Third Party & Independents Archives

None of this post makes any sense:

1. Is she doing anything illegal in asking for donations?

2. Is she doing anything different from any other politician in asking for donations?

3. Why complain about the Sarah Palin endorsement? Do you want her to win or loose? I assume yo want her to loose and if SP will help accomplish that by endorsing her, why do you complain?

4. Polls show Tom Campbell a greater threat to Boxer than Fiorina, so the post is moot, unless you have a personal vendetta against Fiorina.

5. I thought you were for voting out incumbents?

Agree with Berretta9. The world is falling apart and we are debating a political ad?

Close as I can get is = perhaps the most infamous political ad of the century is captured with Obama saying he plans to break up the cozy relationship between big oil and government. Now, there’s a debate fer shure.

And, all is not lost, we aren’t broke as we’ve been led to believe. Obama wants to give Israel $250M for more tinker toys in their defense system. Then, grab yer cheeks and hang on, Obama wants to spend $180B over the next decade to upgrade our nuclear capability. Spend, baby, spend! Can a Calif. bailout be far away?

David,
I agree the Candidates of 2010 need to come up with a better plan than We are not the Incumbents! However, IMHO they are not going to be permitted by the Rank and File to push a progressive agenda thanks to Rush and Company.

For example;

Where is her plan to compete with the Democratic Agenda on Renewable Energy?

Does the Republicans support opening the West Coast to Drill, Baby Drill without oversight?

Would she support allowing the State of CA to default instead of giving the reidents a loan?

Yes, saying that you oppose your opponent is so 20th Century, but telling the American Voter what they can do to deal with the issues of the 20th Century and prepare for the 21st Century is a lesson I do believe that both the Candidate and Incumbent of 2010 Elections needs to be taught by My Community Elders and Peers.

David

When people give money to a political campaign, it makes them more committed to the candidate. Even if the candidate doesn’t need the money, it makes sense to ask at this point i the campaign for that reason.

Knocking off Boxer would be a very sweet victory and it would indeed show Democrats are in big trouble, but I don’t think it will happen. Still, anything that detracts from Boxer is good as far as I am concerned.

Baretta9, your comments are completely disconnected from the title and purpose of this article. No other response from me is appropriate.

C&J, yes, contributing does make them more committed as any student of the cognitive dissonance will attest. Perhaps, that is the intent of her request. But, that misses the point raised. Why should others of lesser means financially support the candidacy of a multi-billionaire if that multi-billionaire is not financing their own campaign. Gotta be pretty dumb to contribute to her campaign without asking and answering that question to one’s satisfaction. I will bet she raises quite a bit from a large number of lesser means folks.

C&J, btw, I too hope Boxer loses, and to Campbell, who is the GOP front runner despite his being a RINO. Makes sense for a Ca. bid, though.

Henry, I don’t expect concrete plans for governance from Fiorina. Being a novice to politics, she is relying upon her political advisers who are telling her to commit to NOTHING specific. Just general demonization of Democrats and liberals and all things not Republican. That’s American politics.

David:

I think many many political ads function just like Fiorina’s, so I’m not going to defend the ad. But are you going to take on all the rich politicians who don’t finance their own campaigns. Face it, a majority of politicians are rich, so your argument here seems…well rather obvious. Is Boxer financing her campaign? She’s not rich in Fiorina’s strata, but rich compared to you and me (financially that is).

Just keep with your anti incumbent voting and I’m in favor of it. But unless you put all the pols together and bash them, I don’t see the need to single this one out.

I do not see anything condescending about this ad. It is a run-of-the-mill last-minute attempt to sway the undecided voters.

That said, as a conservative-minded person, I too think Palin is a detriment to Fiorina’s campaign. In fact, SP is a joke…she’s pulling in millions of dollars in book sales, speeches and don’t forget her Fox News ‘analyst’ gig. She is playing everone and becoming very wealthy…quick!(earned $13 million in 10 months). Look out Glenn Beck (earned $23 million last year)!

She is woefully unqualified to be president. And I can’t wait for her 15+ months of fame to fizzle out!

The California Republican party is actually quite conservative. I grew up in a far-right wing part of CA. (If any of you have any idea where Visalia is) Only radio I could get was Rush and Hannity. So actually, if she’s just going for the Republican primary, the NRL and Sarah Palin will probably help her. She’ll get shredded in the general election though. As far a campaign ads go, though this one is probably the worst I’ve seen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umTITWQuXwY&feature=player_embedded

David,
Personally I don’t want the Candidate or Incimbent to nelieve they have all the answers to the Issues of the 20th Century; however, I do believe they should at least be capable of leading a discussion to bring about positive change in the National Debate.

For example; the West Coast is known for its surf so instead of Drill, Baby Drill where is the political idea for promoting West Coast Energy Companies building Wave Generators. Sure beats the idea of mandating no oil drilling ans leaving the American Voter with nothing doesn’t it?

“I too think Palin is a detriment to Fiorina’s campaign. In fact, SP is a joke…she’s pulling in millions of dollars in book sales, speeches and don’t forget her Fox News ‘analyst’ gig. She is playing everone and becoming very wealthy…quick!(earned $13 million in 10 months). Look out Glenn Beck (earned $23 million last year)!”

Palin draws a big crowd wherever she goes. She is doing what she does best; stirring up a hornet’s nest in the Democratic Party. She has no plans to run for president and wouldn’t get elected if she did. So her best move is to just keep making liberals mad. But, you guys just continue to put her on the ballot. Concerning her earnings: are you as concerned about the millions Al Gore has made? Is it okay for Gore to make millions based upon his deceptive GW scheme, and yet wrong for others to make money? Oh, I forgot, Obama and the liberal politicians set the standard for how much Americans can make.

This is why DR brings up Fiorina’s income. There is a real hatred on the left for successful rich Americans. There is hatred for business and capitalism. The companies and the supervisors of companies are the enemy of the people. Well Comrades, it takes companies and businesses to put people to work. The democrats are driving business out of the country, just as democrats have driven businesses out of cities and democrat controlled states. What amazes me is that it is big business that financed Obama, and Wall Street is made up of liberals and yet Obama has made enemies of the very ones who put him in office. It’s okay for liberals to get rich and control people’s lives, but it’s just not fare for conservatives to have money, when there are so many underprivileged minorities and poor people. This is what Obama is all about: the redistribution of wealth. This is what socialism is about. The goal of socialism is to cause everyone to be dependent upon government. Once dependent, then trapped.

I fear this country is destined for real problems. People will not continue down this socialist path the left is so fond of. You just don’t have the support you think you have. As Americans become aware of what Obama is doing: they will rebel. And the rebellion will start in November.

So Dave, your post is nothing more than the same old attacks on freedom as seen through the eyes of a progressive.

Baretta9 ASSumed much in saying: “This is why DR brings up Fiorina’s income. There is a real hatred on the left for successful rich Americans.”

Your reading skills are really 8th grade if that is what you took from what was written. READ it again, this time for what was actually written. Everyone is screaming for Wall St. investors to have some of their own money in the game. And for real simple common sense reasons, WHICH APPARENTLY ESCAPES YOU if your comment is any indication. That was my point and IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE MORE OBVIOUS OR BLATANT. But, you didn’t get it. Remedial reading course perhaps?

pl8spinner asked: “I think many many political ads function just like Fiorina’s, so I’m not going to defend the ad. But are you going to take on all the rich politicians who don’t finance their own campaigns.”

One is enough. Let the readers decide for themselves. I don’t like really wealthy people buying their government office. But, I won’t trust a wealthy candidate that won’t spend their own money on their own campaign. I don’t care if it is Bloomberg, Rockefeller, or Fiorina. If I had her wealth, I would fund 90% of my own campaign and think nothing of it, and ask for the other 10% as a token demonstration of support. That’s what I would do, so, that is what I expect from candidates seeking my vote.

David:

It doesn’t take a college degree to understand the left’s disdain for successful conservative Americans. There are politicians who spend their own money to run for office and they are labeled as buying a seat. Now you are complaining because they raise money through adds and not spending their own money. Makes no sense!!!

Perhaps this link will help you understand why the rich seek funds for elections.

http://biglizards.net/blog/archives/2008/01/romney_not_buyi.html

Al Gore’s wealth has increased better than 5000% in the past 10 years. He is worth in excess of 100 million dollars. Do you honestly think he would spend his own money if he decided to run again for president? If he did, would you complain about his fundraising?

http://yankeephilip.blogspot.com/2009/04/big-green-and-al-gore.html

You say, “one is enough”, but the one is a republican who is rich. Why haven’t you written about rich democrats who also raise funds? I say it is because it’s okay for democrat politicians to be rich, but rich republicans are the scourge of the earth…

DRR

This is your quote, dated July 23, 2003, on “Campaign Finance Reform”

“There is no debate that individuals should be able to contribute to the candidate or party of their choice…”

Have you changed your mind?

IMO you were making the case that PACs, Unions, and companies were buying elections and campaign finance reform was needed to prevent politicians from being beholden to these donors. If politicians bought their own elections, as you now propose, who are they beholden to? If they are supported by the funds of private citizens, who are they beholden to?

David,

Carly Fiorina is the creepiest of politicians and CEO’s.

I know you don’t live in her district, but if you voted for her, I would personally come to your house and ….wait, that would make me creepier than her.

She was fired, in part, for spying on other execs and board members by the way.

Not a hard choice, in my opinion, and where the VOID philosophy falls down a bit.

“Former Hewlett-Packard executive Carly Florina is providing her Senate campaign in California with another $1.1 million as the state’s GOP primary draws near.”

To date, Florina has contributed $3.6 million to her campaign.

Beretta9, a couple of your sentences start out strong and then seem to fall off a cliff.

“It is okay for Al Gore to make millions based upon his deceptive GW scheme and yet wrong for others to make money.”

If it is okay for Al Gore to make millions based upon his deceptive GW scheme then it is okay for Palin, Beck and others to make millions based upon their deceptive political propaganda schemes.

If you were intending to insinuate that conservatives don’t make millions from deception then you are only fooling yourself.

“It is okay for liberals to get rich and control peoples lives, But it is just not fair for conservatives to have money, when there are so many underprivileged minorities and poor.”

Actually, the way things stand, it is okay for liberals to get rich and control peoples lives just as it is okay for conservatives to get rich and control peoples lives. The underprivileged poor of all colors are need by both liberals and conservatives for different reasons.

I really don’t think that you have deceived yourself into believing that conservatives don’t want to control peoples lives.

jlw
There are far too many people who parade as conservatives but do not practice it. Much like any group of people. There are charlatans out there who want you to believe they are what they say they are, but the fruit of their effort belies the facts. This is true of so-called conservatives, so-called liberals, so-called whatever you want to put in the equation. That is why the electorate must investigate each candidate to the fullest extent possible. Then weigh the facts as see how they fit the candidate. Is the candidate true to his word or a hypocrite. Otherwise you will be in the Chicago voting atmosphere of vote early and vote often.

This vetting thing doesn’t seem to work very well. Who knew that ‘voting for change’ would bring the Chicago political machine and socialist radicals like Anita Dunn, VanJones, Maurice Strong etc, on to the political stage? We had a coupla years to get that one right and missed by a fair amount I would say.

IMO, a 3rd party with a different political attitude is needed to put accountability into the political equation. A party that uses their members as ovesight for elected and appointed officials. A party that will vote to remove their elected/appointed officials if they don’t support the party agenda, have ethics problems or just go crazy.

Additionally, we should support the quest for Article V Convention and vote every incumbent from office every time to weaken the Corpocracy and get their ‘undivided’ attention.

Otherwise, we have the Socialistic-Corpocratic government we deserve.

Roy:

There were, some shouting to the top of their voices that the change Obama was promising was socialism. Glenn Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh, and others were exposing the relationships and connections of Obama. I knew he was coming to DC with the Chicago thug machine, simply because I was listening to these men. But, the MSM was in bed with the socialists and ignored every evidence brought forth by these people. Those who exposed Obama were ridiculed as being crazy. Limbaugh stated that he hoped Obama’s plans for America failed and the left and MSM went nuts, accusing Limbaugh of wishing Obama failed. He wished his policies to fail. So far we have seen some of Obama’s plans pass and many have not passed. The liberal democrats have refused to take up some stuff because it is so unpopular with the American people. They are setting on a budget that should be dealt with now, but the democraps won’t take it up until after the election. If they were to continue to hold the balance of power after the November election, we will see another year of trying to ram unpopular bills down our throats.

