'Freshly Ground Black People'

[Bruce Majors]

>
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/04/17/aussie-cookbook-recalled-recipe-includes-freshly-ground-black-people/?test=latestnews
>Aussie Cookbook Recalled After Recipe Includes 'Freshly Ground Black
> People'
>
> NewsCore
>
> It is a tiny misprint, but an Australian publisher had to pulp a cookbook
> after one recipe called for "salt and freshly ground black people" to be
> added to the dish, AFP reported Saturday.
>
>   It is a tiny misprint, but an Australian publisher had to pulp a
> cookbook after one recipe called for "salt and freshly ground black people"
> to be added to the dish, AFP reported Saturday.
>
> Penguin Group Australia pulped and reprinted about 7,000 copies of "Pasta
> Bible" after the typographical error was found in the ingredients for spelt
> tagliatelle with sardines and prosciutto, The Sydney Morning Herald
> reported.
>
> "We're mortified that this has become an issue of any kind, and why anyone
> would be offended, we don't know," head of publishing Bob Sessions was
> quoted as saying.
>
> Penguin said almost every one of the more than 150 recipes in the book
> called for salt and freshly ground black pepper but a misprint occurred on
> just one page, probably as a result of a computer's spellchecker program.
>
> "When it comes to the proofreader, of course they should have picked it up,
> but proofreading a cookbook is an extremely difficult task. I find that
> quite forgivable," Sessions said.
>
> He said it would be extremely hard to recall the stock but if anyone
> complained about the "silly mistake" they would be given the new version.
>
>
 __._,_.___
  Reply to 
sender|
Reply
to 
group|
Reply
via web 
post|
Start
a New 
Topic
Messages in this
topic(
2)
 Recent Activity:


 Visit Your 
Group
 MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get
the Yahoo! Toolbar
now.
  --

Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms like
you.
 --

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new
interests.
  [image: Yahoo!
Groups]
Switch to: 
Text-Only,
Daily 
Digest•
Unsubscribe•
Terms
of Use 
   .

__,_._,___

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

dangers of municipal lead pipes studied

[Bruce Majors]

Where are the dwindling flocks of Obama
sheeple?
A recent study conducted jointly by the World Health Organization, the
Cleveland Clinic and the Pritzker School of Medicine at the University of
Chicago reveals that most Obama sheeple reside in cities with older decaying
municipal water systems with leads pipes and high levels of contaminants
By:Bruce P. Majors 
Photos:1
**
5 seconds 
ago
 · Comment · Like ·
Share

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Learn How to Pronounce Eyjafjallajökull Volcano-Bre itbart.tv »

[Bruce Majors]

*IMPRESS YOUR FRIENDS-LEARN HOW TO PRONOUNCE "AIV-A -LOAV -ICK"--LISTEN TO
THE COACH ---*
http://www.breitbart.tv/learn-how-to-pronounce-eyjafjallajokull-volcano/

 __._,_.___
  Reply to 
sender|
Reply
to 
group|
Reply
via web 
post|
Start
a New 
Topic
Messages in this
topic(
1)
 Recent Activity:


 Visit Your 
Group
 IF YOU DON'T STAND BEHIND OUR TROOPS, FEEL FREE TO STAND IN FRONT OF THEM!
Please visit: www.operationshoebox.com
 MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get
the Yahoo! Toolbar
now.
  --

Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms like
you.
 --

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new
interests.
  [image: Yahoo!
Groups]
Switch to: 
Text-Only,
Daily 
Digest•
Unsubscribe  •
Terms of Use 
   .

__,_._,___

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Justice Clarence Thomas: We're 'evading' eligibility--WND Article

[Bruce Majors]

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=142101


*BORN IN THE USA?
* Justice Clarence Thomas: We're 'evading' eligibility Does testimony hint
at division behind Supreme Court's doors?
--
Posted: April 17, 2010
4:13 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2010 WorldNetDaily


Justice Clarence Thomas

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas told a House subcommittee that
when it comes to determining whether a person born outside the 50 states can
serve as U.S. president, the high court is "evading" the issue.

The comments came as part of Thomas' testimony before a House appropriations
panel discussing an increase in the Supreme Court's budget earlier this
week.

Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y., actually raised the
question first amid a discussion on racial diversity in the judiciary.

"I'm still waiting for the [court decision] on whether or not a Puerto Rican
can run for president of the United States," said Serrano, who was born in
the island territory. "That's another issue."

Yet after Serrano questioned him on whether or not the land's highest court
would be well-served by a justice who had never been a judge, Thomas not
only answered in the affirmative, but also hinted that Serrano would be
better off seeking a seat in the Supreme Court than a chair in the Oval
Office.

"I'm glad to hear that you don't think there has to be a judge on the
Court," said Serrano, "because I'm not a judge; I've never been a judge."

"And you don't have to be born in the United States," said Thomas, referring
to the Constitution, which requires the  president to be a natural-born
citizen but has no such clause for a Supreme Court justice, "so you never
have to answer that question."

"Oh really?" asked Serrano. "So you haven't answered the one about whether I
can serve as president, but you answer this one?"

"We're evading that one," answered Thomas, referring to questions of
presidential eligibility and prompting laughter in the chamber. "We're
giving you another option."

A portion of the exchange, captured on video by C-SPAN, can be seen below:

*(Story continues below)*

  **



Serrano opened the hearing by noting the jersey number 42 taped to the
platform in honor of black baseball star Jackie Robinson, who 63 years ago
this week broke professional baseball's "color barrier" when he took the
field for the Brooklyn Dodgers.

Serrano also took a moment to honor the Supreme Court's first Hispanic
justice, Sonia Sotomayor:

"I'd like to note before we begin this hearing that there has been a change
at the Court, which has special meaning to the Court, to the American
society in general, and to me personally," Serrano said, "because Sonia
Sotomayor comes from the South Bronx, from the area that I represent and the
area I grew up in and her parents were born in the same island of Puerto
Rico that I was born in."

Though the hearing was specifically called to address the Court's request
for an increase in funding, the racial themes continued when Rep. Barbara
Lee, D-Calif., took Thomas and the Supreme Court in general to task for not
employing more minority clerks and staff.

Thomas, in turn, praised the value of having people of diverse backgrounds,
career paths and regions of the country serving in the judiciary and on
Supreme Court staff.

Serrano then asked if Supreme Court would do well to have justices that
weren't promoted from the appellate courts, but rather came from state
courts or even the ranks of elected officials, laying the foundation for the
later banter over Serrano as president or justice.

As WND 
reported,
Justice Thomas had previously resurrected a case challenging Barack Obama's
eligibility to be president not based on his birthplace, but on whether
Obama, a child born to a foreign national and admitting dual citizenship,
would still be eligible under the Constitution's Article 2, Section 1
"natural-born citizen" requirement.

*New strategy unveiled on answering Obama's eligibility questions. See how
you can help.* 

Hints of division within the Supreme Court on the issue existed as far back
as December 2008, as Justice David H. Souter had initially denied the case a
hearing, but Justice Thomas agreed to bring it back for review. The case did
not, however, obtain the required approval of four justices to move it
forward to a full hearing.

So far, the Supreme Court has not yet heard any case challenging Obama's
eligibility on any grounds.

WND has reported on multiple legal
challengesto
Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article
2,
Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of
the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall
be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether Obama wa

Re: How to tell your feet stink

[Travis]

Very cute.  Thanks

On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Cold Water  wrote:

>
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at 
> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

lowest polls yet for government

[Bruce Majors]

Poll: 4 out of 5 Americans don't trust Washington[image:
AP]<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/ap/brand/SIG=11f589428;_ylt=AkXvYXpKk5NnO_NaUML4aj52wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTBzc2k0M2xoBHBvcwMxBHNlYwN5bi1wcnZkbGluawRzbGsDYXA-/**http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ap.org%2Ftermsandconditions>

   - Buzz up!313 votes
   - 
Send<http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylt=Avl1prnqCfszs51UNOenj1p2wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTBtMjViYjc3BHBvcwMxBHNlYwN0b3AEc2xrA3NlbmQ-/SIG=1a1d5hj9c/**http%3A//m2f.news.yahoo.com/mailto/%3Fprop=news%26locale=us%26url=http%253A%252F%252Fnews.yahoo.com%252Fs%252Fap%252F20100419%252Fap_on_go_ot%252Fus_government_distrust%26title=Poll%253A%2B4%2Bout%2Bof%2B5%2BAmericans%2Bdon%2527t%2Btrust%2BWashington%26h1=ap/20100419/ap_on_go_ot/us_government_distrust%26h2=T%26h3=513>
   - 
Share<http://delicious.com/save?url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100419/ap_on_go_ot/us_government_distrust&title=Poll%3A+4+out+of+5+Americans+don%27t+trust+Washington+-+Yahoo%21+News>
   - 
Print<http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100419/ap_on_go_ot/us_government_distrust/print;_ylt=AuHd1omUTHBzENNdtz7Y0ht2wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTBvajZzaTFyBHBvcwMxNQRzZWMDdG9wBHNsawNwcmludA-->

[image: Greenroom: Tax Day Tea Party]Play
Video<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/external/abc/av_abc_tw/02e889c67e12fd984e5412338997717f/35858821;_ylt=AoDTwmC5EF9qBSCY.5pOVxN2wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTE5c2E0YnJyBHBvcwMxBHNlYwN5bl9yX3RvcF92aWRlbwRzbGsDZ3JlZW5yb29tdGF4/*http://news.yahoo.com/video/politics-15749652/19207045>ABC
News<http://news.yahoo.com/video/abc-news/this-week;_ylt=AhrZNRrDABpVGCtpKuYWONR2wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTE0dmxwNXIxBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5bl9yX3RvcF92aWRlbwRzbGsDYWJjbmV3cw-->
 – Greenroom:
Tax Day Tea Party

   - [image: Roundtable: Financial Regulation]Play
Video<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/external/abc/av_abc_tw/266e495b31153d4775342491afd4f756/35858822;_ylt=AqP8KlD98w0Nv.tdoX5uwd12wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTFib3IzOWliBHBvcwMzBHNlYwN5bl9yXzNzbG90X3ZpZGVvBHNsawN2aWQtZWQtdGh1bWI-/*http://news.yahoo.com/video/politics-15749652/19207035>
   *Video:*Roundtable: Financial
Regulation<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/external/abc/av_abc_tw/266e495b31153d4775342491afd4f756/35858822;_ylt=AvWY7qQHXX1mvd.n426XQ6J2wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTFhMWNndjh1BHBvcwM0BHNlYwN5bl9yXzNzbG90X3ZpZGVvBHNsawN2aWQtZWQtbGluaw--/*http://news.yahoo.com/video/politics-15749652/19207035>
ABC 
News<http://news.yahoo.com/video/abc-news/this-week;_ylt=ApPiwBXRkJcMM9Ix67YsKOV2wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTFiczhtZHE2BHBvcwM1BHNlYwN5bl9yXzNzbG90X3ZpZGVvBHNsawN2aWQtZWQtcHJvdmk->
   - [image: President Pushes to Regulate Wall Street]Play
Video<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/external/abc/av_abc_gma/d7e6b14e1567ecd75d80ea027a576daf/35857824;_ylt=AlfESYgcoaC__p_pNkbi1y12wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTFibHVkMmRiBHBvcwM2BHNlYwN5bl9yXzNzbG90X3ZpZGVvBHNsawN2aWQtZWQtdGh1bWI-/*http://news.yahoo.com/video/politics-15749652/19206106>
   *Video:*President Pushes to Regulate Wall
Street<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/external/abc/av_abc_gma/d7e6b14e1567ecd75d80ea027a576daf/35857824;_ylt=Aj6DTRGuG0y5S_9JXc3qB.B2wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTFhaG4wYjBmBHBvcwM3BHNlYwN5bl9yXzNzbG90X3ZpZGVvBHNsawN2aWQtZWQtbGluaw--/*http://news.yahoo.com/video/politics-15749652/19206106>
ABC 
News<http://news.yahoo.com/video/abc-news/good-morning-america;_ylt=Ar9J4Rsjo7t638S.qq4wEMt2wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTFiM2t1Y29jBHBvcwM4BHNlYwN5bl9yXzNzbG90X3ZpZGVvBHNsawN2aWQtZWQtcHJvdmk->

[image: FILE - In this April 15, 20010 file photo, a couple participate in
the Tax Day tea protest in New York. Can you trust Washington? Nearly 80
percent 
o]<http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Pew-Research-Center/photo//100419/480/urn_publicid_ap_org_a802606b39b34c77a29500809fb5cabd//s:/ap/20100419/ap_on_go_ot/us_government_distrust;_ylt=Aju6zYtHkaiHdELTBtrcGE52wPIE;_ylu=X3oDMTFhMmt2ZG5vBHBvcwM5BHNlYwN5bl9yX2p1bXBfcGhvdG8Ec2xrA2ZpbGUtaW50aGlzYQ-->AP
– FILE
- In this April 15, 20010 file photo, a couple participate in the Tax Day
tea protest in New York. …
By LIZ SIDOTI, AP National Political Writer – 1 hr 23 mins ago

WASHINGTON – America's "Great Compromiser" Henry Clay called government "the
great trust," but most Americans today have little faith in Washington's
ability to deal with the nation's problems.

