regular was a hypocrite and Fox news was dissing the Anthem and Regular did support such a thing that doesn’t then prove that he hates America.
It is not “Nathan logic” at all. It is simply logic.
“Nathaniel” squirms –
“Joe,
So why do you keep threatening to break the law then?”
You might cite those “threats” for us.
“. If JM would click this link and sing along with Sandler and Nicholson, he’d really feel better about himself.”
Won’t be long and he will be going off the deep end again.
Perhaps I should repost the Walker mad-dog attack on half a dozen of us. He never did respond to my challenge. He couldn’t. He was caught being wrong.
Had he had better self-control maybe he wouldn’t make such irrational posts.
Remember JM:
I don’t make you mad.
.
.
You let me
.
make you mad.
It’s self-discipline. Self control.
Chas
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:38 pm | Permalink
“To this section belong economists, philanthro-pists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.” [JimJohnson]
I guess you realize that this list includes almost ALL Christian denominations, and almost ALL Jewish Synagogues in this nation??
SO, in your opinion all of religion is socialist??? WOW, what a goofball!!
———————————-
No, I never said that Chas. Karl Marx wrote that.
And I don’t see where Karl Marx included churches in this group.
Chas, perhaps you are projecting again.
“To this section belong economists, philanthro-pists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.” [JimJohnson]
I guess you realize that this list includes almost ALL Christian denominations, and almost ALL Jewish Synagogues in this nation??
SO, in your opinion all of religion is socialist??? WOW, what a goofball!!
“I guess you realize that this list includes almost ALL Christian denominations, and almost ALL Jewish Synagogues in this nation?? ”
Chas it’s all in the context. You took a portion of a post on the new social democrats theology and interpreted it to your own end.
You should know from biblical research that in order to fully understand a text, you need to know it’s useage: directly in the text, and as it has been used before.
In this particular case, the full context is that the end goal of socialism will be to label and bring all walks of life into the political fold.
It was not JJ making this claim. It is the context of the written words. Once labeled, a “class” of people can therefore be easily put into a little box – and used for the common good.
That does not mean all people of any given class are socialist, bad, good, or evil. It is the labeling by the socialist agenda that makes that happen. It’s far from reality.
Shouldn’t you be in Texas now Chas?
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:40 pm | Permalink
“if your going to make us into monsters, might as well go all the way, huh?”
Don’t exaggerate Walker. Socialists. Not monsters.
—————–
(Baby steps. Soon they will embracee the label “Marxist”, proudly even.)
Marx said that?? Ummm… you posted no link to that effect, or even “quote” markings… What I said about it still stands… EACH of those types in what YOU posted, are representative of nearly ALL Christian denominations, and nearly ALL Jewish Synagogues in this country…
Do you really want me to enumerate them??
Or do you maybe want to back off of your usual Screed???
Oh yea, Celebrate the 4th!!!
Chas
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:48 pm | Permalink
“To this section belong economists, philanthro-pists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.” [JimJohnson]
I guess you realize that this list includes almost ALL Christian denominations, and almost ALL Jewish Synagogues in this nation??
SO, in your opinion all of religion is socialist??? WOW, what a goofball!!
———————————-
No, I never said that Chas. Karl Marx wrote that.
And I don’t see where Karl Marx included churches in this group.
Chas, perhaps you are projecting again.
“Chas, perhaps you are projecting again.”
I think it’s more like imagining.
JimJohnson
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:01 pm | Permalink
WSClark
Posted July 4, 2009 at 9:26 am | Permalink
“Happy Dependence Day to all you libs slobbering at the federal trough and screaming, I WANT MORE FREE MONEY!! I WANT MORE gubermint in my life!!!”
Nice AmWay, real nice, classy in fact.
This life-long liberal doesn’t receive any Federal money whatsoever. None.
—————————
Ahhh, Clark falls into the “Do-Gooder Rich Guy Socialist” category:
Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism
A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.
To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.
The Socialistic bourgeois want all the advantages of modern social conditions without the struggles and dangers necessarily resulting therefrom. They desire the existing state of society, minus its revolutionary and disintegrating elements. They wish for a bourgeoisie without a proletariat. The bourgeoisie naturally conceives the world in which it is supreme to be the best; and bourgeois Socialism develops this comfortable conception into various more or less complete systems. In requiring the proletariat to carry out such a system, and thereby to march straightway into the social New Jerusalem, it but requires in reality, that the proletariat should remain within the bounds of existing society, but should cast away all its hateful ideas concerning the bourgeoisie.