Tom Humes is right; just because a person says he is conservative, does not mean he will vote that way. The great success of the TP, contrary to what liberals spout, is the fact that republicans feet are held to the fire or they are out. There are several in the green column who believe incumbents should be voted out, and I don’t really have a problem with that, if the incumbent has violated his word. The TP has done exactly this. They have been responsible for several incumbents being removed during primary elections. Christ in FL and Bennett in Utah, to name two.

Yup, bad on me Berretta9. During the campaign I watched Lou Dobbs for my news. After Lou, I turned to Beck and O’reilly. But the debates and the MSM provided no hint of what was to come. I recall the debates never brought up the issue of immigration until after the two top candidates were chosen. Now that was bought and paid for’ journalism.

The TP, Independents, VOID and Tenure Corrupts advocates and other organizations will make a dent in incumbency in 10 IMO. If there is a hint of success then 12 should be stronger anti-incumbency yet.

The solution, IMO, is to weaken the Corpocracy, then drive a 3rd party with a different political attitude through the duopoly. Only way we can expect real reform of government, IMO.

I miss William F. Buckley.

“jlw
There are far to many people who parade as conservatives but do not practice it. There are charlatans out there who want you to believe they are what they say they are, but the fruit of their effort belies that.”

Tom H. I don’t know what words of mine your were responding to unless it was these…If it is okay for Al Gore to make millions based upon his deceptive GW scheme they it is okay for Palin, Beck and others to make millions based upon their political propaganda schemes.

I was going to assume that you were including Palin, Beck and others like them, both supposed liberals and conservatives along with Al Gore in the “fruit of their effort belies that” category.

But, then you said, “Otherwise you will be in the Chicago atmosphere of vote early and vote often.”

Obviously, that remark is straight out of the mouth of a Beck or otherwise.

So I guess you weren’t addressing what I said at all and that you believe that people like Palin, Beck and Limbaugh are actually true blue-blooded American conservatives who are preaching the gospel of the liberal, progressive, socialist end times rather than political pundit charlatans preaching propaganda for profit.

And, the conservative charlatans you are actually referring to are the Republican politicians that the true blue-blooded Americans conservatives, with the help of the true blue-blooded American tea party conservatives, are purging from the Republican Party.

Here is a new message for Beck to use: It is time for the independents to step forward and show their true colors.

By the way, the remarks about Chicago atmosphere voting, that is the kind of voting one can expect when people go mucking with the Constitution. We always go wrong when we underestimate the wisdom of our Founding Fathers.

Roy, the battle between the liberals and the conservatives is not about weakening the corpocracy, it is about which party gets to be the best friend of the corpocracy.

Haven’t you been listening to conservative message,(Obama and the liberals hate business, they are trying to drive business out of America. They socialized the banks and they are going to socialize all business to make everyone dependent on the Democratic Socialist Party. Unemployment is high because business hates and mistrusts liberals.) and on and on Roy.

The implication is that conservatives love business and business loves conservatives. Another implication is, the people recognize this and that is why they are going to replace the liberals with conservatives this fall.

Or is it replace the liberals and conservatives with true conservatives that will rid the country of the socialist agenda…..Social Security, welfare, minimum wage, job safety regulations, unemployment benefits, workers compensation, unions, etc. Welcome to the real America, Conservative America. But wait, there is still the conservative right wing Christian social agenda, the one where those who don’t want their individual liberty infringed upon infringe upon other peoples individual liberty.

Gergle, I miss him to. I often disagreed with him but I had a lot of respect for him and the format he chose for discussing the issues.

jlw, you contorted my mind with that one. I like to think I don’t have time for fine grain analysis in politics and tend to take a broad brush approach. Like, I ain’t interested in living in a one world utopia, devoid of culture diversity, where people are more akin to commercialized robots than warm fuzzy humanians. 2nd tier, there are too many people chasing too few dollars. Meaning over population fewer natural resources. The Corpocracy seems of one mindset, GROWTH. Gotta get the GDP up, gotta have more people, gotta have more business startups, gotta strive for total efficiency, one world government, one world trade agreement, one security force, one language, etc. I do believe they would like the world to be comprised in one company with one CEO as the in-charge man.

It’s clear, they do like one political party, the duopoly. The brain dead, Tom Donahue, CEO/CofC, was on cspan yester evening espousing that we would loose 380k jobs if we didn’t sign the latest trade agreement with Columbia and S. Kor. I believe. Nary a word or thot about the 10M jobs lost to globalization.

We need to become a country again, as opposed to some commercial entity. Bust up the duopoly through VOID’s, strive for AVC as a voice for the people, and run a 3rd party with a different political attitude through the Corpocracy. Remove the money influence from politics by abolishing CP and MIFS, and go from there.

Otherwise, we have this Socialistic - - - - -

For years, people have sought balance between the parties, on the premise that they are exactly the same. They call them cute things like duopoly.

But can we really, seriously believe that after eight years of the Bush Administration that the Democrats are equally dysfunctional? It’s become the politically correct reflex to say so, to cast a pox on both houses.

I would say, look at the results. Look at where America really is, and why.

There is one party right now that can make change work, or that would actually work towards change. But part of what inhibits them now are widespread groups of people who have been scared by budget numbers and economic problems into considering putting Republicans back in charge. Also there are people who are dissatisfied with the Democrats.

The plain truth here, though, is that if you take the Republican option, for the most part, you will get a person who is afraid to stand up to their party, doctrinally inflexible, and worst of all, doing everything they can to avoid admitting that 2006 and 2008 were about the rejection of Republican policies, and not merely Republican candidates who fell short of conservative ideals.

I would say hold off on holding Democrats accountable until Democrats are unobstructed by the Republicans. Hold them accountable for what they do, not for what somebody keeps them from doing, against their will. What’s more, don’t forget that punishment only works when the penitent actually disowns their actions, or inhibits them at the very least, in the future. Republicans have no desire to do either, and handing them victories will simply encourage them to do worse than they have already done. It will encourage their literally insane level of hyperpartisanship. It will encourage them to continue their laissez faire ways with business.

It will encourage Centrist Democrats to continue capitulating to those on the right, continue helping them to gum up the works in the Senate and the House. In other words, failing to hold the Republicans accountable will encourage more Democrats in Washington to be wishy-washy, to accept the flawed premise that this country is center right.

It will encourage the continuation of bad policy, policy we all hate.

When you hold Washington accountable, it’s not merely going to be an either/or choice, it’s going to be a choice that concerns total results. Parties, ultimately, don’t matter in elections as much as majorities do, and if folks waste the chance to be in the majority that gets things done, they have only themselves to blame when policy doesn’t go their way.

David:

You stated: I don’t like really wealthy people buying their government office. But, I won’t trust a wealthy candidate that won’t spend their own money on their own campaign.

Seems to me you are saying if they spend their money, you don’t like them buying the seat. If they don’t spend their money, they aren’t committed enough. Which leads me to believe you just don’t like any politicians—or at least not any wealthy ones (which may be a bit redundant these days).

I guess we can agree on that…

Stephen, 32% of the people say the Democrats in Congress deserve to be reelected. 51% say that their incumbent Congressperson deserves to be reelected. Both numbers are all time lows.

I think that the only thing that might keep the November election from being a real blood bath for Democrats is that the people feel the same way about incumbent Republicans.

My advise, come up with a few million jobs, break up those 6 big banks and start busting employers of illegal immigrants or the Democrats will wish it was 1994.

Let’s here it folks, a big round of sympathy for the centrists.

Obama will get along fine with the Republicans for his last two years, he’s a pragmatist.

The people haven’t had a Congressional majority on their side in three decades and their is a mountain of corpocracy legislation and policy to prove it. Plus a couple of oil wars. When they thought they had voted for a change, they just got more of the same.

I don’t think the people are even considering policy right now. They are scared, they are mad and they just want someone to take it out on. There are a whole bunch of people in Congress that are deserving.

Millions of jobs gone overseas. Millions of invaders stealing jobs, wages and opportunities. Millions of Americans out of work. And, you think these Democratic incumbents deserve reelection? No way!

For all you soon to be former elected officials, there are some good job opportunities just south of the border in the Mexican border towns. They are begging for people to run for mayors and city councilpersons. And, since we are all one big happy country now, there won’t be any citizenship issues.

jlw-
It’s easy commenting on a website to suggest outcomes, predict disasters. It’s easy to throw around words of jargon, like “corpocracy” and “duopoly”. It’s easy to suggest that anti-incumbency is the way. Or pro-incumbency.

I’d say let’s put our rational minds back in the drivers seat for a second. Democrats aren’t perfect. They’re not even as committed, in Washington at least, as their constituents are. But imperfect is better than abyssmal.

The Republican leadership is helping to stir up the Tea Party movement. The fact that this movement believes that we are overtaxed while our taxes are the lowest in over half a century tells you all you need to know.

The fact that they fret about people taking away their guns, despite the fact that nobody has the political balls to do that nowadays tells you all you need to know.

The fact that the Republicans have Arizonans, whose violent crime and property crime are the lowest they’ve been in decades, worried about Illegal aliens having made their state a war zone tells you all you need to know.

The Republican Party and the Tea Party movement are all about creating demand for products for which people have no need.

It’s about telling people that the deficit is first priority when historically deflationary economies like the one we’re in right now don’t respond well to austerity measures, leaving you with greater economic suffering, more unemployment, and less revenue, and therefore nothing to show for your efforts.

These are people who look at the terrible, but preventable accident on the Deepwater Horizon, but don’t feel the need to do anything substantive, or re-examine policy, who spend the first three years watching the Iraq war go to hell, and only decide to stop staying the course when they lose an election. These are people who face one of the hugest economic collapses of all time, and are still counselling people to to hold off on regulating these folks.

This is politics applied for the sake of a marketing image, not actual results. This is a consistency in principle that does not translate to a consistency in results, and which they basically demonstrate by being a roadblock to their rival’s legislation.

People like me deserve, want, and are committed to getting better from our government. We’re not going to wait around for these people to finally get the hint about the terrible effects of their policy. We’re going to defeat them. We’re going to force them to be held accountable for their actions.

Democrats like me are not going to wait around for the Tea Partisans to triumph. Loud ignorance is not going to defeat quiet understanding.

S.D. said: “I’d say let’s put our rational minds back in the drivers seat for a second. Democrats aren’t perfect. They’re not even as committed, in Washington at least, as their constituents are. But imperfect is better than abyssmal.”

C’mon, Stephen, this argument is so bogus! Your argument parallels this one: we should allow smallpox to ravage the world, rather than continue to spend money and effort defeating it, because it could be worse, it could be wiping out all of mankind, but, it is a benevolent disease, however imperfect, because it will never kill everyone.

Or how about this parallel argument to yours: There is no point trying to eradicate crime, most people are not criminals, and we should be thankful for that instead of trying spy on everyone in the public place for that small percentage of criminals committing heinous acts against society. Pure bogus argument.

The fact is, Stephen D., the Democrats have, with the Republicans, brought America to its knees crying economic UNCLE, for relief, and you are arguing because they did some good along the way, we should keep their incumbents in power. Tha’t exactly like arguing that we shouldn’t wipe out smallpox because for all its harm, it does build resistance in some, and that is a good thing.

Bogus, bogus, bogus, to the common sense. America needs a political revolution to dramatically alter the way governance is meted out by the Democratic and Republican parties, which spend most of their efforts battling each other instead of solving the people’s issues and need for a prosperous, free, and safe future for themselves and their progeny.

pl8spinner, what I don’t like is the people’s government having rigged the rules in a fashion which only permits the wealthy or those with access to wealth to participate in governance. When that is the case, as it is today, it is no longer the people’s government, but, a government of, by, and for, the wealthy.

‘American needs a political revolution.’ Wonderful words that brings tears to my eyes and the smell of gun powder and new babies to my nasal membranes. As my grandson said yesterday while sucking on a bluish colored slurrpy, “I just love this”.

Kind of anxious about what tomorrow brings re the primaries.

“Kind of anxious about what tomorrow brings re the primaries.”

I am too!!!

You heard it hear first! The NAU is alive and well. Just watched a cspan forum re Calderon’s visit to the U.S. where a presentor said something like, progress will is measured relevant to commerce, unimpeded trucking and cross border movement of people. That’s the NAU in a nutshell. That’s the reason the government has to counter the Az law, there can be no backsliding, no impediments relative to NAU goals.