Public confidence in government is at one of the lowest points in a half
century, according to a survey from the Pew Research Center. Nearly 8 in 10
Americans say they don't trust the federal government and have little faith
it can solve America's ills, the survey found.

The survey illustrates the ominous situation President Barack Obamaand
the Democratic
Party face as they struggle to maintain their comfortable congressional
majorities in this fall's elections. Midterm prospects are typically tough
for the party in power. Add a toxic environment like this and lots of
incumbent Democrats could be out of work.

The survey found that just 22 percent of those questioned say they can trust
Washington almost always or most of th

] SNOPES NOT TO BE TRUSTED!

[Bruce Majors]

A good alternative to snopes is www.truthorfiction.com.  Again, don’t just
believe ANYTHING you read.  Who knows what their slant might be!  Snopes
isn’t to be trusted to provide ACCURATE info, especially on alternative
medicine questions, political info, because they are biased, not truthful!,
and religious questions.  I have found them wrong or even lying on each of
these three issues, and who knows how many others.




* *

About  SNOPES.COM '

Who watches the watchers?
For the past few years http://www.snopes.com/  has positioned itself, or
others have labeled it, as the 'tell-all final word' on any comment, claim
and email. But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was
behind http://www.snopes.com/.

Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it - kinda made you wonder
what they were hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and
wife team - that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no
team of lawyers. It's just a mom-and pop operation that began as a hobby.
David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started
the website about 13 years ago - and they have no formal background or
experience in investigative research.

After a few years it gained popularity believing it to be unbiased and
neutral, but over the past couple of years people started asking questions
who was behind it and did they have a selfish motivation?

The reason for the questions - or skepticisms - is a result of
http://www.snopes.com/claiming to have the bottom line facts to certain
questions or issue when in fact they have been proven wrong. Also, there
were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to
the 'true' bottom of various issues.

A few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville hoisted a
political sign referencing Barack Obama and made a big splash across the
Internet, 'supposedly' the Mikkelsons claim to have researched this issue
before posting their findings onhttp://www.snopes.com/.

In their statement they claimed the corporate office of State Farm pressured
Gregg into taking down the sign, *when in fact nothing of the sort 'ever'
took place*. I personally contacted David Mikkelson (and he replied back to
me) thinking he would want to get to the bottom of this and I gave him Bud
Gregg's contact phone numbers - and Bud was going to give him phone numbers
to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who would have been willing to
speak with him about it. He never called Bud. In fact, I learned from Bud
Gregg*no one from **http://www.snopes.com/* * ever
contacted anyone with State Farm*.  Yet,http://www.snopes.com/ issued a
statement as the 'final factual word' on the issue as if they did all their
homework and got to the bottom of things - *not!*

Then it has been learned the *Mikkelsons are Democrats and extremely liberal
*. As we all now know from this presidential election, liberals have a
purpose agenda to discredit anything that appears to be conservative. There
has been much criticism lately over the Internet with people pointing out
the Mikkelsons liberalism revealing itself in their website findings. Gee,
what a shock?

So, I say this now to everyone who goes to http://www.snopes.com/ to get
what they think to be the bottom line facts ... '*precede with caution*.'
 Take what it says at face value and nothing more.  Use it only to lead you
to their references where you can link to and read the sources for yourself.
Plus, you can always Google a subject and do the research yourself.   It now
seems apparent that's all the Mikkelsons do.  After all, I can> personally
vouch from my own experience for their 'not' fully looking into things. *
*http://www.wikipedia.org/ *
*http://www.snopes.com/

I have found this to be true also! Many videos of Obama I tried to verify on
Snopes and they said they were False... Then they gave their Liberal
slant...!!!   I have suspected some problems with snopes for some time now,
but I have only caught them in half-truths. If there is any subjectivity
they do an immediate full left rudder. Truth or Fiction's web-site
http://www.truthorfiction.com/  is a better source for verification, in my
opinion.

I have recently discovered that is http://www.snopes.com/ is owned by a
flaming liberal and this man is in the tank for Obama. There are many things
they have listed on their site as a hoax and yet you can go to YouTube
yourself and find the video of Obama actually saying these things. So you
see, you cannot and should not trust http://www.snopes.com/ for anything
that remotely resembles truth (SIC ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO LIBERAL vs
CONSERVATIVE CONCERNS)!   I don't even trust them to tell  me if email
chains are hoaxes anymore.

A few conservative speakers on MySpace told me about
http://www..snopes.com/ a
few months ago and I took it upon myself to do a little research to find out
if it was true. 

5 reasons why the Tea Partiers are right on taxes

[M. Johnson]

5 reasons why the Tea Partiers are right on
taxes
Apr 16, 2010 11:28 EDT
Here is the new Washington Consensus: American taxes must be raised
dramatically to deal with exploding federal debt since spending
can’t/shouldn’t be cut. Only the rubes and radicals of the Tea Party and
their Contract from America
movement think otherwise. And don’t worry, the economy will be just
fine.
Don’t believe it. While you will never hear this in the MSM, there is
plenty of academic research supporting the idea that cutting taxes and
spending is the ideal economic recipe for growth, jobs incomes and fiscal
soundness. (This all assumes that America’s amazing turnaround since 1980
isn’t

proof enough.)  Just take a look:
1) Tax cuts boost economic growth more than increased government
spending. Cutting spending is a better way to reduce budget deficits than
raising taxes.
“Large
Changes in Fiscal Policy: Taxes Versus Spending” ­ Alberto Alesina
and Silvia Ardagna, October 2009:

We examine the evidence on episodes of large stances in fiscal
policy, both in cases of fiscal stimuli and in that of fiscal adjustments
in OECD countries from 1970 to 2007. Fiscal stimuli based upon tax cuts
are more likely to increase growth than those based upon spending
increases. As for fiscal adjustments, those based upon spending cuts and
no tax increases are more likely to reduce deficits and debt over GDP
ratios than those based upon tax increases. In addition, adjustments on
the spending side rather than on the tax side are less likely to create
recessions.
2) Tax cuts boost growth. Tax increases hurt growth, especially if
used to finance increased government spending.
“The
Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes: Estimates Based on a New Measure of
Fiscal Shocks” ­ Christina Romer and David H. Romer, July
2007:

In short, tax increases appear to have a very large, sustained, and
highly significant negative impact on output. Since most of our exogenous
tax changes are in fact reductions, the more intuitive way to express
this result is that tax cuts have very large and persistent positive
output effects. … The resulting estimates indicate that tax increases are
highly contractionary. The effects are strongly significant, highly
robust, and much larger than those obtained using broader measures of tax
changes. The large effect stems in considerable part from a powerful
negative effect of tax increases on investment. We also find that
legislated tax increases designed to reduce a persistent budget deficit
appear to have much smaller output costs than other tax
increases.
3) Cutting corporate taxes boosts growth.
“The Effect of Corporate
Taxes on Investment and Entrepreneurship” ­ Simeon Djankov, Tim
Ganser, Caralee McLiesh, Rita Ramalho, Andrei Shleifer, January
2008:

We present new data on effective corporate income tax rates in 85
countries in 2004. The data come from a survey, conducted jointly with
PricewaterhouseCoopers, of all taxes imposed on “the same” standardized
mid-size domestic firm. In a cross-section of countries, our estimates of
the effective corporate tax rate have a large adverse impact on aggregate
investment, FDI, and entrepreneurial activity. For example, a 10 percent
increase in the effective corporate tax rate reduces aggregate investment
to GDP ratio by 2 percentage points. Corporate tax rates are also
negatively correlated with growth, and positively correlated with the
size of the informal economy.
4) Tax rates are reaching dangerous levels where higher rates bring
in less money. “The
Elasticity of Taxable Income with Respect to Marginal Tax Rates” ­
Emmanuel Saez, Joel Slemrod and Seth Giertz, May 2009:

Following the supply-side debates of the early 1980s, much attention
has been focused on the revenue-maximizing tax rate. A top tax rate above
[X] is inefficient because decreasing the tax rate would both increase
the utility of the affected taxpayers with income above [Y] and increase
government revenue, which can in principle be used to benefit other
taxpayers. Using our previous example … the revenue maximizing tax rate
would be 55.6%, not much higher than the combined maximum federal, state,
Medicare, and typical sales tax rate in the United States of
2008.
5) Cutting corporate taxes boosts wages.
“Taxes and
Wages” ­ Kevin Hassett and Aparna Mathur, June 2006:

Corporate taxes are significantly related to wage rates across
countries. Our coefficient estimates are large, ranging from 0.83 to
almost 1-thus a 1 percent increase in corporate tax rates leads to an
almost equivalent decrease in wage rates (in percentage terms). … Higher
corporate taxes lead to lower wages. A 1 percent increase in corporate
tax rates is associated with nearly a 1 percent drop in wage
rates.
There are plenty more, of course. The Tax Foundation
lists
a dozen recent studies how harmful business taxes are to growth, jobs
and wages. Economist

Greg Mankiw has determined America is far from a low tax nation. More
like in the middle. And let 

Populism, Left and Right

[M. Johnson]

Populism, Left and Right
Why the establishment hates it
by
Justin Raimondo,
April 19, 2010
The rise of an often militant right-wing populist movement – the
tea
partiers, the

Ron Paulistas, the

tenth amendment restorationists and the

regionalists – has the powers-that-be in a tizzy. On the
"progressive" left, we have Rachel Maddow sounding the alarm
about

hordes of armed militia types supposedly marching on Washington, in a
populist version of
Seven Days in
May. The
"brown
scare" now energizing those who call themselves progressives is
no longer limited to the familiar precincts of MSNBC and the
Obamaite/
limousine liberal wing of the blogosphere: now we have Bill Clinton

giving voice to the Bizarro World McCarthyism that now inspires the
"left." 
McCarthyism was the offspring of Senator Joseph
"Tail-Gunner
Joe" McCarthy, who carried out a campaign – some would say a
witch-hunt – against employees of the US government he accused of being
Communists or fellow travelers – that is, people who believed the
government should run everything. Not just the insurance industry, and
the auto industry, and the banking field – everything. While less
than judicious in his accusations, by accusing a whole lot of people,
McCarthy was often right, as the

Venona revelations and other surprises from the KGB archives later
proved. 
I have long been of the opinion that the 9/11 attacks impacted with such
physical and psychological force that they caused a rift in the
space-time continuum, and the Bizarro-McCarthyism that has maddened the
progressive left provides yet more validation of this theory. In
Bizarro World,
where up is down and
right is left, we have witch-hunts against those suspected of
harboring "anti-government" sympathies: that is, they are in
favor of freedom – an obviously subversive concept, which must be
ruthlessly exposed and suppressed.
A similar reaction is taking place, to a lesser extent, on the
establishment (i.e. neoconservative) right.