===============================================
PLEASE NOTE >>>>
Nowhere does JimJohnson state that this is a quote from Marx… OR give a link…. OR use quote marks in this post….
WHY do you like to play “make-believe” Johnson??? Does it give you some psychological thrill???
JJ, I’ve read Marx and much of the history on the socialist movement in Europe. Your quotes and their application to today’s democrats is accurate.
I understand your presentation methodology was necessary to not only make your point, but help guide the liberals to see their own image.
Like you have said. Baby steps.
Chas
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:51 pm | Permalink
Marx said that?? Ummm… you posted no link to that effect, or even “quote” markings… What I said about it still stands… EACH of those types in what YOU posted, are representative of nearly ALL Christian denominations, and nearly ALL Jewish Synagogues in this country…
Do you really want me to enumerate them??
Or do you maybe want to back off of your usual Screed???
Oh yea, Celebrate the 4th!!!
———————-
It’s scary how close Chas truly is to the tenants of Marxism.
Chas, did you not recognize those words? They are most famous in any History class.
Do you have to label the Gettysburg Address or Obama’s Inauguration speeches?
Same thing. Public knowledge that I couldn’t even if I wanted to, take credit for such writing.
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:58 pm | Permalink
JJ, I’ve read Marx and much of the history on the socialist movement in Europe. Your quotes and their application to today’s democrats is accurate.
=================================
Apparently there used to be some public schools that taught History and presented other political views outside of the mainstream views in America, at least what whas mainstream years ago.
Today, alternatives are not presented so much. Just one method, one indoctrinated method is taught. No need to learn about what doesn’t work, THEY simply tell you what does work and what is the right way to do things.
No need to think on your own.
And so Chas, and maybe many of the rest, didn’t have that educational background to be ABLE to recognize how close their own view is to the Marxist view. How could they possibly know?
JJ, when he cannot argue with the opinions expressed or content of a post, Chas results to name-calling, labeling, or put downs in some fashion.
When this finally occurs, it means you got him.
And big time.
“JimJohnson” cites –
“…the tenants of Marxism.”
Yeah.
I remember when Karl was my landlord.
Chas
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:56 pm | Permalink
===============================================
PLEASE NOTE >>>>
Nowhere does JimJohnson state that this is a quote from Marx… OR give a link…. OR use quote marks in this post
——————–
AmWay, I see Chas makes my point here. They can’t possibly know what they do not know. They have never been taught how to learn, they were simply told to memorize certain ‘facts’.
I could have quoted the Declaration of Independence or even the US Constitution without citing it for most people. It’s public knowledge, or used to be widely recognized to be in the public domain.
Now I suppose if Chas were to reference God again, he should be challenged to provide a definition and cite a source.
“ABLE to recognize how close their own view is to the Marxist view. How could they possibly know?”
The movement to socialism could never have taken a front door. Had the socialist proposed such radical changes in the 1950’s or 1960’s they clearly would have been recognized for what they are.
They had to shape, mold, and indoctrinate the people over time. Media control is critical. For instance – the big deal being made about healthcare and insurance. Clearly, 80% of Americans are content with their coverage and healthcare providers. Even the majority of the uninsured.
But a persistent media controlled by the socialist will TEACH the people what they need.
Mind control at it’s best. Lies. All lies.
I’m not so sure the USSR really fell apart or lost. This may have been part of a master plan.
Great Britian is clearly more socialist than most Americans would realize. How did this happen?
It wasn’t by direct confrontation or admission.
JJ you do not have to further justify your post.
Chas is lazy. He wants you to provide him a link.
It’s like when he didn’t know about the constitutional convention. Now he is an expert.
Johnson, have you ever read “The Social Principles of the United Methodist Church”?
Have you ever heard of Andrew Carnegie?
Have you ever read Charles Dickens?
Have you never heard of the SPCA?
Have you heard of the WCTU?
Have you any knowledgge of Catholic Charities, or of William Booth?
Have you heard of Habitat for Humanity?
Or the Southern Poverty Law Center?
Do you have any familiarity with other major denominational Social Principles’ statements?