Another interesting statement like, we can’t expect reform to happen quickly as with NAFTA, that would require a dictatorship. I agree completely, i.e. the WTO, which xlates to world government for world business.

Nothing was said in the forum about busting up Carlos Slim’s monopolies as the wealthiest billionaire in Mexico. I guess they are going to leave that up to us too, along with busting up the drug cartels, paying the hotel bills for their incarcerated kingpins, etc. I can’t remember the Corpocracy being so involved ‘to help’ any state in the union as they are with Mexico. Must be some reason for that, perhaps a cheap highway for Chinese and Wal-Mart plastics into the US, where laws are dictated by the WTO, etc.

David R. Remer-
There was and is a one-hundred percent effective vaccine for smallpox. Your anti-incumbency measure is just about to put Republicans back in charge, despite plenty of evidence that they intend to stand in the way of reform, promote gridlock, and tear down the President you support.

A smallpox vaccination was virtually guaranteed to solve its problem. That’s its charm.

But to paraphrase the famous Upton Sinclair quote, it is difficult to get somebody to understand something that their near-term political ambitions depend on their not understanding.

The Republicans cannot admit any wrong, or accept any blame, on much of any policy front. They are not getting your anti-incumbent message, or if they are, they’re fixing to vote in people who are even worse politically, and practically speaking. You’ve sent your message. They’ve ignored it or misinterpreted it. They will keep on screwing things up the way they’ve been doing if they are given the chance.

Are you about to give them that chance on the strength of a political theory? To me, that is absurd, all due respect to you.

You have to understand: I think in pragmatic terms. I’m not going to hope that some son of a bitch is going to get the message. I’m going to put that person in a position that they either do get the message, or I capture his piece and take him off the board. I don’t waste the threat of anti-incumbency on a person whose replacement is going to be even more of a moron, and with the Republican Party the way it is, just about anybody you allow to get elected will take it as a validation of their incredibly bad record, a message that tells them to do more of the same.

I reached my breaking point with the Republican party long ago. What I’m hoping for is one of two things to happen: the party snaps out of its current psychosis, and we get people who put their responsibilities first, ahead of ideology, or the Republican Party gets replaced by one where the members have greater sense.

I’m not going to put another Republican in office until then. I am not going to reward their failure to face reality. Nobody here should either. We are enabling the political equivalent of drug addicts if we do.

About Carlos from “Cornered” by Barry Lynn: “ A mere sixteen years after signing the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) a people who expected that following the economic lead of the United States would bring more economic and political liberty and opportunity has discovered instead that a single man, Carlos Slim, whom the Wall Street Journal calls “Mexico’s Mr. Monopoly,” managed to capture control of more than 7 percent of all the business activity in the entire nation. This includes control over 92 percent of Mexico’s fixed telephone lines and 73 percent of its cell phone business.

Slim is also a big player in banking, mining, construction, cigarettes and railways. In all, Slim’s empire of more than two hundred companies accounts for one-third of Mexico’s top stock market index”

Barry continues with (gist) there is one US paper where you want read in negatives on Slim. In 2000, the struggling NY Times, who once called Slim a “Robber Baron”, accepted a 250M loan from him.

Look at Mex. and see a picture of the world. Monopolies stacked on conglomerates along with poverty and busted governments. Go NAFTA, WTO, viva la NAU! Indeed, we aren’t that far from Greece or Mexico. Seems to me the people of Mexico could ask Slim to kick in a railroad or two to help the peasants. But really, with us taking care of the drug cartels and all the remissions by those immigrants working in the US there probably is little need to disturb Slim at this time.

Barry writes that it was Mexico who, in 1978 introduced ‘formula pricing’ for oil where the contract price could be changed at intervals along the delivery pipeline. First valve would be OPEC, second valve, the gas and oil companies themselves, third valve, gasoline distributors and the fourth valve is supplier nations who control oil at their borders. He writes that the redefinition of the oil system as a ‘market’ was one of the great political revolutions of the last generation. In a few short years, the responsibility and the political onus of pricing oil and gasoline were shifted away from real people, and real corporations, and real governments to a ‘neutral’ mechanism that was presented as entirely non-political.

Following that was a fifth valve, the regulators, such as Phil Gramm and the Commodoties Futures Market allowing Goldman Sachs and such to play in hedge funds turning the oil market into a paper futures market. In 2008, Chris Cook, a former head of market supervision for the IPE in London estimated that investors were piling $260B atop the less than $6B in Brent contracts that were made available in any one month.

Leading me to believe the only sane way to restore our Constitution, our Republic is through a 3rd party with a different political opinion - - - - An American political revolution.

Bear with me, I’m trying to get back on thread here.

S.D., I am happy to remove incumbents, even if it means electing Republican Freshman. What you are missing is the rationale. As long as my government is failing to address the needs of the nation, incumbents are responsible for that, and need to be removed. Ergo, if the government continues to fail to meet the needs of the nation with Republican incumbents, they TOO will be voted out for a challenger with at least the potential of working to meet the nation’s needs.

You completely fail in your comments to address the fact that Democrats are not meeting the needs of this nation, especially, its MOST URGENT ones.

The majority of the people wanted single payer public option. Democrats told them to go piss on themselves and call back in a few years.

The majority of the people wanted fiscal responsibility, but from the getgo, Democrats larged and porked up their budgets adding to the national debt and deficits for the least of priorities for the nation.

The people want an end to corporate buying of political parties and representatives, and Democrats again have said, go piss on yourselves, and call us when the Republicans are in charge.

The nation ABSOLUTELY requires an emergency declaration of war upon fossil fuel emissions and dependency and growth of entitlement spending. Obama opens our ocean shelves to drilling and the Democratic Congress can’t find a single net dollar to save in spending.

Voting for incumbent Democrats at this point is NO BETTER than voting for Republican incumbents. They are ALL destroying our nation’s potential and future for my and our kids.

You ask me now to trust Democrats as the better Party. I don’t think so. They have not lived up to the promises they have been making for decades. I have no reason to trust or Vote for incumbent Democrats. And you know what? Objectively, neither does any other American who believes our government is failing its mission and obligations to the public, present and future.

When Democrats have DEMONSTRATED their willingness to put nation first, above political and power considerations, then call me. Till then, go Piss On Your Party.

Well said David.

I’m trying to get back on thread, but I jus kain’t!

Pelosi recently made a statement that folks may want to quit their job and become a musician as their health care needs are now taken care of.

And, David, stop stealing my thunder! Anything debate raised to the level of pissin up a rainspout or pissing on my pant legs is my terriority. IMO.

This just in. The courts have awared asylum to Obama’s aunt.

Also, FOX just reported the Supreme Court has ruled that 18 yrs olds and below can’t be given a life sentence unless it involves murder. By doing so the Supreme Court shoots down State law in 27 states and directly violates the Constitution relating to sentencing of criminals. The judges referred to foreign law in making their decision in that no other country gives a life sentence to a teenager unless a murder is involved. Harmonizing them laws, getting us ready for a world government, etc, IMO. Constitution be damned, in there opinion.

FOX again, An ass’t SecState, must be hunerts of em, apologized to China at the UN following China’s berating the US over Az immigration law. And, don’tcha be callin them Muslim Extremist Muslim Extremist either.

Roy, sorry about stealing your thunder. I am just fed up with those, whose intents or actions, result in preserving the disastrous status quo of current American challenges and problems.

My background is in psychology. From that perspective, I have to disagree with your assessment of the federal ruling on life imprisonment for children. Children are malleable, and far more capable of rehabilitation than many adults.

I do, however, have to insist, that any law which denies life imprisonment MUST ALSO provide the resources for excellent rehabilitation. Ergo, if the federal law is to deny life sentencing, the federal government must insure that more than adequate resources are available for competent and professional rehabilitation services for youth convicted of crimes of violence.

Otherwise, these youth will simply be released back into society without adequate rehabilitation and pose a high or higher risk of violence again.

David, IMO, it all comes down to parenting. Otherwise, I’ve nothing to suggest relative to the correctness of the law. I do believe that the Supreme Court has no business referring to foreign law in making decisions relative to the U. S. Constitution. Compounded with directly violating the Constitution to reach such a decision is doubly egregious. Seems an impeachable offense to me.

If we don’t have the Constituion as a basis for law then we are little more than anarchists, or soon to be. Just make the law whatever you want it to be so long as it suits some agenda, be it foreign policy, WTO, world court, business venture, etc. I’m at once all excited about the UN appointing Iran as Chief/women’s rights representative. I guess it serves somebody’s purpose. Perhaps makes Iran feel important. I’m not sure world law will work out well for those concerned.

Indeed, the problems we suffer today are directly proportional to the degree we have been dragged away from the Constitution, IMO of course.

Roy,

The problem is that our Constitution is derived from foreign law.

Roy,

Also I’m not sure I understand why you are so scared of Northern Arizona University. It’s seems like a mild mannered school to me.

(Hint: you use too many acronyms)

Gergle, I would like to think there is no political neophyte over seven years of age who would not relate to the NAU shorthand. But, I don’t doubt I could be proved wrong, sadly. I do dislike all the keystrokes required too.

You ain’t goin to like Beck’s output tonight. He gave a Speech at Stanford, I believe, where he whipped up the crowd with ‘you ain’t going to change things thru politics, change will only come from individuals of honor, integrity, and faith in GOD.’ On tomorrows show he will host top religious leaders to talk about faith and politics.

Beck has placed a great crime right at the steps of the administration. In an ongoing crime he refers to as ‘Crime Inc’ he relates that Frank Raines (?), while CEO of Fannie or Freddie, misrepresented their bottom line by $9B so that folks could collect their bonuses. After being found out he resigned and worked to garner several green energy patents which he turned over to Fred/Fan (?) According to Beck he and some well connected folks plan to make lotsa money, project has been estimated at $10T, if a Cap & Trade gets passed into law. One patent involves a means of automatically locking wall outlets in YOUR residence. It’s got radicals, mad scientists and lose women, stay tuned. The WH must be smokin over this one. Can Beck survive much longer?

Roy,

Can Beck survive much longer?

I sure hope not. He’s a ranting charlatan, in my opinion. Beck is making money in scads off people ranting like a lunatic. He is crime, Inc. He’ll be long gone with the money before doing anything to help anyone but himself.

I did figure out what you were talking about, but on several occasions I have to go look up your acronyms. It would be easier to read some of your stuff, if at least once you’d include what your acronym refers to.

Ok gergle, I’ll try to spell it out. Yeah, if Beck bellies up there’s going to be egg on a few million faces. Like this Crime Inc thing. To me it’s just business as usual, the Chicago mafia slicing and dicing business deals. But, Beck wants to make a crime out of it, which it is, but normally, like you don’t hear this in the MSM, that’s main street media for you, and most folks write it off as business as usual.

However, Beck was able to get Van Jones moved to a differnt position so maybe he will have some effect on the mob. A ‘wait and see’ with Beck but thus far, everything he threw at the wall has stuck, IMO.

Roy, Beck will survive as long as his ratings are high enough. 99.9% of the children and 98% of the adults don’t watch Beck or any other political demagogue. But, 2.1% is more than enough to make him wealthy.

What you did with Carlos Slim, do it with Beck’s boss, Rupert Murdock.

A world government is inevitable and will occur between 500 and a 1000 years from now baring a mass extinction event, natural or human induced.

IMO, the far greater threat is a One World Corpocracy with it’s capital Wall Street and the governments of the world subservient to the MARKET.

The greatest threat to a One World Corpocracy is the LEFT, not the right. Beck is a representative of the One World Corpocracy and he and it have no qualms about using populism to demagogy the left.

Stephen D., there is one Democrat that I will consider voting for when he comes up for reelection. That is freshman Senator Brown from Ohio. He is the coauthor of the to big to fail amendment which was defeated in the Senate by a two to one margin. That amendment wold not have broken the large banks up, only kept them from growing bigger. Even it was un acceptable to the corpocrats, Republican and Democrat.

If Obama were a democrat rather than a Democrat he would be traveling the country politicking for public financing of elections instead of cracking Republican jokes at a multi thousand dollar a plate dinner in Manhattan.

Yea, I use words like corpocracy often. Some of the Democrats on WatchBlog used to use it more often as well, but that was before the Democrats gained the majority.

jlw, I want to see what position Beck takes after the Republican’s ping-pong in 2012. He may not last that long as the dem’s will try their best to silence him.