David Frum, the

Bush speechwriter and
co-author of the
"axis of evil" catchphrase, has become the liberal
establishment’s

favorite interview subject because he now spends all his time

attacking "right-wing extremism,"

most especially the

explicitly libertarian elements of the tea party movement. He has set
up his own movement, which might be called the "Scoop Jackson
Republicans," and a Web site
where one can go for regular denunciations of the tea partiers and pleas
for Republicans to moderate their message – except when it comes to
foreign policy,
naturally
enough. In that realm, it’s the same old Republican invade-the- world
globaloney: Iraq was a
"victory
," Afghanistan is a

necessity, and Israel must be defended and succored no matter the
damage to demonstrable American interests.
This ostensibly conservative hostility to the latest _expression_ of
American populism is hardly surprising. One of the founding myths of

neoconservatism is that populism, in all its forms, is always
dangerous, as it is invariably a carrier of the anti-Semitic virus. All
that constant guff we hear about "the "paranoid style in
American politics" comes directly from the neocons in their earlier,
"liberal" mandarin incarnation. The "paranoid" theme
was popularized by the historian
Richard
Hofstadter and a claque of neoconservative sociologists back in the
mid-Fifties and Sixties, who, in their classic anthology on

The Radical Right, and other works, applied the
sociological theories of the Marxist theoretician
Theodor
Adorno to the "problem" of fighting "extremism"
in the postwar world. Adorno and his disciples took the classical Marxist
theory of fascism as a phenomenon attributable to "the enraged
bourgeoisie" and gave it a sociological-Freudian gloss. 
According to these geniuses, all expressions of popular opposition to
Franklin
Roosevelt’s New Deal were merely symptoms of repressed hatred of the
father and inspired by the desire to kill him. The
"reactionary" subjects of their solemn sociological
examinations were invariably antisocial misfits, possessed of an
"authoritarian personality," and the clear implication was that
these types represented a threat to the social order, which it was in
society’s interest to suppress. 
These same leftist professors who had found their place in the postwar
economic and political order, and were firmly ensconced in their
comfortable university chairs, had furthermore decided that we had come
to
"
the end of ideology," the title of an essay (and later a book)
by one of their number. The old revolutionary spirit of the 1930s had
dissipated and proved to be an illusion, and on the right there were
merely reactionary tics, or as
Lionel
Trilling, one of their big heroes, put it , "just irritable
mental gestures." In shoring up the defenses of the postwar

Welfare-Warfare State, and the rising power and prestige of the
American empire, these former revolutionaries sought to defend the status
quo against all comers, who were to be banished

New Poll: American Jewish Voters Are Abandoning Obama

[Bruce Majors]

B



*New Poll: American Jewish Voters Are Abandoning
Obama*

Posted: 16 Apr 2010 08:14 AM PDT

Last week the American Jewish Congress released a poll that indicated
support for Barack Obama amongst American Jews was slipping but he still
held a sizable approval advantage amongst that group. At the time I
suggested that any political poll run by a major Jewish organization should
be taken with a grain of salt, because most of them are supporters of the
progressive agenda. Another Issue with the AJC poll is it questioned *all
Jews* as opposed to *likely voters*.

This morning *McLaughlin and Associates*
 released
an opinion poll of *likely Jewish voter*s which shows Jewish voters in
America are definitely wising up:

§  *Jewish voters would consider someone else for President*. According to
the 2008 exit polls, Barack Obama won 78% of Jewish voters. Now 17 months
later only 42% of voters would re-elect him while  46% would consider voting
for someone else. Just to put this into perspective, during the past 50
years, the lowest percentage a democratic presidential candidate has
received was the 45% that Jimmy Carter earned when he ran for reelection. If
the 2012 election were held today, Obama might do worse. The* AJC
Poll*
of
all Jews did not ask this question, but it did reflect that the President
had a 57% approval rating.

§ A significant portion of Jewish voters disapprove of the President’s
handling of relations with Israel 39% disapprove of the job Barack Obama is
doing handling America’s relations with Israel. When you consider the fact
that almost 60% of Jewish voters are Democrats this is a very bad number for
the POTUS.  The AJC poll of all Jews last week had similar numbers as 37%
disapproved of the President's job of handling Israel relations.

§ When you look at specific elements of Obama's Israel efforts, Jewish
voter's negativity regarding Obama rises.

§ Obama's rumored plan to recognize a Palestinian State Within two years  is
disapproved by 52% of Jewish votes.

§ 64% say that Jerusalem should remain the undivided capital of Israel.

§ 62% believe that the Palestinians would continue the campaign of terror to
destroy Israel if they were given a Palestinian state.

§  73% say that Israel is right to insist the Palestinians accepting
Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state before there are any negotiations
about a Palestinian state.

Jewish voters were a strong voting block for the President in 2008, but it
seems that they are waking up and smelling the chicken soup. Unlike *Democratic
party Israel supporters in
Congress*,
American Jewish voters are moving away from Barack Obama in droves. Unless
Obama changes his policy (which is not very likely), those Democrats better
wise up fast before their reelection chances are hurt by the President's
abandonment of our only ally in the Middle East.

Please email me at *yidwith...@aol.com*  to be put onto
my mailing list. Feel free to reproduce any article but please link back to*
http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com* 



 __._,_.___
  Reply to 
sender|
Reply
to 
group|
Start
a New 
Topic
 Recent Activity:

   - New 
Members
   1

 Visit Your 
Group
 MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get
the Yahoo! Toolbar
now.
  --

Welcome to Mom Connection! Share stories, news and more with moms like
you.
 --

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your pa

Re: Uncivilized Republican monkeys

[Zebnick]

Not a very good analogy with the monkeys, but a good analogy for YOU.
"Someone GIVES 10 bananas to ten monkeys." A perfect analogy for the
way liberals/socialists think.

On Apr 18, 2:27 pm, studio  wrote:
> What would happen if you gave 10 bananas to 10 monkeys?
>
> What will happen is that some monkeys will try to eat more bananas --
> the lion's share-- while others go hungry.
>
> So, say we have 10 bananas for 10 monkeys.
> Someone will eat 4, another 2, and so on.
> If they eat 1 banana each, they would be socialist.
> But if some ate more, they would be Republican.
>
> That's what monkeys do, they take as much as they can and have no
> concern for others.
> Some call it "the law of the jungle", or even "human nature".
> If that were indeed the case, killing your neighbor and taking all his
> stuff would be considered perfectly acceptable behavior.
>
> But I digress; just who is it that is giving 10 monkeys 10 bananas?
> Certainly not a Republican because they don't care if all the other
> monkeys starve to death.
>
> So there you have it; Republicans are uncivilized monkeys.
> Let us all pray to the god of monkeys.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Tea Party Message: Vote Republican

[Zebnick]

You don't have to keep trying to prove you're a moron. Everyone
already knows.

On Apr 17, 12:46 am, studio  wrote:
> On Apr 16, 9:47 pm, "M. Johnson"  wrote:
>
> > Tea Party Message: Vote RepublicanPosted byLaurence Vanceon April 16, 2010 
> > 03:16 PM
> > The caption says it all: “Political strategist Dick Morris encourages the 
> > crowd to elect Republican leadership this November.” This event was in 
> > Fayetteville, AR. See my article, “Will the Republicans Save Us?”
> > So, Dick Morris is now a Tea Partier? God help us.
>
> Everyone at Fox News is either a Tea Partier or Republican of some
> sort or another, and they all go out and stump for them.
> The fair and balanced conservative way of course.
>
> > “Will the Republicans Save Us?”
>
> No, at best they want a police state driven by paranoia where they can
> control people; at worst they want a Biblical Rapture brought on by
> first strike nuclear warfare of their own making.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

There is Nothing Conservative About This President

[JSM]

There is Nothing Conservative About This
President
According to a new poll by the Pew Research Center, public confidence in
government is at one of the lowest points in a half
century.
Pew Research Center president Andrew Kohut writes in today's Wall Street
Journal:
"A desire for smaller government is particularly evident since Barack Obama
took office." Last March, by 54% to 37%, more people said it was a good idea
for the government to exert more control over the economy. Now, by 51% to
40%, a majority of Americans say they want less government control.

President Obama has always tried to cast himself as a centrist. During the
2008 campaign, he promised Americans he would cut their
taxes,
expand the 
military,
and enact "a net spending
cut"
for the federal government. Lower taxes, a strong defense and shrinking the
size of government; these are core conservative beliefs. Unfortunately,
President Obama has completely abandoned them by raising taxes on
lower-income 
Americans,
cutting defense
spending,
and enacting a $862 billion failed
stimulus
.

And we haven't even mentioned the President's health care plan yet. With
polls showing that the President's health care plan has only gotten less
popular since it became
law,
the White House has been desperate to portray their plan in as centrist a
light as possible. So on March 30th, President Obama told "Today" show host
Matt 
Lauerthat
"a lot of ideas in terms of the exchange, just being able to pool and
improve the purchasing power of individuals in the insurance market, that
originated from the Heritage Foundation." Heritage Center for Health Policy
Studies director Robert Moffit responds in today's Washington
Post
:

The Obama health-care law "builds" on the Heritage health reform model only
in the sense that, say, a double-quarter-pounder with cheese "builds" on the
idea of a garden salad. Both have lettuce and tomato and may be called food,
but the similarities end there.
...
For us, the health insurance exchange is to be designed by the states. It is
conceived as a market mechanism that allows individuals and families to
choose among a wide range of health plans and benefit options for those best
suited to their personal needs and circumstances. People would have a
property right in their health policy, just like auto or homeowners'
policies, and be able to take it with them from job to job.

Under the Heritage design, individuals could choose the health plan they
want without losing the tax benefits of employer-sponsored coverage. The
exchange we propose would be open to all state residents and -- very
importantly -- be free of federal regulation.

Under the president's law, however, the congressionally designed exchanges
are a tool imposed on the states enabling the federal government to
standardize and micromanage health insurance coverage, while administering a
vast and unaffordable new entitlement program. This is a vehicle for federal
control of state markets, a usurpation of state authority and the
suppression of meaningful patient choice. Heritage finds this crushing of
state innovation and experimentation repugnant.

This law constitutes a massive alteration of the constitutional balance of
power between the federal government and the states, and strikes at the
heart of American federalism.


This is not the first time the Obama administration has falsely claimed
Heritage Foundation support for its policies. During the 2008 campaign,
then-candidate Obama ran a multimillion-dollar television ad falsely
claiming that we supported his tax
plan

Re: Tea Party Message: Vote Republican

[studio]

On Apr 19, 11:13 am, Zebnick  wrote:
> You don't have to keep trying to prove you're a moron. Everyone
> already knows.

More on than off when it comes to Republitards fanciful delusions of
grandeur.

Republitards lost a lot of elections last few times for no other
reason than most people weren't buying their brand of war monger
paranoid Bible thumping non-sense anymore.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Republican animals

[studio]

Debates have gone on for years of whether pit bull dogs are
instinctively dangerous or not.
But in all fairness, any animal can be trained to be dangerous or
unruly...even people.

And that's precisely what Republicans brought to this country,
especially in the last 10 years.

The repeating Republican government mantras of;
war, military, law enforcement, spying, defense, secrets,
investigations, more police, wire tapping, enhanced interrogations,
water boarding, tactics, strategy, propaganda, lies, withholding
information, weapons research, tripling of military budgets, arms
build-ups, military recruitment's, deregulation's, skirting existing
laws...

On the captialism side of Republican policies we got;
more extreme forms of legalized fighting; television commercials of
revenge anti-social behavior or other angry dark forms of
salesmanship...even the music in the commercials was angry. Resistance
to financial reforms and whistle blowing of illegal or unethical
practices. Ignorance of consumer complaints of numerous kindsand a
host of other things that have only one purpose and one purpose
only...

...to make people angry, uncivilized, anti-social and dangerous
creatures. Some prone to running in packs like wild dogs. Watch Fox
News if you want to study this behavior.

That's the Conservative way of human nature, the law of the jungle,
and turning people into nothing more than desperate animals.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Uncivilized Republican monkeys

[studio]

On Apr 19, 11:06 am, Zebnick  wrote:
> Not a very good analogy with the monkeys, but a good analogy for YOU.
> "Someone GIVES 10 bananas to ten monkeys." A perfect analogy for the
> way liberals/socialists think.

Like I said, no conservative would ever give anything to
anyone...because their selfish monkeys.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Moonbattery Applied to the Automobile

[Gordon Urquhart]

Grow up Keith, with all due respect,of course.





From: Keith In Tampa 
To: politicalforum@googlegroups.com
Sent: Fri, April 16, 2010 11:48:48 AM
Subject: Re: Moonbattery Applied to the Automobile


Good afternoon Gordon and Studio,
 
Gordon, with all due respect, you don't have a clue about what you are talking 
about.   I expect no less from Studio, he usually rambles on about a number of 
subjects that he  is clueless about, but I haven't seen you post enough here to 
make that assumption.
 
First, your statement that, "A conservative would skim most profits and neglect 
its infrastructure, such as happend"  is ludicrous.  There is no evidence that 
this has ever happened with the automobile industry in the United States.  
 
If there were to be a culprit, we could certainly blame GM's leadership 
heirarchy for caving in to the Unions, which I surmise has been GM's biggest 
downfall, (and now, the Obama Administration has allowed for GM to be run and 
managed by the Union, so I see GM as being on its last vestiges of business 
activity) but I want to stay away from the Union for a moment, and point 
fingers at, "Government".
 
