@okie,
okie wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Oh, really? Which scumbag on the Dem side have I defended lately?
Starting with Clinton, that is getting to be a good time ago, but I imagine you defended him, is that correct?
I spent most of the 90's attacking the guy, and then most of the last decade attacking the guy for being a corporatist. So, no; I didn't defend Clinton much. I think his impeachment was bullshit, because it was immaterial to the job he was doing as prez.
Quote:Quote:My roots don't even exist any longer.
That is apparent if you believe a human being has more worth or rights than a worm or a rat, cyclops. Sorry to bring that up repeatedly, but it serves to illustrate a basic and extremely important point.
This has nothing to do with what we are talking about, and I repeat again that it's sad that you cannot understand any sort of nuanced philosophical argument at all. We should block off some time at some point for me to patiently break things down to a level you can understand.
Quote:Quote: The modern Republican party is a joke; they aren't Conservative in the slightest, they don't care about anything but money and aggression. What is there to attract someone to the party? And don't give me any bullshit about 'limited government,' because you know as well as I do that the Republicans in Congress never do a damn thing to limit the size of government.
Cycloptichorn
Not true at all. You are generalizing, as I would do if I accused every Democrat of being a scumbag, which I could by virtue of the fact that almost every single one of them defended Clinton during his presidency. The only one I recall that waffled on that was Joe Lieberman. All the rest of them had no spine, none whatsoever. In the case of Republicans, many are conservative, but yes you are correct, not all are, nor would we want every party member to think as a group. I think it is far better to have some individuality and some variation of thought by individual. We are not groupees as the Democrats are. The Democrats would prefer the whole party follow Obama as if he is a dictator instead of president.
[/quote]
There is nothing meaningful to respond to in this paragraph. You essentially conceded the point that there is little to attract anyone to the Republican party, and instead decided to go on the attack against Dems - as if that mattered.
Regarding 'individual thought,' which party do you believe votes in unison more often - the Republicans or the Democrats? I'm sure you know what the answer is, and it doesn't support your position in the slightest. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that you are completely wrong, and I could easily prove it with data.
Cycloptichorn
@okie,
Geez okie.. You have defended Gingrich and the argument could be made that he was a bigger scumbag than Clinton. In fact every GOPer supported Gingrich so the same argument could be made that you are making about Clinton supporters.
@parados,
Interesting you bring up Gingrich again, which was the Democrats favorite whipping boy to offset Clinton. In case you care to educate yourself about my opinion of Gingrich, I support most of his political positions, perhaps not all, but he in fact accomplished a great deal in the 90's. In regard to his supposed personal problems, such as divorcing his wife when she was in the hospital, I don't know for sure if that was fact, but if so, it would of course be pathetic, and I would not support it. That is however a far cry from the Monica Lewinsky / Clinton affair in the oval office or adjacent to the oval office, essentially in the people's house, on company or country time, taking advantage of a young woman intern, that is beyond pathetic and scumbaggish. If a Republican had done that, I guarantee you that the man would have been impeached for that alone, without Whitewater and all the other Clinton corruption, and probably would be living in obscurity a long time ago, long gone from the public eye, never to be heard from again, except when Democrats brought the subject up, just as they still do about Nixon and Watergate.
@okie,
get over the blow job
at least he wasn't a communist, like the new guy
wait, what
@okie,
Quote:If a Republican had done that, I guarantee you that the man would have been impeached for that alone, without Whitewater and all the other Clinton corruption, and probably would be living in obscurity a long time ago, long gone from the public eye, never to be heard from again, except when Democrats brought the subject up, just as they still do about Nixon and Watergate.
Excuse me?
Jim Ensign, Republican Senator from NV, had an affair with the wife of one of his staffers and then tried to bribe the dude not to go public about it. His parents gave the guy money to stay quiet. You don't get much more scumbaggy then that, and have you said
one ******* word about how he should be kicked out of office? No, you have not, because you really don't care about this stuff when Republicans do it.
Sanford in SC, still in office after admitting to an affair that he repeatedly lied and said he wasn't involved in;
Vitter, in LA, still in office after admitting to sleeping with prostitutes for years.
The Republican party doesn't give a **** about this stuff except when they can attack Democrats with it. It's completely hypocritical.