Surely, Rupert won’t fire him as CNN did to Dobbs. Beck sez what I want to hear, he puts meat on my thoughts. Like, he has the ear of a couple of House members who will ask for an investigation into Frank Raines (?) ex-CEO of Fannie or Freddie. May turn into the McCarthy hearings but will be interesting, IMO. Beck and others have tried to FOIA, freedom of information act, Fan/Fred but the Corpocracy won’t allow it because Fan/Fred is not a true government agency. So, these two reps are going to try a congressional investigation.

The great thing about Beck is he goes after Republicans and Democrats. I believe eventually someone will have him killed. And I think he expects the same thing. If the Republicans are able to take back control of the House and Senate, the American people should demand real investigations into F&F, along with other shenanigans.

Gergle, Quite Right! It was. Foreign law dating back over 2000 years in some cases. Think the French had any influence upon our Constitution given some notable founders have become well read in their notions and ideas of law? Yeah, me too!

Educated people know that great ideas don’t float out of space and strike one with a bolt of epiphanal light. They come from other people with other great ideas and get synthesized into a new one, slightly different, and hopefully, slightly better.

Too often common folk mistake foreign language with foreign logic and foreign knowledge. The rules of logic in France are the same as those in Canada and the same as those in the U.S. The concepts and ideas about representative government and democracy have the same roots in France, or Britian, or the U.S. What differs, and then only modestly, are values based on a nation’s particular history and evolution.

Unless founding Americans looked to the Native American tribes, which they did in part, they had no choice but to look to foreign writers, and thinkers, and our own short history as well for the principles set down in our Constitution. The underlying principles in our Constitution are universal, combined with each nation’s historical values, their implementation and balance is all that differs between modern democratic nations, Constitutionally speaking.

It is wise to look to other nation’s Constitutions and policies for improvements, since ours is failing our nation’s future as implemented. What we borrow has to make sense in our own time and context. That it was borrowed from a foreign nation, stands in the proud tradition of our nation’s founding. That kind of historical context is way, way over Beck’s head, and accounts for his and other entertainer’s ignorant rants about our Constitution having been uniquely designed by Americans without foreign influence of anykind. Laughable if it weren’t so pervasive amongst so many of the electorate.

Roy, I am sure that the Democrats will be able to silence Beck before 2012, especially if he says so.

Fox entertainment put Lou out of work, ratings. Their demagogues are better and they stole his audience.

Why is Beck focusing on Fannie and Freddie rather than the true culprits of the economic collapse? I know why. It is because we all know that the economic collapse was caused by the liberal socialist agenda. We know this to be true because Beck tells us so.

But, is it really true?

“Beck sez what I want to here he puts meat on my thoughts,”

Beck uses a carefully worded script to arouse the emotions and prejudices of his listeners.

That is what demagogues do best and in Becks case, he makes no bones about it, he does it for the money.

Beck says we need to get rid of the liberal, progressive, socialist agenda. He doesn’t say we need to get rid of unemployment benefits. Why is that? It is part of the liberal, progressive, socialist agenda. I wonder how many of his listeners are drawing unemployment benefits?

In Beck’s America, it will be every man for himself. That is what the crew and captain of that ocean liner that sank last year said as they took to the life rafts and left the passengers on a sinking ship.

Absolutely, the tower of Babel. Everyone should try their hand at blogging or joining some group that has meetings to make decisions about things. It would help them understand why government policies are what they are.

I do believe our Founder’s, partnering with the Creator, put together a pretty Constitution. And, I’m sure their decisions were promulgated in part based on their foreign experience with ‘old bailey’ and the ‘rack’ and the dull bladed guillotines of France. I suspect, had the US not come along the the rack and head checker would still be heavily employed in Europe. I’m not sure that you don’t have it backwards David. I believe that the courts giving sway to foreign law is synomous with the Obama admin refusing to call out Islamic Extremist and the Ass’t Sec/State moron apologizing to China for the Az immigration law. In other words, bending over backwards (far enuff to kiss your ass in this case) to make all the other countries feel wanted and counted as ‘one of us’. How precious!

And, I’m sure the Founder’s would be in complete agreement that Corporations are human and money represents free speech.

Beck stole my approach so it’s kinda natural that I would think he has the right approach.

Roy, you lack the reading that our founding fathers partook of. Our Founding fathers, or their parents, afterall, came from foreign nations, with the knowledge, breeding, and values they brought with them. Everything in the Constitution was foreign borrowed in one fashion or another.

That verifiable truth and fact is ‘Inconvenient’ for Beck and his followers who lack this history and education regarding the founding of our nation.

“Americans view the Founding Fathers in vacuo, isolated from the soil that nurtured them,” says Traci Lee Simmons in his book, Climbing Parnassus: A New Apologia for Greek and Latin.

A great many of our founders spoke other languages than English. They needed to, because the great treatises on government were in Greek or Latin, or French. DeToqueville was not American, and left when finished reviewing America.

Many of our founders, had read and digested Polybius, Aristotle, and Cicero./ They used these historical and foreign writers and thinkers to frame and illustrate their ideas before the assembly in Philadelphia in 1787. They conducted heated debates. The Federalist Papers are filled with subtle classical allusions. Madison, Hamilton, and Jay assumed readers to be tolerably familiar with references to the leagues—Amphictyonic, Achaean, Aetolian, Lycian, formed by the ancient Greeks in order to achieve political and city-state security.

Not only are the Federalist Papers replete with classical and some contemporary foreign references, but the pseudonyms each of the writers chose for themselves were all taken from the foreign writers of classical times.

One of the chasmic differences between our founders and the likes of Beck is that the founders revered history and great ideas REGARDLESS of their place of origin in time or locale. Beck is a prejudiced fear mongering bigot preaching Americanism as if it had no roots or relationship with other nations of the world.

I understand Beck all too well. He is an ignorant man depending upon the ignorance of others to fill his coffers. I grew up under an abyssmally ignorant father and I know well the hate and fear such persons create in their own lives and the lives of all others around them. I rejected such persons at the age of 13 and have worked to counter their ignorant ravings every since. Still doing it here today on WatchBlog and other writing/dialogue venues.

Wisdom and virtue do not spring from ignorance, intolerance, and prejudice toward others. You and I and others will fare far better in seeking wisdom and virtue by listening to the founders and those they read critically, rather than the likes of Beck, who seeks only to impassion others to his side to ward off his own fears of poverty, anonymity, and insecurity. At that, he is very adept.

Ignorance is nothing more than a lack of knowing the experience of others that preceded one. Folks read the Constitution and think they have learned something. The truth is, absent learning where these ideas and concepts came from in history and from foreign lands, one might as well read “See Spot Run” in a foreign language one does not know, for all the understanding that will take place.

America does not exist in vacuo, nor do its foundations and founding principles. We are, and always have been, defined by our relationship with other nations, cultures, and foreign ideas. It is no different in this regard, today, than in the 18th century. We are still a nation of immigrants, and failing to learn the history of that immigration of ideas, culture, and principles is the ultimate form of ignorance in America, and widespread, I might add.

The Tower of Babel was the first attempt to build a space elevator. It was being constructed by the Annunaki and Human followers of Marduk. It was ordered destroyed by Marduk’s grandfather, Anu, the king of the Annunaki.

Marduk continued to lay claim to the kingship of the Earth and used is human followers to wage war on the other Annunaki. Rather than suffer defeat, Marduk resorted to using the 7 sacred weapons, raining fire and destruction on the cities and killing many, throughout the lands with the death sickness that followed.

Anu sent word from Nibiru to the Earth ordering the Annunaki to gather their things together and abandon the Earth. Marduk and some of his followers refused and after another battle, they escaped into the wilderness and were left behind on the Earth. The Annunaki have very long lifespans and Marduk is still with us, only today he goes by another name, Satin.

God gave man dominion over the earth and all that is upon it. God did not give man dominion over the heavens.

DR:

“Many of our founders, had read and digested Polybius, Aristotle, and Cicero”…

Don’t you also believe the Bible was read and God was implored to give guidance? Their Christian principles were the foundation of the work they did. After all, our nation was based upon these same Christian principles.

David, tell me, how is it possible for the left to believe they are the most intelligent persons in the world and everyone else is so ignorant? These words show a disdain for anyone who believes different from the socialists. This type of thinking is the height of arrogance. This type of thinking is the foundation of socialism and communism; that the masses are ignorant and must be controlled by the elite enlightened ones. “Submit yourselves to us and we will take care of you”.

jlw:

This story of the “Tower of Bable” sounds different from the one told in the Bible.

Good response Beretta9. Exactly on point with Beck’s hour this evening. The Founder’s put the separation of Church and State in the Constitution to protect the citizens from the State, not the other way around. Church of England and all that. And, Beck hammered away about social justice which the admin is pushing bigtime. Not mentioned in the Bible or the Constitution. That social justice is codeword for collectivism or collective rights. The Bible calls out for charity to be given by the individual, not charity through some government.

According to Beck, the government is working to co-opt the churches as they are trying to do with cap and trade. They plan for the EPA and the churches to ‘partner’ expecting the churches, looking for funding, will take the bait. Beck goes back to about 1915 with a play for redistribution of wealth saying the progressives plan was to demean the Constitution, demean the Founder’s and attack the churches. Sounds pretty much right on to me. For the latest violation of the Constituion we only need to go back to yesterday’s SC ruling on life sentences for youth. FOX reported today that the Texas ‘book revisionists’ want to lower the impetus of Thomas Jefferson and play up Martin Luther King and similar. Church leaders are calling in to Beck asking for his support in fighting off a govt’ takeover of the Church.

The admin and others are trying to take Beck out. Most likely they will claim ‘hate speech’ or some form of treason, etc. We might be in for some McCarthy like hearings.

Will be glad to see this bunch of socialist/commie radicals head back to Chicago. Meantime, we’ve got two more years of this BS.

Otherwise, we have the Socialistic-Corporcratic government we deserve.

Forgot the relevant url:

http://webmail.peoplepc.com/wam/msg.jsp?msgid=6839&folder=INBOX&isSeen=false&x=-2136795573+

Roy;

Thanks, yes I saw Beck tonight. I believe Tom Humes watched the same program. Beck does a great job explaining what is going on. He goes step by step showing the complete connection. I’m sure Obama and his Chicago thugs would love to shut him up.

Texas has stuck a great blow to the history revisionists. Our founding fathers had a great belief in God. They believed God had placed them in a place where their decisions would change the world. Satan has placed Obama in the same place:)

The left tries to downplay the part religion played in the founding of our country. They would even have us believe our founding fathers were atheists, but not so.

Beretta9, does that mean that my version is wrong and the Bible version is correct?

By the way, did you here about the chairman of the tea party express. Allah is a Monkey God and all his followers are the Monkey God’s animals. I bet he is a Christian to. Of course, the tea party isn’t like that is it.

Roy, there was one major figure in the Bible that had collectivist tendencies. He traveled the countryside from town to town preaching the gospel with a band of unmarried men and women (big tabu). He preached love and brotherhood. He turned water into wine and he multiplied the loaves and fishes (sacrilegious and collectivist). He made the conservative leadership very upset and they had him crucified. His followers created a new religion and named it in his name.

Here is a Bluegrass number by Mountain Heart for you fellas.

Here I Am

I’m in this place
I’m all around
I’ve been here forever
You should know me by now
Take me for granted
Well I got some news
To tell you!

I was in the garden
When I saw her face
Opened her eyes
In so many ways
She was so hungry
I gave her a taste
And she knew!

I’ve brought down empires
With weapons of hate
Some found the way out
Some found out to late
I give a little
But I take a lot
So whether you want
To face me or not
Here I am!

I never lie
Do you understand
I’m in the church house
As much as I can
I’m on the street
With drugs in my hand
To sell you!

I was in the crowd
Said crucify him
I fooled you all
And you all joined in
So what makes you think
Your stronger than them
To ignore me!

I’ve brought down empires
With weapons of hate
Some found their way out
Some found out to late
If you need a little
Then I’ve got a lot
So whether you want
To face me or not
Here I am!

I’m in this place
I’m all around
I’ve been here forever
You should know me by now.

jlw:

If you want to believe your version, go ahead.

I play a little bluegrass with a few friends.

Nice lyrics to that song jlw. I just finished watching the TIME ad they run all the time selling 1950-60 country classics. I’ve got the collection but I still will sit and listen to the ads when I find them. Similar to the Founder’s to me, they don’t make them like that anymore.