In 1997, the state of Alabama granted huge subsidies to Mercedes in exchange 
for a plant that would employ 1,500 people. What were the details of this huge 
incentive package? $300 million in tax breaks, $253 million in direct 
incentives, $60 million in Alabama taxpayer money to send fellow Alabamans to 
Germany for training, and a promise to buy 2,500 of the new Mercedes SUV’s at 
$30,000 each. Based on just the initial $300 million grant alone, those 1,500 
jobs will cost Alabama taxpayers $200,000 per job. Apparently Alabama, not 
Mercedes, will be paying those salaries for years to come. With deals like 
these, it’s no wonder foreign automakers have stepped up production in the U.S. 
We’ll even pay their workers’ salaries for them! 
In 1987, Toyota constructed an auto plant on part of the 1,500 acres of free 
land given to them in Georgetown, Kentucky. The auto plant was built by a 
Japanese steel company using Japanese steel. The U.S. government granted a 
“special trade zone” so that Toyota could import auto parts from Japan 
duty-free. Financing was handled by Mitsui Bank of Japan. Total federal and 
state grants and incentives exceeded $100 million. These subsidies, of course, 
were courtesy of your tax dollars. 
Tennessee gave Nissan $11,000 per job for their Smyrna plant built in 1980. 
South Carolina coughed up $79,000 per job to convince Germany’s BMW to build 
their plant in Spartanburg in 1992. Were you aware that our government was 
using your money to create jobs? Or are these merely job announcements where 
you and I foot the bill? Job announcements do make for great rhetoric for state 
governors’ re-election campaigns. How many years will it take a factory worker 
in Alabama to pay back the $200,000+ in tax money that the government gave 
away? A conservative answer would be “several.” 
This is not to say that American companies are not granted incentives to build 
plants here. The most recent is $100 million in incentives for Cadillac to 
build their next plant in Michigan. It is my opinion that we should not be 
imitating the Third World by using public money to bid for jobs. But when given 
the choice between foreign investment (Toyota, Mercedes, Nissan) and American 
investment (General Motors and Ford), American investment is much better for 
America. 
The deal Alabama gave Mercedes makes the deal Michigan gave GM seem rather 
frugal. The point here is that these huge incentives that are offered to 
foreign companies are rarely offered to our own companies here at home. Such 
incentives allow foreign companies to save hundreds or even thousands of 
dollars in costs per automobile. And American companies acquire more of their 
parts from domestic sources, so more jobs are created in the automotive parts 
industry in America.
On the other hand, Ford seems to be doing quite well.  Ford Motors has its 
Union in check, and is profitable.   
It's my opinion that both Ford, Chrysler, and even GM make far better 
automobiles than anything I have seen Toyota, Nissan Hyundai, or any other far 
eastern car manufacturer produce, especially as far as style, and looks.   
The Hummer was a car that was in great demand, because AMERICANS WANTED BIG 
CARS!!  There is still a big market for the Hummer.   


On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:05 PM, studio  wrote:

On Apr 16, 1:04 pm, Gordon Urquhart  wrote:
>> A conservative would skim most profits off of the top and neglect it's 
>> infrastructure such as happened.Personally the big three stopped making 
>> quality vehicles in the mid seventies.My last U.S. made vehicle wasn't even 
>> a big three automobile , I recently sold my stock 1951 Henry J.GM , Ford and 
>> Chrysler are in the fix that they are in today because they have built crap 
>> for the last forty years.Shit, the Chinese even finally

Re: Uncivilized Republican monkeys

[frankg]

And in your socialist world those ten bananas were taken from three
hard working monkeys. Soon, those hard working monkeys say screw it,
they’re tired of doing all the work, and decide to only collect one
banana each for themselves. Seven moneys die from starvation. Oops.

On Apr 19, 12:52 pm, studio  wrote:
> On Apr 19, 11:06 am, Zebnick  wrote:
>
> > Not a very good analogy with the monkeys, but a good analogy for YOU.
> > "Someone GIVES 10 bananas to ten monkeys." A perfect analogy for the
> > way liberals/socialists think.
>
> Like I said, no conservative would ever give anything to
> anyone...because their selfish monkeys.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Open-carry activists rally to challenge gun laws

[Daniel Seigler]

   Some might be interested in this, some not.  I for one would like to know 
how it turns out(meaning do I need to get MY guns?)  

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36635695/ns/politics-washington_post/
  
_
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Republican animals

[Cold Water]

Have you ever been baker-acted studio?  Why not send your last two original 
compositions posted to this group to your closest relative.  Get help dude!

CW


- Original Message - 
From: "studio" 
To: "PoliticalForum" 
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 12:48
Subject: Republican animals


Debates have gone on for years of whether pit bull dogs are
instinctively dangerous or not.
But in all fairness, any animal can be trained to be dangerous or
unruly...even people.

And that's precisely what Republicans brought to this country,
especially in the last 10 years.

The repeating Republican government mantras of;
war, military, law enforcement, spying, defense, secrets,
investigations, more police, wire tapping, enhanced interrogations,
water boarding, tactics, strategy, propaganda, lies, withholding
information, weapons research, tripling of military budgets, arms
build-ups, military recruitment's, deregulation's, skirting existing
laws...

On the captialism side of Republican policies we got;
more extreme forms of legalized fighting; television commercials of
revenge anti-social behavior or other angry dark forms of
salesmanship...even the music in the commercials was angry. Resistance
to financial reforms and whistle blowing of illegal or unethical
practices. Ignorance of consumer complaints of numerous kindsand a
host of other things that have only one purpose and one purpose
only...

...to make people angry, uncivilized, anti-social and dangerous
creatures. Some prone to running in packs like wild dogs. Watch Fox
News if you want to study this behavior.

That's the Conservative way of human nature, the law of the jungle,
and turning people into nothing more than desperate animals.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more. 

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Republican animals

[Travis]

Not baker, BAKED.  Been in the hot sun wy to lng.  Brain
completely fried.

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Cold Water  wrote:

> Have you ever been baker-acted studio?  Why not send your last two original
> compositions posted to this group to your closest relative.  Get help dude!
>
> CW
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "studio" 
> To: "PoliticalForum" 
> Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 12:48
> Subject: Republican animals
>
>
> Debates have gone on for years of whether pit bull dogs are
> instinctively dangerous or not.
> But in all fairness, any animal can be trained to be dangerous or
> unruly...even people.
>
> And that's precisely what Republicans brought to this country,
> especially in the last 10 years.
>
> The repeating Republican government mantras of;
> war, military, law enforcement, spying, defense, secrets,
> investigations, more police, wire tapping, enhanced interrogations,
> water boarding, tactics, strategy, propaganda, lies, withholding
> information, weapons research, tripling of military budgets, arms
> build-ups, military recruitment's, deregulation's, skirting existing
> laws...
>
> On the captialism side of Republican policies we got;
> more extreme forms of legalized fighting; television commercials of
> revenge anti-social behavior or other angry dark forms of
> salesmanship...even the music in the commercials was angry. Resistance
> to financial reforms and whistle blowing of illegal or unethical
> practices. Ignorance of consumer complaints of numerous kindsand a
> host of other things that have only one purpose and one purpose
> only...
>
> ...to make people angry, uncivilized, anti-social and dangerous
> creatures. Some prone to running in packs like wild dogs. Watch Fox
> News if you want to study this behavior.
>
> That's the Conservative way of human nature, the law of the jungle,
> and turning people into nothing more than desperate animals.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at 
> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at 
> http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Muhammid appears on epic 200th South Park episode (pics)

[Travis]

 Muhammid appears
on epic 200th South Park episode
(pics)
*creeping * | April
19, 2010 at 11:30 AM | Tags: Creeping
Sharia,
Humor ,
islam,
Life ,
Media,
Muslim ,
News,
Politics ,
Random,
Religion ,
Sharia| Categories:
Creeping
Sharia ,
Humor ,
Media,
News ,
Politics,
Religion ,
Sharia|
URL:
http://wp.me/pbU4v-5mU

Ok, a stick figure drawing of Muhammid, and Mo behind a censor bar, and Mo
in a bear suit. But he may appear in the next episode as Tom Cruise tries to
harness the power that the jihad holds the free world hostage over: Islamic
blasphemy. CAIRorist press release in 3, 2, 1...

View the full [...]

Read more of this
post

Add a comment to this
post






  [image: WordPress]

WordPress.com  | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage 
Subscriptions|
One-click
Unsubscribe|
Express
yourself. Start a blog. 

*Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:*
http://subscribe.wordpress.com

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Muhammid appears on epic 200th South Park episode (pics)

[Cold Water]

I love South Park!!!

CW


- Original Message - 
From: Travis 
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 02:40
Subject: Muhammid appears on epic 200th South Park episode (pics)






Muhammid appears on epic 200th South Park episode (pics) 
  creeping | April 19, 2010 at 11:30 AM | Tags: Creeping Sharia, Humor, 
islam, Life, Media, Muslim, News, Politics, Random, Religion, Sharia | 
Categories: Creeping Sharia, Humor, Media, News, Politics, Religion, Sharia | 
URL: http://wp.me/pbU4v-5mU  

Ok, a stick figure drawing of Muhammid, and Mo behind a censor bar, and Mo in a 
bear suit. But he may appear in the next episode as Tom Cruise tries to harness 
the power that the jihad holds the free world hostage over: Islamic blasphemy. 
CAIRorist press release in 3, 2, 1...

View the full [...]

Read more of this post

Add a comment to this post 

 

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
  Manage Subscriptions | One-click Unsubscribe | Express yourself. Start a 
blog. 
 

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: 
http://subscribe.wordpress.com 




-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

If in doubt--throw it out--but wait!!

[Travis]

*Did you ever look at some substance and wonder; is it still good??*

*http://www.stilltasty.com/searchitems/search_page*
* *

* This web site will respond to specific questions about specific things.*

* It will ask, open or unopened--fresh, frozen etc.*

* This is a great web site……..*

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Militia movement will be packing heat at gun rally on the Potomac

[Travis]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/18/AR2010041802391.html?wpisrc=nl_headline



*Militia movement will be packing heat at gun rally on the Potomac*

By Ann Gerhart
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, April 19, 2010; A03

Daniel Almond, a three-tour veteran of Iraq, is ready to "muster outside
D.C." on Monday with several dozen other self-proclaimed patriots, all of
them armed. They intend to make history as the first people to take their
guns to a demonstration in a national park, and the Virginia rally is
deliberately being held just a few miles from the Capitol and the White
House.

Almond plans to have his pistol loaded and openly
carried,
his rifle unloaded and slung to the rear, a bandoleer of magazines
containing ammunition draped over his polo-shirted shoulder. The Atlanta
area real estate agent organized the rally because he is upset about
health-care reform, climate control, bank bailouts, drug laws and what he
sees as President Obama 's
insistence on and the Democratic Congress's capitulation to a "totalitarian
socialism" that tramples individual rights.

A member of several heretofore *little-known groups*, including Jews for the
Preservation of Firearms Ownership and Oath Keepers -- former and active
military and law enforcement officials who have vowed to resist laws they
deem unconstitutional -- Almond, 31, considers packing heat on the doorstep
of the federal government within the mainstream of political speech.

Others consider it an alarming escalation of paranoia and anger in the age
of Obama.

"What I think is important to note is that many of the speakers have really
threatened violence, and it's a real threat to the rule of law," Josh
Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said of
the program for the armed rally. "They are calling health care and taxes
that have been duly enacted by a democratically elected Congress tyrannical,
and they feel they have a right to confront that individually."

On the lineup are several heroes of the militia movement, including Mike
Vanderboegh,
who advocated throwing bricks through the windows of Democrats who voted for
the health-care bill; Tom
Fernandez,
who has established a nationwide call tree to mobilize an armed resistance
to any government order to seize firearms; and former Arizona sheriff
Richard Mack, who refused to enforce the Brady law and then won a Supreme
Court verdict  that
weakened its background-check provisions.

Those coming to the "Restore the Constitution" rally give Obama no quarter
for signing the law that permits them to bring their guns to Fort Hunt, run
by the National Park Service, and to Gravelly Point on the banks of the
Potomac River. Nor are they comforted by a broad expansion of gun rights in
several states since his election.

The brandishing of weapons is "not just an important symbol" but "a reminder
of who we are," said Almond. "The founders knew that it is the tendency of
government to expand itself and embrace its own power, and they knew the
citizenry had to be reminded of that."

Countered Horwitz: "Our founders thought they got rid of political violence
with the Constitution. That was its point. The basic idea of America is one
person, one vote, equality."

