Steps to becoming a GOOD Democrat

[johnc]

A good analysis of WW3 for anyone that might be interested. I've read it twice.

 

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0198780710/qid=1093042193/sr=ka-3/ref=pd_ka_3/104-4727139-6031130

[johnc]

Do any of you here in America really believe that Washington DC is operating w/out any agendas of their own and that they have fully disclosed their agendas to its citizens?

 

There's one "National Agenda" and its expressed as policy from Congress and The Executive. This "National Agenda is in constant flux because Washington DC (as a very broad, general term) has thousands of agendas. To break it down to a finer grain you have group agendas for:

 

Congress

The Judiciary

The Executive

Unions

Federal beaurocracies (sp?)

Large, powerful corporations

Special interest groups

Political parties

Criminal enterprises

Foriegn nations

Mass media

 

Within each of those groups you have subordinate groups with competing agendas and every individual within these groups have their own agendas.

 

All of thesed agendas compete constantly and at any point in time some are waxing in power and some are waning in power. That's the whole point of the checks and balances designed into our constitution. If the Patriot Act or Homeland Security moves the balance more to one side, the various groups with their own agendas have recourse to check what they perceive as an imbalance.

 

Also, every one of those groups and individuals have "open" and "secret" agendas just like we all do at our jobs. Its a fundamental part of human nature. Is George Bush's agenda (whatever that may be) at the forefront right now? Probably. Just like Bill Clinton's was a few years ago and John Kerry's will be if he gets elected. So what? That's how our system works and has worked for hundreds of years.

 

Is George Bush part of some centuries old dark, evil, nefarious plot to sell out our country and its citizens to some overlord? Hardly. Does "John Kerry" spelled backwards and run through some religious algorithm calculate to "666", the mark of Ani-Christ. Doubtful.

[JMortensen]

I think in all fairness people should be able to examine some of the theories that Kevin is alluding to here so that they can make up their own minds.

 

The short descriptions of some of the conspiracy theories that Kevin is espousing:

http://www.rotten.com/library/conspiracy/freemasonry/

http://www.rotten.com/library/conspiracy/illuminati/

http://www.rotten.com/library/conspiracy/knights-templar/

http://www.fiu.edu/~mizrachs/poseur3.html

 

One site with brief rundowns on most of the popular contemporary conspiracy theories (including the ones Kevin alluded to):http://www.meta-religion.com/Secret_societies/secret_societies.htm

 

Straight from the source:

http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2004/3125ccf_culture.html

 

Everyone should read about this stuff. This is where a lot of your fringe gropus such as anti-globalists, socialists, fascists, anti-semites, and others come from. If they don't spring DIRECTLY from these theories, a lot of them lean heavily on these theories.

[Kevin Shasteen]

Their agendas differ until unity is required...,

 

Just like NAFTA...oops- I mean WTO which we all were told was going to HELP America.

 

Remember just 10 years ago when the people of all states were calling their congressional reps and telling them to SAY NO to NAFTA?

 

What happened then, did the congressional rep's listen to their constituents? Heck no! NAFTA was passed and the economical situation has been "Swooshing" as Ross Perot said it would ever since to the other side of the border. Ross Perot had it right and everyone laughed at him.

 

Oh yea, let us not forget the Oil Embargo years. Remember we were told that there was an oil shortage and hence would have to stop relying on our own oil and begin buying foreign oil...because it was cheaper! Well I dont think we need to say anything on how this cheaper oil price "HASN'T" found its way to the pump from day one!

 

Dont forget the latest agenda:

 

The Totalization Treaty of Mexico which is half way to the president's desk for signing. If signed will give total acess to Social Security benefits to any Mexican citizen that files for it in the states. Well I'm sure once it passes that it will help boost our economy! Certainly will, good American Fruit being grown there.

 

You will know a tree by the fruit it bears...currently Washington DC doesnt and hasnt for a long long time bear bear American fruit.

 

George Bush when he was running for President was asked by a reporter about his "Christian Conservative Convictions" -vs- his dad's agenda regarding NWO (remember Bush Sr's speeches? He couldnt stop saying NWO in just about every one of his speeches), and Bush Jr. responded, "MAKE NO MISTAKE, I AM A GLOBALISTS!"

 

Globalism is not American...it is anti-American. But we can continue to wave our Plastic Chinese made American Flags because after all that is what a Patriot does.

 

George Bush, again when he was running for President was asked about the UN. The reporter asked if he would be willing to move the UN to Jerusalem. George Jr. immediately said, "I would most certainly push to move the UN to Jerusalem, but first we need peace in that region."