IF you are quoting Marx, did you know that getting rid of Child Labor in factories was a major concern in his lifetime? (ya know, improving working conditions and all)
Have you ever heard of Church World Service, and the Annual Crop Walks for world hunger??
Have you ever been to a community concert, where the only price for admission is to bring canned goods, or non-perishable food items??
The list goes on and on… but I think these are plenty to make my point that YOU, JimJohnson, are just plain NUTS!!
ALL of these and many others, are included in what you label as Marxist ideals…
You should be ASHAMED of yourself!!! And AmWay as well, for supporting your vitriolic of all that is virtuous and outreaching from all kinds of groups of people… not just in this nation, but around the world!!
BTW JJ, I wanted to make sure you saw this link.
This is getting out of hand. Not sure if it is too late to repair the damage being done.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/12/obama-spending-tax-trends-charted/
Chas is spouting off because you got him good JJ.
Nicely done.
I realize you were not being mean, nor was your intention less than honorable.
You should be commended for trying to teach, for trying to show them the way, for showing them the path they are on.
Chosen socialist.
United Socialist States of America
Chas, you will have a very hard time denying that the views expressed by Marx are not your own.
Item by item?
On this 4th of July, in the year of our Lord Two Thousand and nine, I can’t think of a more perfect lesson for the Marxists here, then to actually read the document called the Declaration of Independence:
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm
IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
when in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Long live King Obama!
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 1:10 pm | Permalink
“ABLE to recognize how close their own view is to the Marxist view. How could they possibly know?”
The movement to socialism could never have taken a front door. Had the socialist proposed such radical changes in the 1950’s or 1960’s they clearly would have been recognized for what they are.
They had to shape, mold, and indoctrinate the people over time. Media control is critical. For instance – the big deal being made about healthcare and insurance. Clearly, 80% of Americans are content with their coverage and healthcare providers. Even the majority of the uninsured.
But a persistent media controlled by the socialist will TEACH the people what they need.
Mind control at it’s best. Lies. All lies.
I’m not so sure the USSR really fell apart or lost. This may have been part of a master plan.
==============================
Ahhh yes, the incremental approach was required. Gaining control over most of the mass media was a key step. The Fairness Doctrine will soon be used to stifle Talk Radio, don’t know how they will gain control of the Internet though it likely will involve filters.
Thus USSR collapsed under its own failures. Communism doesn’t work. People are not productive when all incentives to work are gone.
America is following the European model. The Free World has prospered under Captialism, and grown to the point where people are lazy – fat, dumb, and happy.
Like Rome, it fell under the weight of the Socialist programs it grew when it thought it was so rich, that Government could spend money on programs, buying votes to keep certain leaders in power.
The US is heading in the same direction. (Look at Chas posts for one example) Clinging to hope that Government will fullfil its promise to save us from ourselves, we will drown from the weight of our Socialist Programs, reaching the point where it is pointless to work anymore, as you are no longer allowed to keep your earnings or your property. What would be the point of work then?
We are almost there now. What is manufactured in the USA today? Not much. Americans now support the Chinese workers and take jobs away from Americans with every greedy trip they make to Walmart. And they buy their goods at Walmart with handouts from the USA Government. It’s a vicious cycle.
Right, Nathan, you are the true one and only interpreter of all things dictionary, the earth is only 7000 years old, and man and the dinosaurs shared lunch every Friday.
The comedy channel don’t get any better that this.
And mad? I doubt it: laughing is more the norm. How’s that Sarah thing working for ya? Hahahahahaha
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 1:17 pm | Permalink
Chas, you will have a very hard time denying that the views expressed by Marx are not your own.
Item by item?
——————-
No time now. Gotta bbq some dead animal and partake of some ice cold hops & grains, and look for something to light-up and explode in the sky.
AmWay — I post solid AMERICAN ideals, and you and Johnson label it Marxist.. How interesting…. I guess that makes you guys ANTI-American… just as I have been saying for MONTHS!!
John Wesley espoused MANY of the things that Johnson allegedly claims Marx wrote….
How could WESLEY be said to be a Marxist??
“Do all the good you can,
By all the means you can,
In all the ways you can,
In all the places you can,
At all the times you can,
To all the people you can,
As long as ever you can.”
John Wesley quotes (English Evangelist, founder of Methodism. 1703-1791)
http://thinkexist.com/quotation/do_all_the_good_you_can-by_all_the_means_you_can/148152.html
It would be MOST egregious of you to call the tenets of Methodism, founded by John Wesley, to be Marxist…. WHY???