Vanderboegh and Horwitz both said: "We have a fundamental difference in
worldview."

April 19 is the anniversary of the bombing of the federal building in
Oklahoma City in 1995 and the government's final confrontation in 1993 with
the Branch Davidian cult members in Waco, Tex. But Almond said he chose the
date to honor the anniversary of the 1775 battles at Lexington and Concord
that began the Revolutionary War, "and that is the only reason."

So-called open-carry rallies have been sprouting across the country.
Hundreds gathered in Michigan, New Mexico and Ohio last week, and rallies
also are taking place Monday in Arizona.

Where demonstrations were once solely about the Second Amendment, speakers
now quickly link protecting gun rights to safeguarding all other liberties
and decry the new health-care legislation as unconstitutional in its mandate
that individuals must buy coverage.

On April 12 in Richmond, more than a hundred people, dozens sporting
pistols, cheered when Philip Van Cleve of the Virginia Citizens Defense
League called for replacing the "anti-Constitution, anti-freedom, anti-gun"
leadership of the state Senate and when Virginia Attorney General Ken
Cuccinelli II reaffirmed his
vowto
be "aggressive in protecting the Constitution, as
it was written."

There h

Iranian Nutcase: Promiscuous Women Cause Quakes

[Travis]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5inJDPJiXU9k0tYQetNGUhTCNqAcgD9F66BTO0



Iranian cleric: Promiscuous women cause quakes

By SCHEHEREZADE FARAMARZI (AP) – 1 hour ago

BEIRUT — A senior Iranian cleric says women who wear revealing clothing and
behave promiscuously are to blame for earthquakes.

Iran is one of the world's most earthquake-prone countries, and the cleric's
unusual explanation for why the earth shakes follows a prediction by
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that a quake is certain to hit Tehran and that
many of its 12 million inhabitants should relocate.

"Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt
their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently)
increases earthquakes," Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi was quoted as saying by
Iranian media.

Women in the Islamic Republic are required by law to cover from head to toe,
but many, especially the young, ignore some of the more strict codes and
wear tight coats and scarves pulled back that show much of the hair.

"What can we do to avoid being buried under the rubble?" Sedighi asked
during a prayer sermon Friday. "There is no other solution but to take
refuge in religion and to adapt our lives to Islam's moral codes."

Seismologists have warned for at least two decades that it is likely the
sprawling capital will be struck by a catastrophic quake in the near future.

Some experts have even suggested Iran should move its capital to a less
seismically active location. Tehran straddles scores of fault lines,
including one more than 50 miles (80 kilometers) long, though it has not
suffered a major quake since 1830.

In 2003, a powerful earthquake hit the southern city of Bam, killing 31,000
people — about a quarter of that city's population — and destroying its
ancient mud-built citadel.

"A divine authority told me to tell the people to make a general repentance.
Why? Because calamities threaten us," said Sedighi, Tehran's acting Friday
prayer leader.

Referring to the violence that followed last June's disputed presidential
election, he said, "The political earthquake that occurred was a reaction to
some of the actions (that took place). And now, if a natural earthquake hits
Tehran, no one will be able to confront such a calamity but God's power,
only God's power. ... So let's not disappoint God."

The Iranian government and its security forces have been locked in a bloody
battle with a large opposition movement that accuses Ahmadinejad of winning
last year's vote by fraud.

Ahmadinejad made his quake prediction two weeks ago but said he could not
give an exact date. He acknowledged that he could not order all of Tehran's
12 million people to evacuate. "But provisions have to be made. ... At least
5 million should leave Tehran so it is less crowded," the president said.

Minister of Welfare and Social Security Sadeq Mahsooli said prayers and
pleas for forgiveness were the best "formulas to repel earthquakes."

"We cannot invent a system that prevents earthquakes, but God has created
this system and that is to avoid sins, to pray, to seek forgiveness, pay
alms and self-sacrifice," Mahsooli said.

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Mexican Government Targets Oklahoma; State Lawmaker Calls for Tough Response

[Travis]

Screw Mexico.  GO OKLAHOMA!




  http://www.okhouse.gov/OkhouseMedia/ShowStory.aspx?MediaNewsID=3548

Mexican Government Targets Oklahoma; State Lawmaker Calls for Tough
Response

OKLAHOMA CITY (April 9, 2010) – In response to the Mexican government’s
efforts to "bully" the people of Oklahoma through a trade war, state Rep.
Randy Terrill today called for imposing "much tougher sanctions on illegal
aliens."
"This represents an attempt by a foreign nation to interfere with the
sovereign actions of a U.S. state," said Terrill, R-Moore. "We clearly not
only
have the right, but the responsibility to legislate for the public health,
safety, morals and welfare of our citizens – not theirs.
"The Mexican government should know that the people of Oklahoma will not be
bullied or intimidated by anyone, anywhere."
This week the Mexican House of Representatives passed a resolution
denouncing U.S. states that impose remittance taxes and calling upon the
Mexican
government to take trade measures against those states.
The resolution specifically targets Oklahoma, saying remittance legislation
enacted in this state is an "immoral, abusive and harmful" act against
"immigrants’ rights."
The resolution calls on the Mexican Foreign Affairs Ministry to ask
Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry to eliminate the fee (which he does not
unilaterally have
the authority to do) and urges the Mexican Government to suspend all of
its purchases of products originating in Oklahoma.
Last year, Oklahoma lawmakers voted to assess a 1-percent fee on funds
wired out of the state. Revenue collected from the fee is deposited in a
"Drug
Money Laundering and Wire Transmitter Revolving Fund."
The fee does not single out any one group of individuals.
Terrill noted the proposed sanctions on Oklahoma appear to be a violation
of the NAFTA agreement that could result in U.S. countermeasures on Mexico
as provided under the NAFTA accords, and that Oklahoma lawmakers also have
the ability to respond at the state level.
"If they want to talk about trade sanctions, then they need to first start
by cutting off all the dope coming into Oklahoma from Mexico and the
disaster of Mexican citizens who are being pushed into Oklahoma by the
shamefully
dysfunctional Mexican government, where they are draining tax dollars in
the areas of health care, education, welfare and corrections," Terrill said
"On a daily basis, the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics investigates cell
groups tied to some of the most powerful drug cartels in Mexico. Annually,
millions of dollars in illegal drugs are coming into Oklahoma from these
Mexican
cartels for nationwide distribution, and millions of dollars in illegal
drug proceeds are smuggled or wired back to the Mexican bank accounts of
drug
traffickers. Law-abiding citizens are not negatively impacted by The Wire
Transfer Fee. These individuals are able to redeem the fee on their income
taxes," said Darrell Weaver, director of the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics.
"A huge share of the drug problem in Oklahoma is clearly tied to narcotics
exported from Mexico along the I-35 corridor," Terrill said.
He said Oklahoma lawmakers would be fully justified under international law
to respond to the Mexican government’s provocations with improved
countermeasures against drug and alien smuggling from Mexican states.
"If they really want to pick this fight with Oklahoma, then I will be happy
to immediately introduce or amend legislation calling for the state’s
current asset-seizure and drug-forfeiture laws to be extended to all
immigration-related offenses," Terrill said. "I’d also like to have good
cause to
advance legislation denying state-issued birth certificates to children born

to illegal-alien parents. And we should restrict the actions of Mexican
consulars in Oklahoma who often assist illegal aliens attempting to
establish
permanent residence and find employment in the United States.
"I do however, urge the Mexican Congress to support a labor ‘boycott’ of
Oklahoma by investing in sustainable job creation at home," added Terrill.
"I will encourage our in-state development experts to assist them. It will
help improve the employment rate for U.S. citizens and law-abiding
immigrants during this national recession."
.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Muhammid appears on epic 200th South Park episode (pics)

[plainolamerican]

South Park
know the enemy
choose sides carefully

On Apr 19, 1:40 pm, Travis  wrote:
>      Muhammid appears
> on epic 200th South Park episode
> (pics)
> *creeping * | April
> 19, 2010 at 11:30 AM | Tags: Creeping
> Sharia,
> Humor ,
> islam,
> Life ,
> Media,
> Muslim ,
> News,
> Politics ,
> Random,
> Religion ,
> Sharia| Categories:
> Creeping
> Sharia ,
> Humor ,
> Media,
> News ,
> Politics,
> Religion ,
> Sharia|
> URL:http://wp.me/pbU4v-5mU
>
> Ok, a stick figure drawing of Muhammid, and Mo behind a censor bar, and Mo
> in a bear suit. But he may appear in the next episode as Tom Cruise tries to
> harness the power that the jihad holds the free world hostage over: Islamic
> blasphemy. CAIRorist press release in 3, 2, 1...
>
> View the full [...]
>
> Read more of this
> post
>
> Add a comment to this
> post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
>   [image: WordPress]
>
> WordPress.com  | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
> Manage 
> Subscriptions|
> One-click
> Unsubscribe|
> Express
> yourself. Start a blog. 
>
> *Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your 
> browser:*http://subscribe.wordpress.com
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Mexican Government Targets Oklahoma; State Lawmaker Calls for Tough Response

[plainolamerican]

In response to the Mexican government’s
efforts to "bully" the people of Oklahoma through a trade war, state
Rep.
Randy Terrill today called for imposing "much tougher sanctions on
illegal
aliens."
---
it's just a matter of time

choose sides carefully

On Apr 19, 3:14 pm, Travis  wrote:
> Screw Mexico.  GO OKLAHOMA!
>
>  http://www.okhouse.gov/OkhouseMedia/ShowStory.aspx?MediaNewsID=3548
>
> Mexican Government Targets Oklahoma; State Lawmaker Calls for Tough
> Response
>
> OKLAHOMA CITY (April 9, 2010) – In response to the Mexican government’s
> efforts to "bully" the people of Oklahoma through a trade war, state Rep.
> Randy Terrill today called for imposing "much tougher sanctions on illegal
> aliens."
> "This represents an attempt by a foreign nation to interfere with the
> sovereign actions of a U.S. state," said Terrill, R-Moore. "We clearly not
> only
> have the right, but the responsibility to legislate for the public health,
> safety, morals and welfare of our citizens – not theirs.
> "The Mexican government should know that the people of Oklahoma will not be
> bullied or intimidated by anyone, anywhere."
> This week the Mexican House of Representatives passed a resolution
> denouncing U.S. states that impose remittance taxes and calling upon the
> Mexican
> government to take trade measures against those states.
> The resolution specifically targets Oklahoma, saying remittance legislation
> enacted in this state is an "immoral, abusive and harmful" act against
> "immigrants’ rights."
> The resolution calls on the Mexican Foreign Affairs Ministry to ask
> Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henry to eliminate the fee (which he does not
> unilaterally have
> the authority to do) and urges the Mexican Government to suspend all of
> its purchases of products originating in Oklahoma.
> Last year, Oklahoma lawmakers voted to assess a 1-percent fee on funds
> wired out of the state. Revenue collected from the fee is deposited in a
> "Drug
> Money Laundering and Wire Transmitter Revolving Fund."
> The fee does not single out any one group of individuals.
> Terrill noted the proposed sanctions on Oklahoma appear to be a violation
> of the NAFTA agreement that could result in U.S. countermeasures on Mexico
> as provided under the NAFTA accords, and that Oklahoma lawmakers also have
> the ability to respond at the state level.
> "If they want to talk about trade sanctions, then they need to first start
> by cutting off all the dope coming into Oklahoma from Mexico and the
> disaster of Mexican citizens who are being pushed into Oklahoma by the
> shamefully
> dysfunctional Mexican government, where they are draining tax dollars in
> the areas of health care, education, welfare and corrections," Terrill said
> "On a daily basis, the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics investigates cell
> groups tied to some of the most powerful drug cartels in Mexico. Annually,
> millions of dollars in illegal drugs are coming into Oklahoma from these
> Mexican
> cartels for nationwide distribution, and millions of dollars in illegal
> drug proceeds are smuggled or wired back to the Mexican bank accounts of
> drug
> traffickers. Law-abiding citizens are not negatively impacted by The Wire
> Transfer Fee. These individuals are able to redeem the fee on their income
> taxes," said Darrell Weaver, director of the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics.
> "A huge share of the drug problem in Oklahoma is clearly tied to narcotics
> exported from Mexico along the I-35 corridor," Terrill said.
> He said Oklahoma lawmakers would be fully justified under international law
> to respond to the Mexican government’s provocations with improved
> countermeasures against drug and alien smuggling from Mexican states.
> "If they really want to pick this fight with Oklahoma, then I will be happy
> to immediately introduce or amend legislation calling for the state’s
> current asset-seizure and drug-forfeiture laws to be extended to all
> immigration-related offenses," Terrill said. "I’d also like to have good
> cause to
> advance legislation denying state-issued birth certificates to children born
>
> to illegal-alien parents. And we should restrict the actions of Mexican
> consulars in Oklahoma who often assist illegal aliens attempting to
> establish
> permanent residence and find employment in the United States.
> "I do however, urge the Mexican Congress to support a labor ‘boycott’ of
> Oklahoma by investing in sustainable job creation at home," added Terrill.
> "I will encourage our in-state development experts to assist them. It will
> help improve the employment rate for U.S. citizens and law-abiding
> immigrants during this national recession."
> .
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
T

To Hell on a Fast Horse: Billy the Kid, Pat Garrett, and the Epic Chase to Justice in the Old West

[Travis]

 *Revising the Revisionists*

Posted By *David Forsmark* On April 19, 2010 @ 12:02 am In *FrontPage* | *3
Comments
*

*To Hell on a Fast Horse:**
Billy the Kid, Pat Garrett, and the Epic Chase to Justice in the Old West*
By Mark Lee Gardner
Morrow, $26.99, 336 pp.