It won’t change anyone’s religious perspective but we’ll get some answers re Beck, Fred/Fan, Crime Inc. and the like in due time.

Meanwhile hedgefund and CDS gambling continues, biggest housing crash yet to come, etc. Maybe, with enuff pain $ misery - - - (Country song) Agony,Misery and Pain. Woe and despair is drivin me insane. If I didn’t have some bad luck I’d have no luck a tall - - - Agony, misery and pain —-

pardon me fer that. I would hope folks reach a point where they will stand up for a 3rd party with a differnt pol attitude and remove the influence of money from the poltiical equation. Down with the Corpocracy, out with the radical-ism’s. In with the Constitution and clean elections and up with the Republic. Could we make a song out of that??

Last thought…in a pure democracy where people can vote themselves a raise, ever greater largesse at the public trough, then soon the vocal minority rules the silent majority (our posit today) and anarchy soon follows… every time. Thank GOd we have our the Republic, our guns and our Constitution to cling to …

Otherwise, we have the socialistic-Corporcratic government we deserve

Beretta9, You can find people playing Bluegrass in backyards all over America and I’ve heard some very good ones. In 69-70 I was stationed in Grand Forks North Dakota and there were people playing the mountain music in backyards on the Great Plains.

The message I’m trying to say is that we have to lose the hate. Despite the partisan bickering of socialist on the left and nazis on the right, despite the arguments about what America is or isn’t, what it should be or shouldn’t, nearly all of have one belief in common, this is a great country to live in and we wouldn’t want to live anywhere else.

“I’ve brought down empires with weapons of hate, some found the way out, some found out to late.”

jlw:

I agree, but still hold very strong to my beliefs.

We spend the winters in FL and there are several of us who get together and play. I play a D-16 Martin, and a little banjo. I use to fish a lot in Canada. They are crazy about BG in Canada. Sirius radio channel 65, 24/7 BG.

Baretta9, I can’t speak for the Left, only for myself. In response to your idiotic red herring comment:

“David, tell me, how is it possible for the left to believe they are the most intelligent persons in the world and everyone else is so ignorant?”,

Those on the right who are well read in history and philosophy are just as educated as those on the left. Education and ignorance know no political boundaries. Ignorance however, is vastly more pliable to the wiles of the educated, especially the unscrupulous and educated.

What has God to do with designing governments and Constitutions in America? Render unto Ceasar, that which is Ceasars, God’s son said, according to Christians. Your comment about God and the Constitution is a straw man argument at best, ignorant one, more likely. Many of the better known founders were deists, NOT evangelicals, or Catholics, or Mormons, or Jews, or Methodists. Think about it. Look up the definition if need be. It will be educational for you.

David:

I consider myself a student of history, and although I have read some philosophy, I don’t see any relevance or need for it. Education seems to be very important to you, because you often talk about it. I have two college degrees, but that doesn’t make me any different than anyone else. I don’t even like talking about my own personal accomplishments.

Perhaps I am wrong, but you come across as arrogant and condescending. Your writing makes you sound like you are educated and everyone else is ignorant. Like you have placed yourself on a pedestal above everyone else. Like you are royalty and everyone else are just common peasants.

I have noticed you seem to have a problem with me. It seems you are angry when you respond to me. Perhaps I am wrong, if so, I apologize. In any case, you seem to respond to me differently than you do to others.

I may be a senior, but I have tried to stay up to date with modern technology. I use email and text messaging. One of the problems with texting is that, what you write and what you would say in person can come across differently. Sometimes a person can write something jokingly, but it may come across as serious. So perhaps I am just reading you wrong.

Baretta9 deceptively says: “I don’t even like talking about my own personal accomplishments. “

Bullcrap. You have talk about your degrees, your Florida vacations, your personal finances, all in a very braggard way seemingly designed to lend credence to your other opinions, which, undermines the credibility of everything you write, in my opinion. The anecdotal proves no rule, principle, or generalized concept. And your anecdotal references as basis or support for argument preempt credibility in your claims to have two degrees, unless they are in hole digging and dirt shoveling, both noble vocations without which civilization could not exist, but, requiring no formal education in logic, debate, or reason.

Actually I don’t go to FL on vacation, I live there during the winter months. My finances were in answer to a question about drawing SS and Medicare. I do nothing to lend credence to my opinions. I am simply a red neck conservative from flyover country. I have said I was a Christian at times. Does that also count against me?

Since you made an attempt to determine what my degrees were in; then I guess your education is open for debate too. Is this a fair conclusion? Sometimes I feel I am being goaded into saying something that would get me banned from WB. Would someone who has a physiology degree know if a person needed to attend anger management classes?

There were times when I had to dig ditches to earn a living. There were even times when I flipped hamburgers, and I even set pins in a bowling alley once. I always heard, learning other occupations, builds character. Don’t know for sure, that would probably be more in your field.

Well, I think we saw enough yesterday to get some idea of the potential for VOID activity come November. My sense is that incumbents do need to be worried. Pressure on incumbents will increase dramatically during the next few weeks, IMO. The admin is pushing to spend another $100B or so over the next few months, even as the economy falters. Also, Beck’s ranting on things like Crime Inc. will cost the Dem incumbents at the polls.

Some will not like the President tag teaming with the Pres. of Mexico to whup up on Arizona. Not too Presidential, IMO. Napolitano, Holder, a State Dept rep and others are complaining of the Az law while admitting they haven’t read it. That’s neither here nor there, you either are for immigration control or you are not, but it doesn’t make for good politics IMO. Goes more towards taking an arrogant position on an issue. Hillary is laying low on the matter. Why would she not speak out to protect her own?

Gotta cut this short. Want to see if Beck comes out in cuffs tonight, or perhaps one of those leg monitors so’s he can’t leave the country unexpected!

Roy, what is Beck talking about with the Chuch and state merger?

Berretta9 you are aware that Beck has said the Progressives started back in the early 1900’s working on this wealth redistribution thing, through social justice. To succeed they had to demean the Constitution (useless rag, irrevelant), the Founder’s (old, anglo-saxon, ignorant, deitists)and religion (religious leaders being cited for hate speech). Beck pointed out that the Corpocracy, in trying for a power grab like with the stimulus, TARP, GM etc they are working to co-opt the Church through partnering the EPA and Church through green projects. The idea is that the Church will take funding from the Corpocracy to the point where government can influence the Church, a la ye ole Church of England. Today, the Corpocracy pulled some T-shirts bearing logo’s relative to the partnering project.

Today he noted that 17 of the top 25 books are about or relative to the Founder’s. Re-covered the fact that Jim Wallace, Van Jones, SEIU or boycotting him and that a Congressman Wiener is calling for an investigation of one os Beck’s sponsors. McCarthy here we come. The Pres is staying silent. Just like Hillary is on the AZ immigration issue.

I can remeber back in to Regan days when media began to merge and the people complained that the rich and powerful would end up owning all media. Beck noted that CEO GE, on the Presidents advisory board, and GE sibs NBC/CNBC/__ and Telemundo are putting on some kind of progaganda blitz which I failed to catch. Socialist, George Soros also got a mention.

Well, it’s like Beck took all my old posts and is using them on his show nightly. For about three years I’ve referred to the Corpocracy breaking the back of the middle class to get us ready for a globalized world. Beck calls it redistribution of wealth from us to the less developed nations. It’s like he is taking the words right out of my posts. Should I do the American thing and sue? Tonight, he said we should go to his website and ‘spread’ his material around. Maybe I’ll do that instead.

After the propaganda blitz that Beck’s show was falling apart Beck put out May’s ratings tonight: Up 22%.

If Obama and company are using churches to spread their message, why aren’t the liberals on this site screaming their normal seperation of church and state rantings?

I saw a video of Pelosi telling preachers and priests what to tell their congregations. If this isn’t violation of church and state, I don’t know what is. I guess it’s ok if a liberal does it…

So I guess when these churches accept EPA funds, they will be reqired to preach the lefty message in their pulpits?

Fer shure, they will preach social justice, we are guilty and we owe them, redistribution of wealth, socialism to a high degree.

Watched the OBama/Calderon do the rose garden today. The North American Union (NAU) all over again. Change the name and keep on truckin. Incrementalism at its finest.

Here is a url to Beck’s factcheck website on Congressman Wiener:

http://www.weinerfacts.com/weiner/

More on ‘don’t ask, don’t tell, Excerpt from Calif for Population Control: “Proponents of another new amnesty for illegal aliens fail to acknowledge the history and net effect of previous amnesties. Many Americans believe that there has been only one prior amnesty, the Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA) of 1986. In fact, including IRCA, there have been seven amnesties since that time, using the misnomers of “reform” or “adjustments.” These additional amnesties have had the ultimate effect of naturalizing millions of individuals who knowingly entered the United States illegally.

Since IRCA was enacted, some 5.7 million more people have been granted amnesty and the opportunity to become citizens. But now there are at least four or five times that many people illegally in the United States. Through all these amnesties, many more foreign nationals were amnestied than had been estimated. IRCA was expected to cover some 1 million illegal aliens.

The seven amnesties that have been passed by Congress:
1. Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA), 1986.
A blanket amnesty for some 2.7 million illegal aliens

2. Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994.
A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens

3. Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997.
An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994

Note: The numbers for section 245(i) are not broken out for 1994 and 1997

4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997.
An amnesty for close to 1 million illegal aliens from Central America

5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998.
An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti

6. Late Amnesty, 2000.
An amnesty for some illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens

7. LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000.
A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens

When IRCA was passed by Congress, it was with the strict understanding that it would be a onetime- only forgiveness followed by strict border and active workplace enforcement. The list of amnesties post-IRCA shows that rather than leading to a tightening of immigration policy and enforcement, IRCA became a powerful lure for more illegal entry. Since IRCA led to an amnesty for three times as many people as were estimated beforehand, the U.S. might now be looking at offering naturalization to some 30 million people.”

For those of you who blog here, I want to thank you for your sanity and affinity for the human race. Below url relates:

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/18/weiner-goldline-beck/

303,824,640 = number of Americans
- 2,500,002 = people who listen to Glen Beck
301,324,638 = number of Americans who do not listen to Beck

From another perspective, jlw. We want to remove the Corpocracy and restore the Republic. I’ve blogged that three preferred ways to do that is, through VOID action, vote out incumbents every time. Support Article V Convention as provided by the Founder’s as a means to restore government when trust has been lost. And, support a 3rd party with a different political attitude.

I would add to that: listen to the Glenn Beck show nightly. Whether one likes or dislikes Glenn is not the point of listening in. It’s that through his words and actions he is helping to put a nail in the coffin of Corpocracy, just as those methods cited in the above para. He is weighing in moreso than a single individual.

He may be a Republican in the wolf’s clothing, etc. We won’t know that until the Republicans take control again. But right now he is helping to get rid of the Chicago mob factor, just as we had to deal with the Dallas oil patch gang under Bush. Beck is helping the cause of weakening the Corpocracy, much like a VOID action and should be supported, or at least tolerated for the immediate future, IMO.

Otherwise, we have the Socialistic-Corporcratic government we deserve.

David R. Remer-
I believe in expending the least necessary energy to do the most possible good. Electing a Republicans meets neither criteria. Republicans are looking to distance themselves from Democrats at top speed, because their read on their last two election losses is that they failed to be conservative enough. The Tea Party is all about that divorce from reality, folks following political dogma down the road of doubling down on every ideological talking point.

You will not moderate the political environment if you get more Republicans elected. The party’s gone certifiably insane. At least with the Democrats you have some chance of pushing things in another direction.

When you, and people like you punished the Democrats for their failed promises, what happened, did the Republicans step up to catch the dropped ball? No. Hell, they just want to stomp that ball flat.

So what is your sane alternative here? Don’t rhapsodize about what the future holds, tell me right here, right now, how the hell you think you’re going to get what you want if you put power in anybody else’s hands?

Democrats may be slow, but that is in part because we spent the last thirty years adjusting to the Reagan and Gingrich revolutions. And for that, I’m sorry. But you won’t get beyond them yourself by wishing for some other party to come around and save us. You have a decent chance of pulling the Democrats to the left if you elect them and re-elect the right ones. You have absolutely no chance to convince the Republicans to do what you want, not as they are now.

But if you just want to posture, and hope and pray, be my guest. I think that kind of politics, personally, is a waste of time and effort. My politics is about getting **** done.