Karl Marx was born on May 5, 1818
Chas, at 1:13 you are sort of cute, if not downright funny in DEFENDING Karl Marx.
Do carry on.
Oh Chas, it’s important not to confuse Church & State.
I thought you supported that separation?
Religion and Politics are two different animals.
Whatever people CHOOSE to do under their religious beliefs (as long as it’s not hurting anyone or violating reasonable laws) is a right of Freedom.
However, whatever people are COMPELLED to do, under the crushing weight of an oppressive Government, cannot be equated with some religious voluntary choice one might make.
There’s a difference Chas in being deprived of life, liberty, and property, and voluntarily giving of oneself out of the goodness of one’s heart.
CHOICE is a concept I thought even YOU, understood.
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 1:16 pm | Permalink
Chas is spouting off because you got him good JJ.
Nicely done.
I realize you were not being mean, nor was your intention less than honorable.
You should be commended for trying to teach, for trying to show them the way, for showing them the path they are on.
Chosen socialist.
United Socialist States of America
——————————–
Oh, he knows not what he is. He’s the picture of ignorance. He may be past the point of saving even.
Sad, so sad.
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 1:13 pm | Permalink
BTW JJ, I wanted to make sure you saw this link.
This is getting out of hand. Not sure if it is too late to repair the damage being done.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/12/obama-spending-tax-trends-charted/
————————–
Saw it.
There are many very interesting graphs at that web site.
Dems were only bothered by Deficits when they were Bush Deficits.
Bush Deficits = BAD Deficits
O’Bama Deficits = GOOD Deficits
#
Regular
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:15 pm | Permalink
I see XXX is whining again. Perhaps he’s not getting enough moose s3x.
_______________________
Ha,ha,ha! As if you knew anything about sex.
Silly old eunuch.
Chas
Posted July 4, 2009 at 12:51 pm | Permalink
Marx said that?? Ummm… you posted no link to that effect, or even “quote” markings… What I said about it still stands…
————————-
The lil dim lightbulb, you could see it turning on.
Then so as not to flip flop and become overtly hypocritical, he chooses to defend Marxism.
LOL!
In commemoration of The Boy Kings first 4th in office I believe the Mrs. and I will step outside now and blast off a few rounds from the EBR.
Scrue You, you Fascist Pinko!
JM Walker,
“Right, Nathan, you are the true one and only interpreter of all things dictionary, the earth is only 7000 years old, and man and the dinosaurs shared lunch every Friday.”
================================================
I don’t have to “interpret” the dictionary. I just read it. I also posted the definition right there for you to see. If you wish to remain willfully ignorant, then that is your problem, not mine.
What I believe in regards to the creation of the Earth has nothing to do with your ignorance of what Hypocrite means.
“And mad? I doubt it: laughing is more the norm. How’s that Sarah thing working for ya? Hahahahahaha”
=================================================
You didn’t know the meaning of Hypocrite and when confronted with a dictionary definition your response is to change the subject to Sarah Palin?
From the concluding section of the Communist Manifesto, first published in English in 1850 >>>
“In short, the Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things. The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.”
Workers of the world, Unite![9]
A movement against the existing social and political order… (ocial principles such as Roe v. Wade, social outreach programs, such as SCHIP, and Healthcare for all, same gender marriage etc.) would seem to be the foundation of the CON movement now — so well spelled out by Marx/Engels in 1848… Amazing how the pendulum swings…
EBR = Environmental Biosafety Research?
Involves testing of a watermellon, stuffed with dynamite, thrown into the air and shot with a 12 gauge?
Chas’ interpretative powers to totally and completely effing misconstrue black to be white and white to be black is quite amazing!
Doeth he speaketh in tongues and play with ratttle snakes too?
Chas you need to ask your buddy BJ what the words of Marx truly mean.
You hear almost those same words from BJ everyday.
“The Communist Manifesto, was first published on February 21, 1848, and is one of the world’s most influential political manuscripts. Commissioned by the Communist League and written by communist theorists Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, it laid out the League’s purposes and program. It presents an analytical approach to the class struggle (historical and present) and the problems of capitalism, rather than a prediction of communism’s potential future forms.” [From Wiki]
PLEASE NOTE: The Communist Manifest is not Marxist. Rather, it was commissioned by the Communist League… That League chose the authors for THEIR document. Please, please remember this sometimes “covered up” fact of History.