Some things never change.  The New York Times, for instance, can always show
sympathy for a cop killer with an excuse.

In 1926, a Times book reviewer criticized *The Saga of Billy the Kid*, one
of the first books on the Kid and Pat Garrett that relied on actual
reporting, for presenting Garrett as a hero.  The critic, who apparently had
watched a few too many Tom Mix movies, thought the lawman with eight kids to
feed should have given Billy “a chance to fight for his life.”

I didn’t know liberals were so into dueling. The statement is doubly ironic
since the Kid’s most famous killing was the straight-up bushwacking ambush
of the (admittedly corrupt) sheriff of Lincoln County, New Mexico.

Nearly a century later, the Times can still find fault with nearly every
police shooting, while it romanticizes cold-blooded cop killers for
“standing up to the Man”—especially if their politics are radical.

The story of Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid often has been used as sort of a
pseudo-Marxist fable– though, unlike Jesse James, John Dillinger and other
outlaws who attained such status, the Kid didn’t rob banks.

One of the more infamous accounts of the legend is Sam Peckinpah’s *Pat
Garrett and Billy the Kid, *a glum disaster of a movie that basically killed
what was left of the drunken director’s career (plus nearly snuffed out the
Western genre itself in the early ’70s).  Peckinpah imagined Garrett as a
man who is bitter about being used as a capitalist tool to kill off a young
rebel threat who sits around grousing about the greedy businessmen who have
destroyed the code of the West.

But the truth comes out in Mark Gardner’s *Hell on a Fast Horse: Billy the
Kid, Pat Garrett, and the Epic Chase to Justice in the Old West. *He reports
Garrett was an enthusiastic, if not terribly successful, capitalist himself
who had invested in and started several large cattle concerns and other
enterprises.

And while Billy may have been on the right side in the famed Lincoln County
War, it was the only time in his life that the career horse thief and casual
killer had any justification for his actions.

*To Hell on a Fast Horse* may not present a lot of new information, but it
is a vividly told, action-packed and thoroughly enjoyable look at the
complete lives of two of the Old West’s iconic figures.

Gardner tells the story as parallel biographies. The Kid was not born
William Bonney (as usually reported) but probably Henry McCarty, the son of
a poor Irish refugee.  A petty thief who gradually drifted West ahead of the
law, the Kid graduated to stealing horses and constantly practiced with his
pistols.  Personally charming, the Kid attracted a loyal band of cohorts —
and women — and his dash and daring earned him admiration among some in the
general public.

Garrett, meanwhile, was almost the Kid’s direct opposite.  A tall man of few
words, Garrett was born on a prosperous Louisiana plantation but sought his
fortune in the West. He worked as a buffalo hunter and cowboy, saving his
money until he opened his own saloon in Lincoln County.  Garrett married
Juanita Gutierrez, who died within months of the wedding. (The Kid, along
with most of the county’s folks, probably attended the wedding reception,
leading to the myth, central to Peckinpah’s film, that Garrett and the Kid
had been good friends.) Garrett then married Juanita’s sister, Apolinaria,
who bore him nine children.

Two things would forever shape how the American public would view both
men.  First, the irony that the Kid worked his first straight job for John
Tunstall, the most sympathetic figure in the Lincoln County War, a smaller
entrepreneur looking for fair treatment in the cattle market. After Tunstall
was shot down in cold blood, many saw the Kid’s subsequent actions —
including shooting a corrupt sheriff from ambush — as honorably seeking
vengeance and justice for his dead boss. His real motives, however, were far
cloudier than that.

Garrett, on the other hand, would never live down the fact that he
ultimately shot the Kid from a position of advantage in the dark, even
taking into account the number of deputies Garrett had lost in the pursuit
of the Kid, and his belief that the Kid was armed and making a move on him.

Garrett never garnered a reputation like Wyatt Earp, Bill Hickok and other
legendary lawmen because of how he shot the Kid in the dark. Ironically,
Garrett’s detractors generally ignore that the Kid had shot Lincoln County’s
Sheriff Brady from ambush– and that Garrett had captured the Kid alive once,
only to have the outlaw murder one of his deputies and escape.

*To Hell on a Fast Horse* at times reads

Re: Redneck Word for Today

[plainolamerican]

fuck the yankees and their hypocrisy

as the South goes so does the rest of the nation

On Apr 19, 3:07 pm, Travis  wrote:
> I think this is not a Redneck word but a Democrat word.  And I would suggest
> using this (see attachment) to clean onself afterwards.  Of course BO TP may
> not work as nothing esle associated with BO works either.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Cold Water  wrote:
> >    * *
>
> > *REDNECK WORD FOR TODAY:  * *
> > OBAMA*
> >          [image: cid:_2_02C2350402C231C4004BAD4C85257583]*
> > I BOUGHT ME A CASE* *
> > OF BEER AND* *
> > DRANK IT **OBAMA **SELF*
>
> >  --
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community 
> > athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
>  image001.jpg
> 49KViewDownload
>
>  ObamaToiletPaper.jpg
> 26KViewDownload

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

“The extremists are coming! The extremists are coming!”

[M. Johnson]

“The extremists are coming! The extremists are coming!”

Posted by Butler
Shaffer on April 19, 2010 03:06 PM 
It is interesting to watch the political establishment implode. Having
slurred critics of the war system and the rapidly expanding growth of
political power as “anti-Semites” and/or “racists,” the champions of a
system of state-dominated society have kicked their sense of desperation
into high gear. While Reuters reported an opinion poll showing nearly 80%
of Americans saying they don’t trust the government, the voices of state
power work feverishly to characterize critics of the state as did one
historian who informed the New York Times that the Tea Partiers, for
instance, “are the same angry, ill-informed, overwhelmingly white,
crypto-corporate paranoiacs” who embrace the “blithely narcistic
presumption that the vast majority of Americans . . . already agree with
them.” Given the aforementioned opinion poll, one has to wonder just who
is “ill-informed.” What with the American government conjuring up wars
based upon lies, forged documents, and other acts of deceit; with the
economic system in a state-created turbulence; with the shoveling of
hundreds of billions of dollars into the coffers of corporations friendly
to the state; with major corporations [e.g., General Electric, Bank of
America] paying no federal income tax this year; and with Washington
endeavoring to create a situation to justify an unprovoked, “pre-emptive”
attack on Iran with nuclear weapons, it is the height of elitist
arrogance to charge tens of millions of Americans as “extremists” for
objecting to such moral and intellectual corruption. A twisted logic is
now in place amongst the establishment voices: those who object to
government practices = militia extremists = Timothy McVeigh [CNN has
devoted numerous hours these past few days to the Oklahoma City bombing
of fifteen years ago].
It is important to bear in mind the admonition of the late George Carlin:
“I never believe anything the government tells me!” At the same time, be
aware that political systems – ALL political systems – are grounded in
the unprincipled use of violence. Their machinations – while outwardly
cloaked in the language of “public interest,” very quickly erupt into the
self-serving violence dramatized so effectively in the “Godfather” films!
When their special interests are threatened – such as by most members of
the public no longer buying into their racket – they have the legalized
forth – and the willingness to exert it – to resort to whatever desperate
measures they deem necessary.





-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Speak to me of Rep Foley now

[dick thompson]

   

*Massa saga just heating up*
By: Jonathan Allen
April 19, 2010 04:50 AM EDT

For nearly a year, the allegations of scandalous activity in former Rep. 
Eric Massa 's 
office were kept quiet --- by the congressman, by male aides 
 who accuse him of 
sexually harassing them and by other congressional staff. 

But with two aides coming forward last week to announce that they had 
filed harassment claims 
 against the New 
York Democrat, charges and countercharges are exploding into full public 
view, ensuring that the Massa saga 
 will not simply 
go away. 

Instead, it will raise old questions about whether Congress is able to 
effectively police its own members and staff, and the degree to which 
staff members are responsible for --- or even capable of --- reining in 
lawmakers who are accused of abusing their power. The answers may become 
apparent only if the ethics committee reports on its investigation into 
the matter or if sexual harassment claims filed with the congressional 
Office of Compliance are not settled by the parties. 

One thing is clear: Despite Congress's voting in 1995 to subject its 
members and staff to basic employment laws, there are still tremendous 
institutional obstacles --- both structural and political --- in the 
path of aides who believe they have suffered discrimination or harassment. 

Lawyers for an anonymous Massa aide who made public this week a sexual 
harassment claim against the former congressman portray a lawmaker whose 
behavior escalated from juvenile to loutish to sexually harassing in a 
short period of time and a senior management team that, for months, 
ineffectively attempted to handle the matter internally. 

"Despite the fact that this was a major problem in the office, no one 
was able to rein in the congressman's behavior until it exploded," Debra 
Katz, an attorney for the anonymous aide, told POLITICO last week. 

At the top of that management team was Joe Racalto 
, who announced 
Friday that he had filed his own sexual harassment claim against Massa. 
Racalto raised concerns about elements of Massa's behavior to an aide of 
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi 
 (D-Calif.) in 
October 2009 --- about seven months after the lawyers for the anonymous 
aide say allegations of Massa improperly touching staff were first 
brought to senior management in his congressional office --- according 
to Pelosi's office. The Pelosi aide was told that Massa was living with 
several of his aides and used inappropriate language around the office, 
according to another Pelosi aide. 

The announcement of Racalto's harassment claim against Massa came less 
than two hours after POLITICO reported that Massa's campaign paid 
Racalto a lump sum of $40,000 
 on March 4, the 
day before the congressman officially resigned from the House. 

Massa told The Associated Press on Saturday that he didn't authorize 
that payment or a $40,000-per-year raise Racalto received in his 
official capacity as chief of staff, a bump Massa said required that his 
signature be forged. Massa added that he would notify the proper 
authorities about the matter.
Racalto's attorney, Camilla C. McKinney, contradicted Massa, saying that 
both the campaign payment and the congressional office salary hike were 
proper and authorized.


McKinney accused Massa of trying to undercut her client's sexual 
harassment claim.


"The former congressman is trying to discredit someone who is making a 
sexual harassment complaint against him," she said.


Still, the timing of the campaign's payment, amid Massa's resignation 
and an ethics committee investigation into the matter, is sure to raise 
eyebrows. Racalto, who is still employed by the House, has spoken with 
the ethics committee on several occasions, according to McKinney.


Though the panel no longer has jurisdiction over Massa, it has been 
pursuing an informal investigation into how lawmakers and their aides 
handled allegations that the congressman was sexually harassing his aides.


In addition to other questions about the payments to Racalto, aides at 
Racalto's pay level have an outside-income limit of $26,550, and it is 
not clear whether the lump-sum payment from the campaign would put his 
earnings over that cap.


Racalto's lawyers say the campaign money was a "deferred payment" for 
work done after the 2008 election and in preparation for the 2010 
election, though The Washington Post reported that several sources 
challenged whether Racalto did any substantial campaign work.


Katz said her client's claim includes allegations that Massa groped, 
touched

Facts are facts

[JSM]

Isn’t it interesting that barry (AKA Obama, the illegal) sends millions of
dollars to bring Palestinians to the US for ‘resettlement’ and yet not one
Muslim country will accept Pals into their country.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Hot Muslim Women

[Travis]

http://funnycrave.com/girls-girls-girls-hot-chicks-in-burkas/3455/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+funnycrave+%28FunnyCrave%29

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Chairman Zero's Favorite Propaganda Outlet Paid No Taxes Last Year

[Travis]

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2010/04/chairman-zeros-12.html

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Why the Civil War?