My record should demonstrate this. Did my dislike of the way the Iraq war was started mean I wanted my country to lose? No. I advocated for the means for the country to leave, having succeeded, until it seemed to me that this was not going to happen. Even so, my ideals about foreign policy do not sway me from the notion that my party should try and get out the most responsible, not the quickest way.

Budget-wise, I’m all for cutting waste and keeping pork to a minimum. But I’m not going to see good policies and legislation die for the sake of that purity. I’d like to get less pork and waste and good policy, so what I am saying is that if I had to allow a little of the first to get more of the second, I would do it.

I also believe that it’s easier to start beneficial government programs and lend government’s aid to Americans if inconvenient questions of fiscal responsibility aren’t in the way. Therefore, I believe in managing the federal budget wisely.

But when most economists say we’re in deflationary phase, and that such austerity measures, however driven by political or personal good intentions would backfire in such a case, I’m not going to let the point become politicized. And if they say that we need a sudden and strong stimulus to jog us out of that, I’m not going to argue with them, or accuse them of being communists, or irresponsible spendthrifts. Benefiting the economy was the excuse for Republicans to overspend and undertax. Here, they are the genuine reason, and to seek false consistency by applying an fiscal principle inappropriately would be folly.

I believe that consistency with appropriate decision making is more important than political consistency. You can argue your way out of a political controversy much easier than you can argue your way out of the real world consequences of bad decision making. I’m not going to advocate foolish policies or foolish behavior by voters in the name of politics, because we will suffer in the real world for that.

Roy Ellis-
The whole point of the juvenile justice system is that kids are not capable of adult level judgment. There is no point in punishing somebody who doesn’t understand fully the moral import of their actions, who is neurologically incapable of that level of judgment.

Or put another way, kids aren’t clear enough on the line between right and wrong behavior for it to be useful to treat them like an adult. The other kids aren’t going to be mature enough to absorb the retributive message sent by it.

As for referencing other law, they were not saying those laws applied here. They were simply citing the modern standard around the world for criminal prosecutions informally, not using it as legal precedent in making the decision.

As for state law being supreme in criminal cases? No, it is not, at least not always. There’s a reason folks provide public defenders even in state law cases, Miranda Rights, even if the law involved is not a federal law. If you think federal definition of the limits of local jurisprudence is anything new, you’re not familiar with current law.

As for Glenn Beck?

He’s a Pied Piper. He’s a charismatic figure to those who buy into his politics, getting you hyped up, to lead you exactly nowhere but deeper into the doo-doo.

Liberals don’t fear him. They don’t take him seriously. They enjoy watching him get skewered by the folks on Comedy Central, and laugh their butts off at the hysterics involved.

But worse yet, when they do see Glenn Beck on Television for real, they realize that he almost makes it too easy to lampoon him. His stuff really is nuts. And by leading more of you to willingly believe it, he’s making you folks look equally nuts.

These people, like Beck and Palin are leading your movement to become a joke. If these are the Republic Sentry Party, then you’ve probably lost the political battle before its fought for the next half century.

I doubt Obama worries much about Glenn Beck or his viewers. If you wanted to deliever a harmful message aobut him to voters, Obama would probably want it to come out on Glenn Beck so that none of his voters would take it seriously.

Stephen D. said: “At least with the Democrats you have some chance of pushing things in another direction.”

Sorry, the days of choosing the lesser of two evils, the Republocrats campaigning game, ARE OVER! We ain’t buying it anymore. Both parties are responsible for destroying this nation’s future, and both parties are to be REJECTED by voting out their incumbents. Then it becomes a whole new game of which Party will reform itself internally, and the government externally, to win back OUR anti-incumbent votes, first.

That’s whats called democracy and APPROPRIATE use of the vote, to force the King Georges of both parties to yield the will the demands of the American people. People shouldn’t be afraid of the actions of their government in a democracy, the government should be afraid of the people’s free exercise of their vote. And that is the objective of Vote Out Incumbents Democracy. And we, and those buying into our strategy and mission are finally large enough as a voting population to effect this kind of most laudable change in American politics and governance.

We don’t care which horse wins. We care that all the horses are running their best and most ablest for OUR benefit. That is what democracy was always intended to be. The government working for the people, not the other way around with the people working to pay taxes for those in government and their favored lobbyists, wealthy special interests, and corporate buddies.

Democrats like you still don’t get it. That is why your Party is about to get trounced. Wake UP. Your party is no longer the majority in this country. The Independent voters are. The sooner your party amends itself to that reality and embraces it, the sooner your party can demonstrate it is more worthy of our votes than the other party.

Roy said: “Whether one likes or dislikes Glenn is not the point of listening in. It’s that through his words and actions he is helping to put a nail in the coffin of Corpocracy,”

That is the only valid justification for Glenn Beck, I have ever heard. His methods and arguments are a throwback to reason, logic, and education. But, for a small portion of the American public, he is moving them toward anti-incumbent voting at the polls in rejection of the Congress which is neck deep in corporate and wealthy special interest pockets. That much, is good.

Baretta9, Churches can preach whatever they want under the First Amendment. If they want to preach politics, they SHOULD NOT be receiving favored tax treatment from the government and tax payers.

David;

Then they are not allowed to preach what they want. Speaking of preaching what they want; what do you think of Pelosi telling priests and pastors to preach immigration reform laws from the pulpits?

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978234080

http://www.thefoxnation.com/nancy-pelosi/2010/05/10/pelosi-tells-catholic-church-preach-amnesty?page=7

Do hate crime laws limit the free speech of preachers and church leaders?

http://charismamag.com/index.php/news/22636-hate-crimes-vote-may-come-thursday

Baretta9, logic fails you again. Of course Churches can continue to preach whatever they want. Why should favored tax treatments or the lack of them encumber their freedom to speak to their congregation. Or, are you in favor of tax subsidies to special interest groups? Apparently so, by the implication of your illogical statement.

Churches having their tax exemption revoked for political speech IN NO WAY gags them from continuing to preach politics from the pulpit. Two degrees, huh? Doesn’t show.

I never made a statement, but I did ask you 2 questions. Logic would only incur if I had made statements. But, anyway, thanks for trying to answer my questions.

The question was, when Pelosi asked pastors to promote the democratic immigration law from their pulpits, was it violation of separation of church and state? And if, these pastors obey Pelosi, is that a violation of separation of church and state?

Now if you can get off your high horse, maybe you could answer the questions instead of presuming what I am trying to say…Physc degree, huh? Maybe that’s the problem?

“Do hate crime laws limit the free speech of preachers and church leaders?”

Let’s hope not, preachers and church leaders should have the right to preach hate right up to the instant they are standing before Jesus.

“Judge me Oh Lord for spewing hate from my mouth in your name.”

David, I know we are getting somewhere when you use the word ‘ain’t’ in a post. Afterwards, did you feel faint or break out with the farts and such? I feel much better about the way things are shaping up. I may just take my little sign and attend another DC TEA Party rally this year or next. Sure wish I had a helper or two. I’d be out there on the street on many weekends.

Becks revelations on Crime Inc and Shore Bank of Chicago should send people to stand in line at polling centers, waiting on November. Beck is shining a bright light on the workings of the Corpocracy. Clearly makes the point that biz and gov are way to intimate.

David, what are your thoughts on abolishing corporate personhood and money is free speech as a means to remove the money influence from politics?

Roy; Beck does have that red phone with a standing invitation for the WH to call him if he has anything wrong. They are the only ones with the number and he “ain’t” got “no” calls yet. David loves it when I screw up the King’s english. It shows how dumb I am…

Well, IMO, politics is more about winning hearts and minds to your side, being able to form coalitions, knowning when and where to compromise on an issue, etc. IMO, that’s why the fair haired dudes, like Clinton, are more likely to be winners than say, a Ron Paul type. I believe women are more prone than men to fall for the charismatic character over political substance. Politics is more about personality, congeniality, glad handing, etc than about being well educated, and, —that’s all. Like this fellow Blumenthal who is not sure if he served in Vietnam or not. (Please remove the ‘or not’ if you are a grammatically correct reader). etc. The ‘or not’ IMO adds emphasis and besides, I like it. snork, snork! Well, he is supposedly a ‘brilliant’ man but portrays himself politically as lacking integrity. Integrity is a marker for the ‘man on the street’ but the educated elite may choose to downplay the integrity issue if Blumenthal serves a useful purpose. Some well educated politicians will try and hold up Blumenthal as integrity is not seen as that big of a marker to them. I think perhaps educated people are more goal oriented rather than being driven by the moment.

It’s like this Crime Inc. bunch Beck has been high-lighting. All those folks know they have to dance with those that brung them. You throw a main street fella in there amongst them, maybe a church goer, respected in the community, puts in a good 40 hour week, etc, and he would come out there running, IMO.

Neut was on TV this pm debating the greater evil between socialism and secularism. He said the greater evil was a combination of the two, social justice over equal justice, etc. Neut, IMO, is pretty smart and he doesn’t try to hide the truth so much, but, he is a Republican, has to dance with those that brung him, and I wouldn’t trust him fer nuthin. But, he is telling it straight up when he says the left is pushing for world socialism, on the order of the EU, and where the government is the sole power, a world void of that silly religious stuff. Neut sounds good but, as a politician he has to dance with those that brung him when all is said and done.

Which brings me to what I really was trying to say. Whew!! Moreso now, than ever before, politicians of a party must band together, as the thin blue line might, lock step in making decisions on bills brought to the table by the Corpocracy. IMO, no amount of VOID is going to dramatically alter that scenario. Weaken the Corpocracy, yes, but it won’t defeat the Corpocracy. However, if you put a VOID action inside the Party itself, whereby, Party members can remove their politicians from office by membership vote then you have an effective way to ensure the people drive issues rather than politicians. The politician is sworn to carry out the party agenda. But, he can lobby the constituent base and get ‘the people’ to agree to change the agenda to his view. But, the action is between the politician and the people, not between the politician and the Corpocracy.
Keyboard is out of charters. Yawn…

I understand what you are saying, and agree. What part do you belive the TP has played in the senario?

Roy asked: “David, what are your thoughts on abolishing corporate personhood and money is free speech as a means to remove the money influence from politics?”

I oppose corporate personhood and their ability to contribute funds to campaigning of elections in any way whatsoever. I would go further and rescind all safe harbor legislation which insulates managing and executive directors of corporations from criminal and civil liabilities for the actions of their corporations where their actions or in-actions of due diligence can be proven.

That said, it would take a Constitutional Amendment to eliminate their ‘money as speech’ rights recently established by the Supreme Court, or a predominantly Liberal Supreme Court to overturn the this court’s ruling on the matter. Neither is likely to happen soon.

Likewise on the issue of corporate personhood. Congress could legislate corporate personhood away, but, the challenges to a conservative Supreme Court would reinstate them, making a Constitutional Amendment necessary, to again overturn them. It’s a simple matter of following the money to arrive at this conclusion.

Hence, many of the American people have it right, that some really serious and comprehensive campaign finance reform must take place which breaks the cuddling relationship between corporations and the political parties, Congressional, and presidential campaigns, before the reforms you speak of could enter the realm of the possible.

The only way Congress and the President are going to initiate those kinds of campaign finance reforms is if the incumbent reelection rate for both parties drops consistently to between 50 and 60%. Then, as an attempt to reacquire those anti-incumbent votes, one or both parties in Congress will become willing to cut their funding umbilical to corporations.

All good reforms which the majority of Americans want, begin with reducing the incumbent reelection rate from the current 90% plus average to between 50 and 60 or 65%. Only then will the Parties who control Congressional action have the incentive to grant the American people the reforms the majority of them want to see take place.

Roy, the problem with your scenario is that such a third party would have to act like the duopoly parties to acquire the power to make the changes you propose. In the process of becoming like the duopoly to acquire that kind of Congressional power, your third party would of necessity, have to become as corrupt and make the sames kinds of deals and appeal for the same kinds of funding as the duopoly now does. The duopoly controls the rules of power acquisition and usage in Congress. That is why there can be no third party threat to the duopoly, absent a wholesale public anti-incumbent movement over successive election cycles. That is a reality you seem not to want to acknowledge. It is noble, but, not practical.

VOID strategy must become the electorate’s raison ‘d’etere, before your vision of a third party challenge could be successfully established. One cannot put the cart before the horse and expect to get one’s destination.