Cycloptichorn
@Cycloptichorn,
In the post Clinton era, yes, more of these people now get passes for their problems, thats what Clinton gave us. I remember back a few decades ago, I think a Senator Hatfield that got drummed out of office for simply making a pass or some comments to a woman in his office, that was trumped up as sexual harassment or some such thing. But there was a double standard even way back then, as the press protected all the sexual shananigans of JFK, even ignoring his affair with a German spy as I recall.
The fact is, the Republican Party does care much more about this than Democrats. If Bush had done what Clinton did, I would be willing to bet a pretty good sum of money that it would not have played out as it did. I would bet that his party and his wife both would possibly have abandoned him, and he would have been kicked into political obscurity a long time ago.
Democrats bow at the alter of public morality rather than private morality. Democrats can lie, cheat, and steal, and it doesn't matter because all that matters is if they advocate taxing the producers to give to their non-producing voters in need. That is compassion according to them. These lessons are clear to anyone that listens closely to the words of Democrats since at least the Clinton administration.
By the way, count me as one to condemn this type of stuff if it is equally applied to politicians in both parties. So far, I don't see that happening.
@okie,
Speaking of fraud and corruption, cyclops, I am betting you won't care about this. It appears Obama is going to allow corrupt people like his friend and Fannie Mae crook Franklin Raines to go free under some kind of special deal:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/18/business/18fannie.html?_r=1&ref=franklin_d_raines
"Federal regulators plan to announce on Friday a legal settlement with Franklin D. Raines, the former chief executive of Fannie Mae, and two other former executives of the giant mortgage company over their roles in an accounting scandal that surfaced in 2004, according to people close to the negotiations.
Mr. Raines and the two others — J. Timothy Howard, the former chief financial officer, and Leanne G. Spencer, a former controller — were accused of engineering a six-year accounting fraud intended to inflate the reported earnings of the company and thus increase their bonuses."
A friend posted this on FB: Ever wonder where Glenn Beck gets those loony conspiracies he is always ranting about? He gets them from the Glenn Beck Conspiracy Generator.
Golly! It's cool!
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/bl-glenn-beck-conspiracy.htm?PS=159%2C536%2C513%2C694%3A1
Here is a bit of a recent post from People For the American Way:
The Right has brought new vigor to an old front in their relentless attacks on our core values. Taking place right under our noses and going largely unrecognized as the dangerous threat that it is, the Right is stepping up its attempts to rewrite history.
As we just saw in last month's Texas textbook controversy... or on the airwaves every day on FOX News programs like Glenn Beck's... their revisionist history is based on outright lies. Unchallenged, it will prove a powerful tool for recruiting members of this generation and indoctrinating members of the next.
People For the American Way is fighting back against the hypocrisy of the Right's phony constitutional narrative AND against its dangerous attempts to rewrite history. This means we must change the debate over the courts and the Constitution, debunk the Right's misleading rhetoric and fight, tooth and nail, against attempts to indoctrinate students by injecting political propaganda into textbooks in place of history.
Sharron Angle has made herself scarce since the primary, refusing to talk to the press. She walked away from reporters after denying that she authored statements that appear on her website.
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote: The Right has brought new vigor to an old front in their relentless attacks on our core values.
You're damn right! The right is attacking your core values. That's because your core values are sick!
People For the American Way have been lying about the Right, and Conservatives in particular, for years. They, and now the Odem too, continue to emulate Saul Alinsky's sick behavior and practice his sick doctrines.
The mentor of those who mentored Barack Obama when he was a community organizer in Chicago, was Saul Alinsky, who in his books, Reveille for Radicals, and Rules for Radicals, wrote:Radicals should be "political relativists." and should take an agnostic view of means and ends;
The most basic principle for radicals is lie to opponents and disarm them by pretending to be moderates and liberals;
The radical organizer does not have a fixed truth—truth to him is relative and changing;
Radicals are not virtuous by not wanting power, because power is good and powerlessness is evil;
Life is a corrupting process;
He who fears corruption fears life;
The radical is not a reformer of the system but its would-be destroyer;
The radical is building his own kingdom;
The radical’s purpose is to undermine the system by taking from the haves and giving it to the have-nots;
The stated cause is never the real cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause;
The real cause is accumulation of power to make the revolution;
The standard of the revolution is a democracy which upends all social hierarchies, including those based on merit.
These rotters, if ultimately allowed to be successful, will destroy the rest of the human race as well as themselves.
@okie,
Sorry my above post should look more like this.
Quote:okie wrote:
The leader of these radicals is ... George Soros. He has essentially privatized the Democratic Party, bringing it under his personal control. The Shadow Party is the instrument through which he exerts that control....