For true Marxist thinking, read Das Kapital.
TO ALL:
Have a GREAT Celebration of the Founders of this GREAT NATION!!
Happy 4th of July to ALL!!!
#
Nathaniel
Posted July 4, 2009 at 2:12 pm | Permalink
You didn’t know the meaning of Hypocrite and when confronted with a dictionary definition your response is to change the subject to Sarah Palin?
=================================================
Well, actually I do know the meaning, and I’ll stick by my interpretation:
hyp?o?crite
??/?h?p?kr?t/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [hip-uh-krit] Show IPA
Use hypocrite in a Sentence
–noun
1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.
Seems to say it all, doesn’t it? Well, at least to those who understand how politics enter into it.
And the title of this thread is Open thread 7/4, as such, I’ll write anything I want to, so there . . . . hahahahahahaha
So Nathan never answered the proof that the Republican Party in it’s platform way back in 2000 PROMISED to outlaw abortion.
Of course it never did outlaw it.
It needed the Christian suckers to elect and reelect Bush WORST PRESIDENT EVER.
So Nathan, since you are a huge sucker…how ’bout comin’ over to MY house…boy?
“Involves testing of a watermellon, stuffed with dynamite, thrown into the air and shot with a 12 gauge?”
Practice for the Independence Day II?
#
satatom
Posted July 4, 2009 at 2:36 pm | Permalink
So Nathan never answered the proof that the Republican Party in it’s platform way back in 2000 PROMISED to outlaw abortion.
Of course it never did outlaw it.
It needed the Christian suckers to elect and reelect Bush WORST PRESIDENT EVER.
So Nathan, since you are a huge sucker…how ’bout comin’ over to MY house…boy?
————–
And so with that satatom reveals he is an ignoramus, nasty, and a homo? The trifecta.
And outlander makes Jesus cry…
So outlander…why didn’t the Republicans outlaw abortion during the 8 years they were in full power?
IMO they wanted the Christian vote so they kept the issue on the table.
They never intended to do away with abortion.
They PLAYED you for the suckers you are.
You are a bigot.
Bigots make Jesus cry ’cause it means you reject His teachings and His sacrifice.
You are not a follower of Christ.
satatom
Posted July 4, 2009 at 2:58 pm | Permalink
So outlander…why didn’t the Republicans outlaw abortion during the 8 years they were in full power?
———-
Good grief satatom, you don’t need to keep displaying your ignorance like a flag just because it’s the 4th. It’s obvious.
There were never any promises to outlaw abortion. And how, please tell us, could it have been accomplished?
I’ll wait over here.
Oh, and not to pile on, but while you’re at it satatom, what 8 years would that have been? When Republicans were in “full power”?
THIS is NOT a promise according to Nathaniel/outlander:
Ban abortion with Constitutional amendment
We say the unborn child has a fundamental right to life. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and we endorse legislation that the 14th Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. Our purpose is to have legislative and judicial protection of that right against those who perform abortions. We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it. We support the appointment of judges who respect the sanctity of innocent human life.
Source: Republican Platform adopted at GOP National Convention Aug 12, 2000
After a few boxes of brass copper and lead through the EBR and I feel better. It’s off to buy some kiddie fireworks. A great day to all who remember what the day is all about. And to all others may you rot in Heller.
If that’s not a sketch of a rwe good ol’ boy, I don’t know what is.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090704/ap_on_re_us/us_sc_killing_spree_16
That’s cool, N.K. celebrating our fouth of July with rockets.
satatom: That isn’t a promise. Quit digging. And you worry too much about Christians. I’ll decide if and when I become too disenchanted with the Republican party. If that happens, maybe I’ll join you and become a democrat. Chuckle…
Echoing Heckler, I’m off to get buy fireworks to shoot with the kids. Probably also get some extra firecrackers to scare off the birds when they come roosting in the fall.
Happy Independence Day all. Especially you satatom.
Man with gun seen buying fireworks in El Dora dooo.
No one noticed.
No one panicked.
No one went insane.
No blood ran in the street.
Time for a hops beverage.
Grasseater says “Would that be the same “man” who earlier BRAGS about firing a gun randomly(into the air?) in a rather juvenile manner of demonstrating personally to his children and in writing here his lack of responsible use of his independence and the right to bear arms.”