Baretta9, are you stupid if you answer, or stupid if you don’t? Questions fashioned in this novice debate format don’t deserve a response from an intelligent and educated person. Ergo, I won’t be answering your novice trick questions.

Suffice it to reiterate, that political speech is free in America regardless of whether it receives exceptional tax favor from the government, or not. One need only open one’s mouth and utter words. No tax subsidies required for that. Should be obvious, but, your comments appear to have begged for the obvious as a response.

Good assessment David. I put an high urgency level on ridding ourselves of the Corpocracy. The longer we delay the more the Constitution is defiled, more barricades to 3rd party movements and the like, making it way more difficult down the road. Look at the EU today and witness what happens when you don’t have a strong constitution or multiple constitutions, with multiple political factions seeking control of a socialized system. A good reason why I’d like to see a 3rd party, with a different political attitude get started with the single agenda issue of abolishing corporate personhood and money is free speech. I feel we should lay down all the issues of the day and concentrate on abolishing CP and MIFS followed by real campaign finance reform. Once we have removed the influence of money in politics and attained free and clean elections then other issues could again be considered.

Globalization continues with congress looking to spend another $250B or so with only about $30B pegged as a revenue source. First, it was Beck stealing my act and now the Republicans have joined him. The Rep’s are moving to the populist center with a project to have citizens vote as to where spending cuts should be focused. That’s close to what I’m pushing with having Party members provide an oversight function for their elected/appointed officials. The Rep’s are adding insult to injury by calling their project a ’21st century’ approach to democracy. Taking the words right off my website I believe. Ain’t politics awful?

Otherwise, we have the Socialistic-Corporcratic government we deserve.

Remmer:

Well I guess your just to smart to be trapped in a trick question!!

Berretta9, I’ve been on the scene for about three years now. Before that never paid any attn to politics. I’m sure the anti=incumbent movement has been around for at least a decade but David’s ‘VOID’ effort, www.voidnow.com, and Walker’s ‘Tenure Corrupts’, www.tenurecorrupts.org or .com, have been strong models for the anti=incumbency effort. Then Independents began to bulk up and of late we have the TEA Party movement. Certainly, the TEA Party has the lead ($$)with media coverage, road trips, etc. People have become so frustrated that you have a few dems and reps willing to vote out incumbents. We will still be left with the Corpocracy but people are willing to throw Party-ism under the bus for the moment. Great time to be alive, me thinks!

The crux will come the year after the Republicans take over, IMO. Will the TEA Party continue as a strong movement or fade into the background after most of ‘their own’ are returned to office? We need several election cycles of anti-incumbency to really soften up the Corpocracy. Somewhere along the way I am hopeful that a 3rd party with a different political attitude can find some traction.

Roy, I hope the TP movement stays strong after the 2010 elections. Of course, we are going through primaries right now, and it is hard to determine the influence of the TP. But, in the case of Kentucky, we have sure evidence of the influence of the TP. The mainstream Republican Party supported Grayson. They not only supported Grayson, but they actively campaigned against Paul. There is no doubt the TP was victorious. How this will affect other primaries; who knows? Although; Bennett of Utah seemed to have been beat by the TP. I believe the TP has instilled in voters the determination to force politicians to listen to the constituents.

Blue dogs and moderates (if there is such a thing) are running from Pelosi, as we speak. Liberals can spin the results all they want, but even democrats are scared of the populace. Only Obama is not scared; he has 2 and one half years to go, and he has no concern for democrat congressman or senators. He is only concerned about his agenda. I don’t really think he is even concerned about getting re-elected. He seems to want to inflict as much damage as he can to America, as fast as he can. I agree, it will take a few cycles to remove these bums, but I don’t think a 3rd party will ever work on a national scale. Yes, we can vote in 3rd party congressman, or possibly Senators, but never a president. I think the goal of the TP is to take control of the Republican Party. Just as there is a movement, by liberals, in the Democratic to take control. Sestak of PA and Halter of AR were very liberal alternatives to Specter and Lincoln. The question is, is America more conservative or more liberal?

Roy, very seldom did I ever watch Glenn Beck. But since your remarks about him, I have been watching. He has been dealing with the influence our founder’s religion played in the founding of our country. There are some, (Remmer, Stephen, and others) who hate the thought that Christianity played any part in the founding of our country. But, it seems their Christian beliefs played a great part in our founding. It appears we are a nation who was founded upon Christian principles. Revisionist history is tonights subject.

“Will the Tea Party continue as a strong movement or fade into the background after most of ‘their own’ are returned to office.”

First, they have to elect a tea party candidate before they can return him to office.

With the momentum behind Paul, I thought he had a genuine opportunity in Kentucky but, he is alienating voters at a record breaking pace.

Paul’s position on the Americans With Disabilities Act: The federal government does not have a right to discriminate against Americans with disabilities but, corporations and other businesses have the right to discriminate against them if they chose to do so.

Paul’s position on the Civil Rights Act: Again, the government can not discriminate against Americans but, corporations and other businesses do. Denny’s corporation has a right to not serve black people if they so chose.

Paul’s position on corporations: President Obama’s criticism of BP is un american.

BP runs it’s operation on the cheap. They are self-regulated thanks to the Bush Administration.

After the accident, BP points finger at the other corporations involved.

BP calculated the flow rate of the leak at 5,ooo barrels a day. Everyone in the know, in the industry, knew that the method used by BP to calculate the flow rate was inaccurate. A team of oceanographic scientists said they had the equipment to accurately determine the flow rate. They were denied access to the site. BP got their syphon hose in and they are syphoning off some of the flow, not half and probably not even a third of what is pouring out. And, guess what, they are syphoning off 5,000 barrels a day.

BP is a lying, on the cheap corporation and Paul says that criticizing them is un american? There not even an American corporation.

If the tea party agrees with Paul on these issues, think Ross Perot and the Reform Party. How many Americans remember the Reform Party?

You should be asking Paul what his position is on corporate personhood and corporate wealth financing of elections.

Now begins the talking points and attacks against Paul, but in reality attacks against the TP movement. Everything taken out of context and the LIES begin. There is no Tea Party, there is a tea party movement, whose goal is to elect conservatives of either party. That is why democrats are now and will in the future run against Obama, Pelosi, and Reid policies:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/21/anti-obama-tack-buoys-some-democrats/

For someone who claims to be INDEPENDENT, they appear extremely DEMOCRAT.

Some peoples’ hypocrisy knows no ends.

It’s all very confusing.

Vote non-incumbent … unless, they are Democrat?

There is NO important difference.

Yes, anti-incumbency, IMO, does not represent the final solution. Anti-incumbency can, and will weaken the Corpocracy, knock them off stride, but in the long run you are still voting in Dems and Reps, both tightly controlled by the Corpocracy. It would, at best become a war of attrition, which the public has no taste for, no staying power, while the Corpocracy lives on to fight in perpuity. IMO, the Corpocracy must be taken out by the roots. To restore the Republic, our Constitution, we must change the dynamics of government from a business to government relationship, where the voters be damned, just like what’s going on now, to a relationship where the government takes their que from the voters. That’s the way it used to be and what the Founder’s planned. What has happened, with the advent of Corporate Personhood law, is that the Corporations have set themselves up as an entity competing for the attention of government. And, since corporations can organize and dump huge bucks on government the corporation gets the attention.
This incremental takeover of by the Corpocracy has become dangerous, IMO, to our national interest. The nation, the voter, the Republic, the Constitution is just being dragged down the road to wherever the Corpocracy wants to take us. They got their own world trade government with the WTO, IMF, World Court, Intl Cof C, and so on. People are wondering what’s going on with immigration, the Az law, lack of federal enforcement etc. Nothing more than the North American Union rules being adhered to by the administration. As late as today I heard that we must ‘harmonize’ our immigration laws. Harmonize has been the keyword for globalization, WTO, NAFTA, NAU etc for the last 20 years. The Corporations are doing their part to bring on socialism as it provides the strong central government needed to control the people. Done through putting them on entitlement programs and dropping their wages to something beyond pitiful, exactly where we are headed, IMO.
Therefore, IMO, it’s going to require a 3rd Party, with a different political attitude (that’s about the leben hundredth time) to change the dynamic to that desired. Corporate Personhood and Money Is Free Speech law must be abolished to remove the money influence from politics. The Party has to target that specific goal/agenda. Once the influence of money is removed then we can carry out campaign finance reform and go from there. Remove the money influence and politicians will be forced to work with the voters as the Founder’s intended.

Otherwise, we have the Socialistic-Corporcratic government we deserve.

Great green gobs of grimy greasy gopher guts - it’s Dan, Dan, the Info Man! Or something like that. Yes, your web page spells it out clearly. BUT WAIT, there is more. Now I know you may think I am highly conspiratoral but there is good reason to add radical, socialist and Marxist endeavors to your list of pejoratives given in discriminating the two parties.

Irregardless of what you think of Beck, he has video and audio of numerous Democrat’s in an around the administration in which they let the world know in no uncertain terms that they are radicals, socialist and marxist. Now, if it’s put before you to witness, in visual and audible media form then taking such a position should be acknowledged as part of the repetoire for that segment of the Corpocracy. Further, many of them have stated their goal is ‘globalization’, ‘one world government’, ‘workers of the world unit’, ‘a socialist system similar to Europe’, ‘not only damn American, but G.. Damn America’ and so on. Well, I haven’t made mention of such on Republic Sentry. Don’t believe it would be productive to savage one party while advocating for a different party. But, if these fools want to act thusly then the voters should take them on, IMO. Should we just ignore them, be silent and hope they get defeated in 2012. And, to see how these same people who want to put the boot of socialism on your throat, have incestously laid the ground work for potentially trillions of green energy (Cap and Trade) dollars to flow into their coffers multiplies the egregious factor, IMO. Glenn’s red phone ain’t rung yet and don’t guess it will.

And, for that crowd to portend they are concerned about civil rights re the Az law is just preposterous. If you are an admitted preacher of socialism, marxism, wishing to take the government down that road then why should they not be prejudged as to their civil rights position on immigration. Bull S..T, IMO.

Otherwise, we have the Socialistic-Corporatic government we deserve.

Dan, If your comments were addressed to me, I have to say that I think I have been doing a good job of weaning myself away from a 40+ year association with the Democratic Party. In the last two primaries and one general election, I have voted for two Democrats, both non-incumbents. I have voted for every independent I had the opportunity to vote for and when the selection has been between an incumbent Democrat and a Republican, I have left it blank. I am sorry, but to ask this old progressive to vote for a Republican, especially a libertarian Republican like Rand Paul is beyond my capabilities.

“Now begins the talking points and attacks against Paul, but in reality, attacks against the TP movement.”

“Everything taken out of context and the LIES begin.”

Beretta9, perhaps your are trying to flatter me by placing me up there with the greats of talking points takers out of context and liars such as Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh, but really, I am not worthy of the comparison.

The TP may be just a movement but, if so it is being ill served by some who profess to be spokesmen for the movement.

If you prefer direct quotes, here is one for you.

“Islam is a 7Th Century death cult coughed up by a psychotic pedophile and embraced by defective, tail sprouting, tree swinging, semi-human, bipedal primates with no claim to be treated like human beings or even desirable mammals for that matter.”

Mark Williams
Chairman of the Tea Party Express

Is this true?

Do you think that statement can be spun out of context? Let me try.

Those defective, tail sprouting, tree swinging, semi-human, bipedal primates with no claim to be treated like human beings or even desirable mammals for that matter; are in fact, millions of human beings, created by God in his image.

Disclaimer: The Tea Party is mute and has no spokespersons.

Roy, you are succumbing to errant dichotomies which are Beck’s trademark. There is capitalism whose largest players aspire to monopolism and corporate control of governments sanctioned by the Republican Party, and then there is Socialism which taken to its fullest extent attempts to incorporate all human endeavor into the government’s control and regulation and dispensations while meting out an equal share to all, sanctioned by a few Democrats, but, not by any means, the whole Party.

The reality is we have such extremists in America on both sides. But, it is also a reality that the mixing of the best of both economic philosophies resulted in the building and expansion of the wealthiest nation on earth and the broadest middle class of any population on earth. That mix is out of whack, and has grown more so ever since the Democrats defeated God Reagan’s Bork nomination for the Supreme Court. The hyper-partisanship and growth of the extremists in both parties and in our Congress can be traced back to that seminal event in which neither of the duopoly parties could forgive or tolerate the actions of the others surrounding the Bork nomination.