[M. Johnson]

Why the Civil War? 
Posted by Butler
Shaffer on April 19, 2010 04:16 PM 
With secession being more openly discussed as a political option, it is
instructive to read/listen to the responses of the statists. The
superficial answer has been the non sequitur that “the civil war
resolved this question.” This is no more intellectually viable an
argument than to suggest that Ronald Reagan’s presidential victories
resolved the question of the policies of future occupants of the White
House. It also ignores two important points: (1) secession is a remedy
necessarily implied in the “social contract” theory of the state. (That
governments have never been created by contract, but always by conquest,
need not concern us at this point. The statists like to insist upon the
social contract explanation, so they must take all aspects of contract
theory.) (2) This nation traces its beginnings back to the Revolutionary
War, which was premised on the legitimacy of secession from British rule.
Intelligent minds need read only the first portion of the Declaration of
Independence to confirm this.
It was almost amusing to read a recent article/editorial in the
Minneapolis StarTribune bemoaning a resolution unanimously passed by
Republicans in Minnesota’s Fifth Congressional District. The resolution
read: “Be it resolved the Republican Party of Minnesota supports
nullification of unconstitutional federal laws and secession as options
to enforce state sovereignty.”
The newspaper writer declared that “Jefferson Davis . . . couldn’t have
written it any better,” then alluded to the “nearly 300 Minnesotans [who]
lost their lives in the Civil War, fighting to keep the United States
whole.” Her comment would seem to fly in the face of establishment-driven
American history, that has long insisted that the Civil War was fought to
free the slaves.
I cannot speak to the motives of Northern soldiers who fought in this
war. My grandfather (who I never knew) and his three brothers fought for
the North (my grandfather was the only one of the four who survived it).
I strongly suspect that the motives of most soldiers was – as reflected
in some of Mark Twain’s personal recollections ­ based more on seeking an
“adventure” than fighting for any political or humanitarian principle.
Still, it is interesting to note how interchangeable are the explanations
of the Civil War ­ and of Abraham Lincoln, for that matter ­ when it
comes to upholding the priority of centralized federal power.





-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Column about Clinton's speaking about the OKC bombing and the Tea Partiers

[dick thompson]

 Tuesday, April 20, 2010


 BLANKLEY: There Bill Clinton goes again

Tony Blankley 

Former President Bill Clinton last week inadvertently demonstrated Karl 
Marx's shrewd observation, "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, 
second as farce." The historical event in question is the attempt to 
deter by smearing a broad-based, popular, American anti-high-tax, 
anti-big-central government movement as likely to induce seditious 
violence against the government.


The historic example of this calumny was Alexander Hamilton's slander 
against Thomas Jefferson and James Madison's emerging 
Republican/Democratic Party. The first repetition, as tragedy, was Bill 
Clinton's attack on the Republican Contract With America rhetoric 
following the Oklahoma bombing in 1995 - which resulted in deflecting 
the upward progress of conservatism from the summer of 1995 onward.


The second repetition - this time as farce - occurred last week as, once 
again, Mr. Clinton went back to his once-trusty playbook and implied 
that this time, the Tea Party rhetoric might result in political violence.


By coincidence, I have found myself involved in both of Mr. Clinton's 
attempted repetitions. As Newt Gingrich's press secretary in 1995, I 
received the calls of reporters asking me to respond to Clinton White 
House-generated accusations that our Contract with America rhetoric had 
caused Timothy McVeigh to bomb the Oklahoma City government building. As 
preposterous as the charge was - advocating constitutional, limited 
government is inherently nonseditious, nor did we ever call for violence 
of any sort - the charge had its intended effect and put Mr. Clinton 
back in the political driver's seat in Washington after the drubbing he 
took the previous November.


Being a shrewd student of history, Mr. Clinton doubtlessly got the idea 
from Federalist Hamilton's initially successful effort to tar 
anti-Federalists Jefferson and Madison's effort to squelch a big federal 
government from overwhelming American liberty.


Back-country resistance to Hamilton's new excise tax on distilling and 
selling liquor was overcharacterized as a violent rebellion (the famous 
Whisky "Rebellion"). Hamilton and his people warned darkly that 
thousands of rebels were going to march on Philadelphia. America's first 
large standing army was raised while Jefferson was being slandered by 
Hamilton for encouraging "rebellion."


As Jefferson wryly observed at the time: "An insurrection was announced 
and proclaimed and armed against, and marched against, but could never 
be found." Does that sound familiar? Were unrecorded rude words really 
uttered at the Tea Party event on Capitol Hill last month? No matter. 
Those who made the claims hoped even the unproved charge would help the 
government against the Tea Party movement. Don't bet on it.


Back in 1794, after the fact, Hamilton said: "The insurrection will do 
us a great deal of good and add to the solidity of everything in this 
country." In fact, as historian Gordon Wood has written, "so much did 
the rebellion redound to the benefit of the national government that 
some thought the Federalists were behind the entire uprising."


Eventually, the Federalists fell because, inter alia, the vast public 
they slandered turned out not to like being lied about by their 
"betters." So was born - then - the Democratic Party.


By chance, I was on CNN's "Situation Room" on Friday to comment on Mr. 
Clinton's latest attempt to smear anti-tax, anti-big-government 
grass-roots efforts. Unlike in 1995, now I had the advantage of being 
familiar with subsequent statements by Clinton aides and others. So, on 
the show, I quoted from Mr. Clinton's chief speechwriter in a 2000 
interview on PBS' "Frontline."


Michael Waldman said, describing Mr. Clinton's words immediately after 
the 1995 Oklahoma bombing, that "he also very skillfully used the moment 
to begin the process of making people wonder about the Republican 
revolution on Capitol Hill. ... And very subtly and appropriately, by 
planting the national flag in opposition to that [GOP rhetoric and the 
McVeigh bombing] began to turn the political tide as well."


To which the PBS correspondent, Chris Bury, correctly asked: "Couldn't 
[Clinton] be accused of manipulating a terrible tragedy in order to do 
that?" Indeed.


How closely the Clinton strategy paralleled Hamilton's. Consider the 
description of Hamilton's method by Jefferson's ally Madison: "The game" 
Madison explained in a letter, "was to connect the democratic societies 
[those accused of encouraging the insurrection] with the odium of the 
insurrection - to connect the Republicans in Congress (Jefferson, 
Madison, et al.) with those Societies - to put the President ostensibly 
at the head of the other party, in opposition to both."


And just as some Americans came to suspect the Federalists of provoking 
that of which they accused

This commenter makes a very good point and one that our beloved leader doesn't seem to understand

[dick thompson]

El Pollo Real  said...

From the NYT article you linked:

/In the current U.S. debate over health care reform, "rationing" has 
become a dirty word. Meeting last month with five governors, President 
Obama urged them to avoid using the term, apparently for fear of evoking 
the hostile response that sank the Clintons' attempt to achieve reform./


That sort of linguistic manipulation that nobody seems to care about 
concerns me.


4/19/10 6:41 PM

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Start the Revolution! Government is out-of-touch with the People!

[NoEinstein]

The Right to Privacy Should Have Few Limits

The ragtag US Supreme Court is about to consider a case that concerns
whether an employer has a right to monitor private text messages, or
other information, kept on a company BlackBerry (or computer).  While
writing my New Constitution, I would occasionally read or hear, in the
news, that some suspect’s personal computer was confiscated.  If there
is obvious criminality, and a person’s computer is known,
conclusively, to have information documenting illegal activity, then,
a judge should be able to issue a warrant to search that computer.
However, I strongly suspect that warrants are being issued to search
any and all ’personal property’ for incriminating evidence—without
anyone being sure that such information will be found.  Anytime that
happens, it is indicative of the very worst aspects of a police
state.  And it is must stop!

A computer can contain typed information which is akin to having one’s
THOUGHTS recorded in digital form.  The 5th Amendment protects a
person from self-incrimination.  Accessing any person’s… thoughts—
contained within a computer—is very much like letting that person self-
incriminate, without first reading them their rights.  Most of those
reading this, though not criminals, wouldn’t want an employer, or the
police, discovering their most private inner thoughts.  People who
have had their homes broken into by robbers often report feeling
violated, because personal things were gone through.  Whether that
person is a thief; one’s employer; or the police, there would still be
a feeling of violation of privacy.

If the police don’t find anything incriminating in the computer, no
one is arrested.  But the person whose computer was just searched has
still been violated!  And it must stop!  My New Constitution contains
broad extensions of the protection of private property from
unreasonable searches and seizures:

“5th Amendment:  A person may be held for a capital or other infamous
crime only after indictment by an unbiased Grand Jury, except in cases
relating to land or naval forces, or the militia, when in actual
service in time of war or public danger.  No person shall be subject,
for the same criminal offense, to twice be put in jeopardy of life or
limb; *** nor shall any person be compelled in any criminal case to be
a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or
property without due process of law; nor shall private property be
taken for public use without just compensation.  Voluntary testimony
by a defendant shall not negate such person’s rights to have
discretionary, selective protection against self-incrimination.  The
assessment of a penalty in a civil case shall not automatically limit
the assessment of further reasonable penalties for the same offense in
a subsequent trial(s).  In criminal cases, there may be an aggregation
of lesser penalties in lieu of a single larger penalty, and such
doesn’t violate the double jeopardy clause.  A contempt of court
charge shall carry a maximum, conglomerate, 30 day prison sentence.”

“Citizens’ rights in their homes or on their property are inviolable
by governmental edict without due process of law.”

“If the public isn’t injured, it’s not a crime to flee or hide from
injustice, nor to aid another, therewith.  *** Nor is it a crime, or
proof of a crime, for an innocent person to lie to protect their own
privacy, or the privacy of an innocent person.”

“4th Amendment:  People, their motor vehicles, boats, possessions,
clothes, phones, computers and other personal or private effects shall
be secure in their houses, or other abodes, or on the associated owned
or rented property, or at their place of work against unreasonable
searches and seizures.  Warrants may be issued only with just,
probable cause, supported by a recent eye witness’s oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and
the persons or things to be seized.  No warrant shall be issued based
on supposition, chance or a presumed likelihood of finding evidence.
The obtaining or issuing of a warrant without just, probable cause is
a felony, as is the serving of a wrongful warrant by an armed
officer(s).  Law enforcement shall not presume that a major crime may
have occurred or might be in progress because of a petty crime; nor
shall arrests be allowed that are due mainly to a person’s propinquity
to a crime.  A person arrested without resistance who is not a suspect
in a provable crime of violence, may be searched, but not shackled, if
they voluntarily agree to transport themselves, or to be transported;
nor shall shackles nor prison clothes be used during the voluntary
transport of such person to or from a public proceeding or court.
Anyone who is arrested, detained, searched or has property seized
because of a warrant shall have a public warrant hearing within 24
hours.  Such hearing, with competent counsel, shall be before the
judge issuing the warrant; the basis for issuing the war

Re: “The extremists are coming! The extremists are coming!”

[studio]

I don't understand why conservatives are so mad about Bush Jr. having
tripled the military and law enforcement budgets now?
Conservaturds, it's just to protect you, that's why it's called
"defense". You got what you wished for. Now they'll enforce the laws.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Uncivilized Republican monkeys

[studio]

On Apr 19, 1:49 pm, frankg  wrote:
> And in your socialist world those ten bananas were taken from three
> hard working monkeys. Soon, those hard working monkeys say screw it,
> they’re tired of doing all the work, and decide to only collect one
> banana each for themselves. Seven moneys die from starvation. Oops.

???
You mean hard working Republican monkeys doing all the work?
That doesn't make sense. Republican monkeys don't work, they scam.
None of what you said makes any sense.

Damn monkey's typing on a keyboard trying to write a novel.
A few Republican monkeys stole 2 trillion bananas, destroyed the
banana farm, and threw their feces at everyone.
That's why we don't have a monkey as President anymore.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Muhammid appears on epic 200th South Park episode (pics)

[studio]

On Apr 19, 4:15 pm, plainolamerican  wrote:
> South Park
> know the enemy
> choose sides carefully

The only side that claims you is the bottom side.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Militia movement will be packing heat at gun rally on the Potomac

[studio]

Bush Jr. would never have allowed that.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Redneck Word for Today

[studio]

On Apr 19, 4:18 pm, plainolamerican  wrote:
> fuck the yankees and their hypocrisy
>
> as the South goes so does the rest of the nation

lol, yeah right...how could the north survive without crawdad imports?