A quote from my above post, which would tend to agree with what has been reported that Soros said about the Democratic Party, that he paid for it so he should own it, something to that effect anyway.
Some of George Soros's and his associates' comments to contemplate.
GEORGE SOROS in his 1995 book, page 145, [I]Soros on Soros[/I], wrote: I do not accept the rules imposed by others. If I did, I would not be alive today. I am a law-abiding citizen, but I recognize that there are regimes that need to be opposed rather than accepted. And in periods of regime change, the normal rules don't apply. One needs to adjust one's behavior to the changing circumstances.
Bruck, in The World According to Soros, page 58, wrote:Tividar [George Soros's father] saved his family by splitting them up, providing them with forged papers and false identities as Christians, and bribing Gentile families to take them in. George Soros took the name Sandor Kiss, and posed as the godson of a man named Baumbach, an official of Hungary's fascist regime. Baumbach was assigned to deliver deportation notices to Jews and confiscate Jewish property. [Baumbach] brought young Soros with him on his rounds.
Michael Kaufman in his biography of George Soros, page 293, [I]Soros [/I], wrote:My goal is to become the conscience of the world
GEORGE SOROS in his 2000 book, page 337, [I]Open Society[/I], wrote:Usually it takes a crisis to prompt a meaningful change in direction.
GEORGE SOROS in the Washington Post, page A03 of November 11, 2003, wrote:Ousting Bush from the White House is the central focus of my life. It's a matter of life and death.
GEORGE SOROS in the 2003 edition of his book, page 15, [I]The Alchemy of Finance[/I], wrote:My greatest fear is that the Bush Doctrine will succeed--that Bush will crush the terrorists, tame the rogue states of the axis of evil, and usher in a golden age of American supremacy. American supremacy is flawed and bound to fail in the long run.
What I am afraid of is that the pursuit of American supremacy may be successful for a while because the United States in fact employs a dominant position in the world today.
GEORGE SOROS on June 10, 2004 to the Associated Press, wrote:
These are not normal times.
GEORGE SOROS in his 2004 book, page 159, [I]The Bubble of American Supremacy[/I], wrote:The principles of the Declaration of Independence are not self-evident truths but arrangements necessitated by our inherently imperfect understanding.
Quote:In April 2005 the Soros funded Campus Progress web site posted this headline: "An Invitation to Help Design the Constitution in 2020" (This was an invitation to a Yale law School Conference on "The Constitution of 2020: a progressive vision of what the Constitution ought to be.")
Sam Hananel in his associated Press article, December 10, 2004, wrote: On December 9, 2004, Eli Pariser, who headed Soros's group Moveon PAC, boasted to his members,
"Now the Democratic Party is our party. We bought it, we own it."
Quote:Soros … pushed for the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 which was intended to ban "soft money" contributions to federal election campaigns. Soros has responded that his donations to unaffiliated organizations do not raise the same corruption issues as donations directly to the candidates or political parties.
Quote:Soros gave $3 million to the Center for American Progress, committed $5 million to MoveOn, while he and his friend Peter Lewis each gave America Coming Together $10 million. (All were groups that worked to support Democrats in the 2004 election.) On September 28, 2004 he dedicated more money to the campaign and kicked off his own multi-state tour with a speech: Why We Must Not Re-elect President Bush[19] delivered at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:
GEORGE SOROS in his 2004 book, page 159, [I]The Bubble of American Supremacy[/I], wrote:The principles of the Declaration of Independence are not self-evident truths but arrangements necessitated by our inherently imperfect understanding.
Thanks for the quotes you provided, ican. Of all of them, I think the above one illustrates best why Soros is one evil man that needs to be defeated in his efforts to defeat the United States. And when we defeat Soros, we also defeat the Democratic Party. After all, are they one and the same now?
By the way, are we sure that cyclops is not a George Soros clone posting on this forum, ican?
@ican711nm,
Fine! Demonstrate that my values are sick, according to you. Better to be sick than stupid. Better to be sick than racist.
@ican711nm,
Something wrong with your eyesight? That outsized typeface is just plain rude but, then, there is no such thing as a polite right winger.
I was sent a link to a very long article profiling some more dangerous than usual right wingers. I am going to print the intro here and provide a link so that those who are interested may read it in its entirety.