Beck fuels this hyper-partisanship dichotomy, which is, to a very large extent responsible for the gross extremist measures taken by our Supreme Court, Congress, and Presidents of late. You and I agree that the Duopoly Party cannot extricate itself from this extremism on both sides. I think we agree that the people, through their anti-incumbent vote in ever greater numbers, can force these parties back from their extremism.

The only question for me is, can we accomplish this in time to save our nation’s future and preserve our first world nation status. I truly don’t know. And not knowing demands that I do my best to insure that we do accomplish this in time. As I said, to the extent that Beck is promoting anti-incumbent voting he is doing this country some good. But, to the extent that he is also promoting extremism and hyper-partisan divides, he is undoing the good at the same time.

If voting out incumbents is successful and in time, the American people must mandate, as a majority consensus, their demands of the reformed parties and government so that the remaining incumbents and newly elected freshman have a clear course of action to win back the anti-incumbent vote. Beck is working to destroy that public consensus and mandate by promoting distortions, exagerations, and partisan ideology which works against a public agenda of the majority and consensus and tolerance of Americans toward fellow Americans. He is preaching hate of those Americans who don’t mirror his views. Hate is not how one holds together a nation and salvages its future.

Hate and intolerance of differing views is how you bring a great nation down. Which is the objective and strategy of al-Queda, and now Taliban of Pakistan. Hate and intolerance is how you get normal young men to kill fellow human beings in war, and not be deterred or regretful or pained by it for as long as possible. Hate and intolerance for others because of their views and ideas within a nation brings violence and even war to the streets of that nation, as we have witnessed with the Civil War, the race riots of the 1940’s and 50’s, and the burning and looting of our cities in the 1960’s and 70’s, and the murder crime waves of the 20’s and 80’s, and the Oklahoma federal building bombing and Uni-bomber, and anthrax attacks by mail, and ‘postal’ homicides of the 80’s and 90’s, as a short list of examples.

An appeal to people’s reason instead of their passions is what our nation needs today. The riled passions of the public is precisely what the founding fathers feared in giving suffrage to the public. Beck and Rush and Bachman are working to bring about the worst fears of the founding fathers, mob rule. That is not where we need to go, nor how we need to get there, IMO.

The American people are already angry and disappointed. What they want and need now is a reasoned and rational course of Constitutional and law abiding action to channel their their anger and disappointment through to effect the changes they know must occur for the future of their nation and their children. That is what VOID and the anti-incumbent movement provide. And why it is growing in numbers and confidence.

jlw, No, my comment was at no single person in particular.

It was to all party-lever pulling, delusional party-loving loyalists, who love THEIR party more than their nation, more than common-sense, more than honesty and virtue, and who don’t yet see that their loyalty is severely misplaced, and that there is little difference between the two major parties (aside from their two equally destructive left/right extremes), and spend a lot of time fueling the partisan-warfare (which is exactly the mindless, circular trap that many politicians want to lure mindless voters into).

Democrat voters bash Republican voters.
Republican voters bash Democrat voters.
Independent voters bash both, but still split their votes to both.
Many politicians love it all, because Congress still has 90% re-election rates, while luring the majority of voters to wallow in the circular, divisive, destructive partisan-warfare.

Too many in Congress are literally FOR-SALE, incompetent, and corrupt.
Examples of their corruption would fill volumes.
Examples of their incompetence is clearly evident today.
Examples of their carrying the water only for their wealthy puppeteers are numerous and disgusting.

The majority of voters mostly have only themselves to thank for all of it.

Roy, You’re right.
Simply voting out bad politicians is not enough.
But, it’s a start.
Voters have to do their part too.
Voters’ laziness costs them dearly.
Voters are their own worst enemy, because they have the power to change it, but their own laziness, delusion, greed, and short-term selfishness stands in their way.
It’s easier to shift the blame to the OTHER party, while ignoring 90% re-election rates for Congress.
40% of voters don’t even bother to vote at all.
Too many voters don’t even know their Congress persons, much less their voting records.
Too many voters blindly pull the party-lever.
Too many voters prefer to wallow in the circular, distracting, divisive, blame-shifting partisan-warfare.
Too many voters fail to see that they are the biggest part of the problem.
So, while many people are blaming the OTHER party, or doing nothing at all, Congress enjoys 90% re-election rates, automatic annual raises, and their cu$hy, coveted seats of power, perk$, and luxury at the tax-payers’ expense.
Cha Ching!
The politicians love it!

But, perhaps there’s hope.
But it is sad that significant pain and misery is required first to motivate enough voters to pull their heads out.
It was gratifying to see Arlen Specter finally get the boot, after 30 years in Congress.
When I saw that video where Arelen Specter said “My change in party will allow me to be re-elected”, I wondered if the Pennsylvania voters would still reward him with re-election too.

Such arrogance is incredible.
But the voters look the other way all too often.
But how arrogant can a person be to think that such a thing (see this video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=x97DdZho11k) would be over-looked too?

It’s encouraging, but even though Specter lost, he still received a lot of votes.

Voters also need to keep a closer eye on their elected representatives, and rewarding corruption and failure certainly is not the answer.

Education is also part of the solution.
Too many voters believe that THEIR politicians and THEIR party is better.

Yet, for many years, no one has yet been able to list at least 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, or even 268 (half of 535) in Congress that are not FOR-SALE, and/or irresponsible, and/or incompetent, and/or corrupt?

But if one party was actually better than the other, then why have so many things continued to deteriorate significantly for several decades, despite BOTH parties having been the IN-PARTY and OUT-PARTY?
Perhaps 90% re-election rates has something to do with it?

Regarding the Tea Party, those people have a right to be angry. Unfortunately, they lack focus, and they’ve been infiltrated by cheaters who have their own inappropriate political and religious agendas. If the Tea Party would simply focus on these 10 major abuses, they might have the my support, as well as many other Americans’ support.

The problem is not only the politicians.

The problem is also (if not mostly) the voters.

At any rate, the majority voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, … , at least perhaps, until repeatedly rewarding failure and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, and corrupt incumbent politicians, and repeatedly rewarding THEIR party with 90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful?

“For some who claims to be INDEPENDENT, they appear extremely DEMOCRAT.”

Dan, that seems rather specific to me, there are few on here who meet that criteria.

When Democrats were blaming Phil Gramm for GBL, I was the one that reminded them that a large majority of Democrats voted for it and Clinton signed it into law.

When Democrats and some independents were claiming that to elect Obama was to elect change, I declared that Obama was a corpocracy candidate and would be a corpocracy president.

When Democrats say that their politicians are not to blame, that Bush is, I’ve been there to remind them that a majority of Democrats voted for most of the Bush/Republican agenda.

When Democrats say they haven’t had enough time to turn things around, give them a chance, I remind them that as far as the corpocracy is concerned, their politicians aren’t interested in turning things around. I also tell them that the American people are all out of chances to give and they want results. I realize this isn’t totally true because of the partisanship but, the first law of governance has always been divide and conquer.

“Regarding the Tea Party, those people have a right to be angry.”

Almost all of us have a right to be angry, especially in regards to the government. But, it seems to me is that what they are most angry about is that the Republicans did not eliminate the social programs when they had the opportunity to do it. I haven’t heard any of the Tea Partiers express anger over a 750 billion dollar defence budget. What I here some of them saying is the liberals have made the poor to lazy to work because they give them welfare. They want to ignore the fact that a majority of those receiving assistance do work or were working before the economic down turn. They are angry about illegal immigration, so am I, but scapegoating the immigrants isn’t the solution. They need to stop scapegoating the poor and do as you say, concentrate on solutions. To do that you have to compromise with your fellow citizens.

“and they have been infiltrated by cheaters who have their own inappropriate political and religious agenda.”

This is true, but when they say that Paul is being taken out of context while Paul is backpedaling like a son of a gun or that the views of the Chairman of the Tea Party Express are his own and not the views of the Tea Party, it does them no good. When reform movements have supposed leaders who make outlandish statements, the duopoly has the ammunition it needs to discredit the entire reform movement.

Rand Paul complained day before yesterday that it was unfair that journalists were quoting IN context. That’s a new one. Not very clever, however. Young and inexperienced is Rand Paul. He apparently went to school, but, is one of the throng there that didn’t learn much, from what I can tell, so far.

He fails to consider and define his audience before speaking, and exercising the discipline to speak to their concerns, not his own. A real political rookie this. But, give him time, I am sure Congress will corrupt him far more than it did his Dad, who remains a man of principled integrity, though I think his principles are half-baked. Convert to a gold standard? Surest way to global depression I can think of. But, his principle is sound: stop printing money and devaluing the currency while increasing the debt and service on that debt.

As to socialist and Marxist enjoying the good life here in this country, I thought they had all died out after the 20=30’s. I believe a lot of them were locked up during the war years. I suppose some of them found their way into government back then but now they are in the White House. Indeed, they are the one’s shouting fire and throwing money at the fire to put it out. Taxpayer money, being whizzed away by a bunch of socialist and Marxist. Hard to get your mind around. Nothing from the media or from any quarter leading up to the elections. Jerimiah Wright was the only clue that I know of during that time frame. I would say the Democrat’s feel right at home with these radicals, putting forth bills and voting for them. Hopefully, they have expended their ‘capital’ and can’t do further damage in the coming year and a half. A bunch of socialist raping the taxpayers for a four year stretch, and few complaining. Just incredulous! They should all be impeached and thrown in jail, IMO.
Dan, a real good post, telling it just like it is. The people have cynically left the Republic and the Constitution to defend itself. ‘Liberty and freedom to hell, and pass them Tostitos over here’. Joel Hirschhorn recommends making voting mandatory, making election day a national holiday, holding all primaries on the same day. All sensical ideas to me. Allowing felons who have served their time, to vote. All that stuff is in the Republic Sentry Party mission/agenda. But, I’m thinking that the agenda should be strictly limited to removing the Corpocracy from power; abolishment of corporate personhood, money is free speech law and getting on with campaign finance reform. Reason being is that none of the other stuff could ever happen unless the Corpocracy is removed. Going to take a heap of education to get folks on the right track.
Beck is doing a great job with his Founder’s Friday. This past Friday he related that a dome replica of the Washington monument is on display at some museum. The dome has a religious inscription on the side facing the East. Beck sez the dome is turned so that the public can’t view the side with the religious inscription. People are beginning to return to their roots but will be a long slow process. I hope it can be done in a year and a half.

Otherwise, we have the Socialistic-Corporcratic government we deserve.

Roy, you are forgetting the 8 years of socialists doubling the national debt and taxes for ALL Americans going forward, called the Republicans. When it comes to fiscal issues, you can’t tell the left socialists from the right socialists in history. Even Reagan was fond of increasing debt and taxes for Americans to follow his leaving office.

THe only difference between the two parties is the target of their socialized spending. Republicans love to spend our money on their wealthy buddies and corporate subsidies and outsourcing even when it costs more in the private sector. Democrats love to spend our money on the have-nots, presumably to insure a broader voter base. When it is done on the taxpayer’s credit card, it is harmful to the nation and future generations, and Party makes no difference at all.

Good point David. Well aware of social welfare for the rich. An insider recently noted that about six tax breaks a week get processed, unobserved by the public, for the corporations. Well, are we to believe that congress folks don’t participate in this process? They do, but choose to say nothing. Just like taking perks and earmarks. One congressperson can’t complain about the other’s earmarks as that other may complain when it comes time for earmarks for the congressperson. Just keep it quiet and keep it going! For instance, they’ve passed a healthcare bill and the Corpocracy will spend the next 4 or 5 years filling in the blanks.

Yes, interesting how outsourcing by the Repub’s fits the socialist new world order agenda. Corpocracy at its finest.

If you like arrogant Boxer then vote for her. If you like Fiorina then vote for her.

Lizzie, and if you want to improve Congress overall, join the millions who will NOT be voting for ANY incumbent for Congress this year, but, their challenger, instead, regardless of party. It will be a powerful message to those in the Party leadership and Congress, that the people are taking matters back into their own hands.

Fiorina was an pain in the butt leader at HP, tearing the company to bits until she was pushed out. No surprise that she’ll be a pain in the butt in congress, if elected. Ultimately, Boxer is a HUGE pain the butt. No matter how many problems Fiorina has, she’ll still be seven times better than Boxer.

Whatever happened to Chuck DeVore’s campaign?