No it wouldn’t be. Where’d you get that? I’m curious to know?
Show me the thread or admit you’re either mistaken or a liar.
IMHO everyone should stop for just a second and remember those who are resposible for this day and for the Independence days before and upcoming,all gave some,some gave all. Happy 4th everyone
Hey Free…good to see you posting. How are things going for you?
Great still sober, got my 2nd grandchild, a girl,on the way due in Nov. Life is great!
Congrats! Great to hear! Happy (sober) 4th to you!!
My son is loving his job as a firefighter for the city, daughter is going back to college, I have my grandson stay overniht a couple of times a month(He says he is PaPA’s boy. I tell you if my life was any better there would have to be 2 of me
Sobriety and the steps are all and more than they are cracked up to be
I hear ya there, Free! Good on ya!!
This news must have made a happy fourth for Rush Limbaugh, the head of the Republican Party:
NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Former NFL quarterback Steve McNair and a woman were found shot to death Saturday inside a residence in Nashville, police said.
satatom
And what do Limbaugh and Steve McNair have to do with one another?
Heckler…you are asking for logic from someone who is clearly incapable of such. Waste of time to even try.
Heckler,
satatom is like most racists in that they get black me confused because they are all um, black.
Limbaugh did have a run-in or run-out? with Donovan McNabb when he (Limbaugh) was part of that sports thing.
Rush Limbaugh (during his short stint on ESPN) managed to be his racist Republican self opining how bad Black quarterbacks were.
One less Black quarterback = happy Republican leader.
Read his comments for yourself. Log in and put Steve McNair in the search engine.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html
satatom
Tell us. What did Limbaugh have to say about Steve McNair. I’m not a member of Limbaughs site.
heck…from the comments i have seen here, it appears that the libs spend a lot more time reading and researching rush than most of us normal people do.
I suppose we could, using the above ‘logic’ say that Louis Farakhan (the one who labelled bho as ‘the messiah’) as the leader of the Democratic Party, yes?
Raptor
One could say that. But they wouldnt understand.
Evidently, satatom is a registered member of the Rush Limbaugh Website. He stated one has to log in.
I find that awkwardly interesting and somewhat perverted.
Last time I checked, Michael Steele was the national chairman of the Republican Party. Did he resign and appoint someone else without anyone knowing?
great point, reg. Scary to think of people logging in, reading, and making notes of that website just to bring it up on a blog.
Does the term “get a life” come to mind? :-)
1776?
Pfffft!
By 1776, the first born in the colony of Pennsylvania, colonial America of MY family name was older than I am now.
#
satatom
Posted July 4, 2009 at 7:34 pm | Permalink
Read his comments for yourself. Log in and put Steve McNair in the search engine.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html
————–
The strange and pathetic satatom, caught in another lie.
Why don’t we just save time and just assume his posts are lies unless otherwise proven?
Just got time to stop in for a moment here remotely and have to get off this public PC in a short.
Again Happy Independence Day to all independents, conservatives, and liberatians.
Happy Dependence Day to those liberals dying for more gubermint intervention in their lives, demanding more FREE MONEY!!!
Enjoy the fireworks whereever you are:
http://www.bluelaketahoe.com/webcast.html
Happy 4th Everybody. Got to admit, it sounds like a war zone out there, and it sounds beautiful. The dogs don’t care too much for it though.
satatom=Chas as suspected.
Hey! What happened to Daniel? Who was it’s original nic?
And the lady posting her life story with her brother? Isn’t that just KSFARMGIRL in another nic?
Gone like a freight train
gone like yesterday
gone like a soldier in the civil war bang bang.
Gone like a 59 Caddie, and they ain’t never coming back………
Gotta run. Showtime is coming and so is the next round.
Happy 4th JimJohnson, you sly dog you.
Thanx for taking the time to explain to the libs how their beliefs are truly modeled after socialism
and Marx.
Hope you and yours are safe.
American_Way
Posted July 4, 2009 at 10:31 pm | Permalink
satatom=Chas as suspected.
Hey! What happened to Daniel? Who was it’s original nic?
And the lady posting her life story with her brother? Isn’t that just KSFARMGIRL in another nic?
==========================================
WRONG AGAIN, stupid!!!
But Happy 4th, anyway… even if you are Anti-American, and Anti-government…