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Republican animals

[studio]

On Apr 19, 2:32 pm, Cold Water  wrote:
> Have you ever been baker-acted studio?  Why not send your last two original
> compositions posted to this group to your closest relative.  Get help dude!

No because I'm not a threat to myself or anyone else.
But that might be a good solution for Republican animals.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: “The extremists are coming! The extremists are coming!”

[M. Johnson]

HUH?
Butler Shaffer -- not a conservative -- sad NOTHING about 'Bush Jr.' NOR
the military or law enforcement budgets.

Regard$,
--MJ

 "...whatever power you give the State to do things for you carries 
with it the equivalent power to do things to you." ~ A. J. Nock




At 09:42 PM 4/19/2010, you wrote:

I don't understand why conservatives are so mad about Bush Jr. having
tripled the military and law enforcement budgets now?
Conservaturds, it's just to protect you, that's why it's called
"defense". You got what you wished for. Now they'll enforce the laws.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Obama is showing himself to be petty - and also lying

[dick thompson]

I see how he keeps saying that the main problem facing the country is 
the lack of jobs and the fiscal problems.  A little late after he has 
wasted a year and a half messing it up even worse.   how soon can he be 
gone.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/19/pro-gay_hecklers_repeatedly_interrupt_obama_at_dnc_fundraiser.html

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Can I have an AMEN?????

[dick thompson]

« Morning Links 
Recruiting Tool 
 »



   Government, Violence, and Bill Clinton
   

Monday, April 19th, 2010

In today's /New York Times/ 
, 
Bill Clinton once again tries to tie the Oklahoma City bombing to those 
of us who hold "the belief that the greatest threat to American freedom 
is our government, and that public servants do not protect our freedoms, 
but abuse them."


Of course he sort of proves those of us who do believe such things right 
by continually using April 19 to tie us to a deranged murderer instead 
of acknowledging, taking some responsibility for, or expressing any 
remorse whatsoever for another anniversary we observe today: the Clinton 
administration's slaughter of 76 people, including 20 children, at the 
Branch Davidian compound in Waco. Waco gets all of a sentence in 
Clinton's op-ed.


Clinton twice invokes America's founders in the piece: He refers to 
George Washington's suppression of the whiskey rebellion, and he 
explains that the founders "constructed a system of government so that 
reason could prevail over fear." I was born on April 19, so I know a bit 
about today's history. It's not just the anniversary of Waco and 
Oklahoma City, it's also the anniversary of the battles of Concord and 
Lexington---the first shots of the American Revolution. That would of 
course be an occasion of citizens rising up to violently overthrow the 
government that most Americans---including Clinton---tend to celebrate. 
And it's probably worth noting that we threw off the yoke of the crown 
for violations of human freedom and dignity that were a hell of a lot 
less severe than what we put up with today.  (Today is also the 
anniversary of the beginning of the Warsaw ghetto uprising 
---a reminder 
sometimes violence against those who have deemed themselves in charge is 
/unequivocally/ justified.)


I don't think Clinton is calling for censorship of people who, as he 
puts it, "demoniz[e] the government that guarantees our freedoms and the 
public servants who enforce our laws." But I do think he's trying to 
marginalize those of us who criticize the government---to shunt us to 
the fringe. And he's laying groundwork so that the next time some idiot 
flies a plane into an IRS building, or some madman opens fire on a 
couple of cops, he can move the ball a bit more toward pinning the 
bodies on those of us who dare to criticize the now insurmountable 
federal deficit, the mass looting of the taxpayers that is the public 
pension system, or the panoply of drug war, criminal justice, and police 
militarization abuses you read about on this site---to rattle off just a 
few examples.


I've never really felt the need to distance myself from people like Tim 
McVeigh or Joseph Stack because I've never felt any affinity or kinship 
with them. But just for the record, let me say that taking up arms 
against the government is moronic and reprehensible for a host of 
reasons, not least of which is that there isn't a chance in hell you're 
going to win. Beyond that, atrocious as Waco was, murdering a bunch of 
federal workers, their children, and bystanders, none of whom had 
anything whatsoever to do with Waco, wasn't just morally repugnant, it 
was an act of insanity and delusion (McVeigh actually thought the 
bombing could have sparked a revolution). And even if one were depraved 
enough to find some moral justification in Oklahoma City, think of what 
it did for McVeigh's cause: Instead of April 19 being the day we 
remember and lament the Clinton's administration's monumental fuck-up, 
and possibly reflect on massive power of government to simply eliminate 
people it deems weird or fringe or threatening, Clinton, armed with 
moral rectitude provided by McVeigh, now gets to take to the pages of 
the /New York Times/ to celebrate government, and to denounce and 
marginalize the people who dare to criticize it.


The really mendacious thing about the crap Clinton spews at about this 
time every year is that unlike the tortured nexus he tries to build 
between government critics and Timothy McVeigh, /his /responsibility for 
the charred bodies at Waco is pretty damned easy to chart. He gets to 
gloss over all of that now.


The thing is, Mr. Former President, if I may address you directly, is 
there /are /far too may public servants who, as you put it, "do not 
protect our freedoms, but abuse them." I document them every day on this 
site. And so despite your admonition, I will continue to criticize them 
for it. And when, for example, they out and out /murder/ innocent people 
 
in the name of a senseless, was

Re: Can I have an AMEN?????

[plainolamerican]

Bill Clinton once again tries to tie the Oklahoma City bombing to
those
of us who hold "the belief that the greatest threat to American
freedom
is our government
---
yeah, npr has been pushing the idea
the cyber czar even when as far to say that the kkk and white
supremists are to be feared

know the enemy

On Apr 19, 10:49 pm, dick thompson  wrote:
> « Morning Links 
> Recruiting Tool
>  »
>
>     Government, Violence, and Bill Clinton
>     
>
> Monday, April 19th, 2010
>
> In today's /New York Times/
> ,
> Bill Clinton once again tries to tie the Oklahoma City bombing to those
> of us who hold "the belief that the greatest threat to American freedom
> is our government, and that public servants do not protect our freedoms,
> but abuse them."
>
> Of course he sort of proves those of us who do believe such things right
> by continually using April 19 to tie us to a deranged murderer instead
> of acknowledging, taking some responsibility for, or expressing any
> remorse whatsoever for another anniversary we observe today: the Clinton
> administration's slaughter of 76 people, including 20 children, at the
> Branch Davidian compound in Waco. Waco gets all of a sentence in
> Clinton's op-ed.
>
> Clinton twice invokes America's founders in the piece: He refers to
> George Washington's suppression of the whiskey rebellion, and he
> explains that the founders "constructed a system of government so that
> reason could prevail over fear." I was born on April 19, so I know a bit
> about today's history. It's not just the anniversary of Waco and
> Oklahoma City, it's also the anniversary of the battles of Concord and
> Lexington---the first shots of the American Revolution. That would of
> course be an occasion of citizens rising up to violently overthrow the
> government that most Americans---including Clinton---tend to celebrate.
> And it's probably worth noting that we threw off the yoke of the crown
> for violations of human freedom and dignity that were a hell of a lot
> less severe than what we put up with today.  (Today is also the
> anniversary of the beginning of the Warsaw ghetto uprising
> ---a reminder
> sometimes violence against those who have deemed themselves in charge is
> /unequivocally/ justified.)
>
> I don't think Clinton is calling for censorship of people who, as he
> puts it, "demoniz[e] the government that guarantees our freedoms and the
> public servants who enforce our laws." But I do think he's trying to
> marginalize those of us who criticize the government---to shunt us to
> the fringe. And he's laying groundwork so that the next time some idiot
> flies a plane into an IRS building, or some madman opens fire on a
> couple of cops, he can move the ball a bit more toward pinning the
> bodies on those of us who dare to criticize the now insurmountable
> federal deficit, the mass looting of the taxpayers that is the public
> pension system, or the panoply of drug war, criminal justice, and police
> militarization abuses you read about on this site---to rattle off just a
> few examples.
>
> I've never really felt the need to distance myself from people like Tim
> McVeigh or Joseph Stack because I've never felt any affinity or kinship
> with them. But just for the record, let me say that taking up arms
> against the government is moronic and reprehensible for a host of
> reasons, not least of which is that there isn't a chance in hell you're
> going to win. Beyond that, atrocious as Waco was, murdering a bunch of
> federal workers, their children, and bystanders, none of whom had
> anything whatsoever to do with Waco, wasn't just morally repugnant, it
> was an act of insanity and delusion (McVeigh actually thought the
> bombing could have sparked a revolution). And even if one were depraved
> enough to find some moral justification in Oklahoma City, think of what
> it did for McVeigh's cause: Instead of April 19 being the day we
> remember and lament the Clinton's administration's monumental fuck-up,
> and possibly reflect on massive power of government to simply eliminate
> people it deems weird or fringe or threatening, Clinton, armed with
> moral rectitude provided by McVeigh, now gets to take to the pages of
> the /New York Times/ to celebrate government, and to denounce and
> marginalize the people who dare to criticize it.
>
> The really mendacious thing about the crap Clinton spews at about this
> time every year is that unlike the tortured nexus he tries to build
> between government critics and Timothy McVeigh, /his /responsibility for
> the charred bodies at Waco is pretty damned easy to chart. He gets to
> gloss over all of that now.
>
> The thing is, Mr. Former Presi

Re: “The extremists are coming! The extremists are coming!”

[plainolamerican]

I don't understand why conservatives are so mad about Bush Jr. having
tripled the military and law enforcement budgets

where did the money go?

it didn't find OBL and didn't stop illegal immigration

you can smell a rat or you can't smell

On Apr 19, 8:42 pm, studio  wrote:
> I don't understand why conservatives are so mad about Bush Jr. having
> tripled the military and law enforcement budgets now?
> Conservaturds, it's just to protect you, that's why it's called
> "defense". You got what you wished for. Now they'll enforce the laws.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/ 
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Why the Civil War?

[plainolamerican]

I strongly suspect that the motives of most soldiers was – as
reflected in some of Mark Twain’s personal recollections based more on
seeking an “adventure” than fighting for any political or humanitarian
principle. Still, it is interesting to note how interchangeable are
the explanations of the Civil War and of Abraham Lincoln, for that
matter when it comes to upholding the priority of centralized federal
power.
---
you've missed a lot

ask for help

On Apr 19, 6:59 pm, "M. Johnson"  wrote:
> Why the Civil War?Posted byButler Shafferon April 19, 2010 04:16 PM
> With secession being more openly discussed as a political option, it is 
> instructive to read/listen to the responses of the statists. The superficial 
> answer has been thenon sequiturthat “the civil war resolved this question.” 
> This is no more intellectually viable an argument than to suggest that Ronald 
> Reagan’s presidential victories resolved the question of the policies of 
> future occupants of the White House. It also ignores two important points: 
> (1) secession is a remedy necessarily implied in the “social contract” theory 
> of the state. (That governments have never been created by contract, but 
> always by conquest, need not concern us at this point. The statists like to 
> insist upon the social contract explanation, so they must take all aspects of 
> contract theory.) (2) This nation traces its beginnings back to the 
> Revolutionary War, which was premised on the legitimacy of secession from 
> British rule. Intelligent minds need read only the first portion of the 
> Declaration of Independence to confirm this.
> It was almost amusing to read a recent article/editorial in the Minneapolis 
> StarTribune bemoaning a resolution unanimously passed by Republicans in 
> Minnesota’s Fifth Congressional District. The resolution read: “Be it 
> resolved the Republican Party of Minnesota supports nullification of 
> unconstitutional federal laws and secession as options to enforce state 
> sovereignty.”
> The newspaper writer declared that “Jefferson Davis . . . couldn’t have 
> written it any better,” then alluded to the “nearly 300 Minnesotans [who] 
> lost their lives in the Civil War, fighting to keep the United States whole.” 
> Her comment would seem to fly in the face of establishment-driven American 
> history, that has long insisted that the Civil War was fought to free the 
> slaves.
> I cannot speak to the motives of Northern soldiers who fought in this war. My 
> grandfather (who I never knew) and his three brothers fought for the North 
> (my grandfather was the only one of the four who survived it). I strongly 
> suspect that the motives of most soldiers was – as reflected in some of Mark 
> Twain’s personal recollections based more on seeking an “adventure” than 
> fighting for any political or humanitarian principle. Still, it is 
> interesting to note how interchangeable are the explanations of the Civil War 
> and of Abraham Lincoln, for that matter when it comes to upholding the 
> priority of centralized federal power.
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>  
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.