Profiling 10 of the Deeply Troubled Individuals Leading the Right-Wing, Government-Hating Crusade
Militias and the anti-government Patriot movement are on the rise, accompanied by the rapid expansion of other sectors of the radical right.
June 15, 2010 |
In the last year and a half, militias and the larger antigovernment "Patriot" movement have exploded, accompanied by the rapid expansion of other sectors of the radical right. This spectacular growth (see timeline) is the result of several factors, including anger over major political, demographic and economic changes in America, along with the popularization of radical ideas and conspiracy theories by ostensibly mainstream politicians and media commentators.
Although the resurgence of the so-called Patriots — people who generally believe that the federal government is an evil entity that is engaged in a secret conspiracy to impose martial law, herd those who resist into concentration camps, and force the United States into a socialistic "New World Order" — also has been propelled by people who were key players in the first wave of the Patriot movement in the mid–1990s, there are also a large number of new players.
What follows are 10 selected profiles from the Southern Poverty Law Center's special report on key leaders in the larger 'Patriot' movement. AlterNet will be running more of these in the coming days.
http://www.alternet.org/news/147218/profiling_10_of_the_deeply_troubled_individuals_leading_the_right-wing%2C_government-hating_crusade/
What Rand Paul and Sharron Angle Have in Common: A Far-Right “Biblical Law” Political Party
Posted By Adele Stan On June 15, 2010 @ 2:26 pm In Republican Party, Rights and liberties, Tea Party movement, belief | 18 Comments
It could be the most important political party you’ve barely heard of — the Constitution Party, a far-right party that combines the sort of quasi-libertarian ideology spouted by Ron Paul with a Christian Reconstructionist bent for the biblical law of the Book of Leviticus (you know, the law that mandates death by stoning for practitioners of gay sex and adultery).
But when it comes to Constitution Party street cred, Sharron Angle, the Republican nominee for Nevada’s U.S. Senate seat, seems to have Paul, and his son, Rand (the GOP’s nominee for Kentucky’s Senate seat) beat. Angle, reports TPM’s Justin Elliott, spent six years as a member of Nevada’s Independent American Party, the state’s Constitution Party affiliate.
When Tea Party favorite Rand Paul defeated the establishment Republican candidate to win the nomination for the Kentucky Senate seat being vacated by Jim Bunning, AlterNet reported the Paul family’s ties to the Constitution Party, whose founder, Howard Phillips, keynoted the elder Paul’s 2008 Minneapolis rally celebrating his quixotic presidential bid.
Then Bruce Wilson revealed that Paul the younger keynoted a convention of the Minnesota state chapter of the Constitution Party.
Now along comes Angle, who, from 1992 – 1998, according to IAP members, belonged to their party until her decision to run for political office made it more expedient to become a Republican.
If the name of the Constitution Party sounds vaguely familiar, perhaps you recall the dust kicked up when, during the presidential campaign Todd Palin was revealed to have belonged, for seven years, to the Alaska Independence Party, that state’s Constitution Party affiliate.
If the Tea Party could be said to have a founding father, I’d name him as Constitution Party founder Howard Phillips. Deeply influenced by the Christian Reconstructionist theology of Rousas John Rushdoony, Phillips not only helped found the religious right, but created a political party that has served as a haven for such figures as Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry and neo-militia leader Matthew Trewhella. (Founded in 1992 as the U.S. Taxpayers Party, the organization adopted the name “Constitution Party” in 1999.)
Phillips also chairs the Conservative Caucus, a political organization that served, during the presidential campaign, as a virtual clearinghouse for anti-Obama messaging — the very messaging that would find itself amplified by the Tea Party movement. It was from Phillips’ shop that I first heard the trope about Barack Obama’s birth certificate, and heard tales of the future president’s socialist past.
The Caucus works closely with the John Birch Society, and has featured Ron Paul as a speaker at several of its events. It is a tireless crusader against something called the North American Union, which it claims nefarious forces are trying to create after the model of the European Union.
With the nominations of Angle and Paul to GOP tickets, Phillips — a former Republican who worked in the Nixon White House — is closer than ever to seeing his ideology injected into one of the nation’s two major parties. For a taste of that ideology, here’s a snippet of the preamble to the Constitution Party’s platform:
The Constitution Party gratefully acknowledges the blessing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Creator, Preserver and Ruler of the Universe and of these United States.
[...]
The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries.
For more on Sharron Angle and the Constitution Party, check out Julie Ingersoll’s post at Religion Dispatches.