 

The agenda to move the UN to Jerusalem is also not a new one, it has been around for about 200 years or so. All you have to do is read the documentation the globalist themselve print. Read it...dont poo-pa it simply because it is "Oliver Stone material".

 

George Bush alone is not the problem: anyone who tells you it is okay to sell out America is the problem.

 

I was listening to some Senator a few years back and he said a pretty wild thing. He said there are two types of people that run for office, those that wish to fight for America and then those that wish to eradicate America. For him to say this publically was pretty bold.

 

There are agendas indeed. I still feel we as Americans are entering into an era that isnt going to be so forgiving regarding our libeties and freedoms.

 

Kevin,

(Yea,Still an Inliner)

[JMortensen]

How could I forget the nefarious NWO:

 

http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/

[Guest socket_toomee]

Being Australian i suppose that i will be overlooked, I haven't posted in a long time. But i spent a year in America as an exchange student and i saw my high school budget slashed by 50% to fund the war. So far WMD have not been found and George Bush has to take responsibilty. If the American public cannot see this and still vote for the man who illegitemately won the last ellection than maybe i should run for president

[pete280z]

But i spent a year in America as an exchange student and i saw my high school budget slashed by 50% to fund the war.

 

This is absolute nonsense. You don't say what state you were in, so I cannot check this out to an absolute certainty, but I'm afraid that you are the victim of some bad information.

 

illegitemately won the last ellection

 

maybe i should run for president

 

Perhaps you didn't study in the US for long? Otherwise, I hope that you could recognize one of these statements as propagandist drivel and the other as a total impossibility.

[Guest socket_toomee]

Any country that allows a man to become president who got less votes than their opponent, i can't understand how that could happen. I studied in Lincoln, Nebraska and went to Lincoln Southwest. Australia has a compulsary vote and i believe that is a lot more beneficial for representing the entire population than america's poor voter turnout. Being only 18 i'll admit that a lot probably passes over the top. But i only comment on what i read and if Michael Moore is correct than america really is poorer for allowing Bush to become president

[pete280z]

Any country that allows a man to become president who got less votes than their opponent, i can't understand how that could happen.

That would be because the USA does not elect it's president by straight democratic election. We rely on a system of checks and balances. Google for "electoral college." That will help explain how this works.

 

It is currently fashionable for certain politically active people in this country to portray our government as having a populist spirit. When it comes to presidential elections, that just isn't true.

 

Mandatory voter turnout would quite likely have a _very_ interesting effect on our elections. But do we really want everyone voting if they're not willing to educate themselves on the issues? I'd rather have an interested minority vote than suffer the decisions of a clueless mob. Perhaps Australians have a different attitude about their civic resposibilities?

 

But i only comment on what i read and if Michael Moore is correct than america really is poorer for allowing Bush to become president

AH HA! We've smoked out that propagandist. Check out the "facts" he presents, his sources, and his selective editing. Then consider the source.

[JMortensen]

Socket you clearly do not understand the American electoral college system. Each state gets electoral votes based on representation in Congress. Since our Constitution protects smaller states (to a small degree) from being at the whim of bigger states by allowing ALL states 2 senators, an individual from Wyoming (state with a low population) will actually have a greater input with his single vote than a voter from a state with a very large population. 3 times in US history the president has won the election and lost the popular vote.

 

This skewing of power was purposefully done when the country was founded. There were concerns at the time about the cities taking control of the rural areas by popular vote and forcing their will on the rural areas. This fear is well founded. Look at a United States election map. Lots of red (republican), very little blue (democrat).

http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_44/b3705061.htm

http://www.socialstudieshelp.com/Lesson_15_Notes.htm

 

The democrats do have most of the states with big cities, because big cities are by their nature breeding grounds for discontent and the people in them tend to think they "need" government entitlements (that's less fact and more just my opinion).

 

I don't understand American voter apathy either, but I think it has less to do with representation in the electoral college and more to do with the nastiness and corruption that surrounds American political candidates, no matter which side they are on. I do know that there are very few die hard super leftists that actually believes that Bush "stole" the election, although after 2000 I did hear a lot of calls for an amendment to elect the president off of a straight popular vote.

 

I would not support a compulsory vote because so few people in this country actually take an interest. At least the people who go to the voting booths on their own might have a clue about what is going on.

 

Michael Moore is not correct BTW. We already pointed that out.

[pparaska]

I'm --- speechless at the moment. Since I posted last, I can not believe what I'm reading....I'm totally blown away.

[Pop N Wood]

I have said it before in other threads. Quoting something from a Hollywood movie doesn't do much to enhance your credibility. I will take that statement one step further and say anyone who quotes or claims to have actually learned anything from a Michael Moore film probably isn't worth talking to. Try reading a newspaper on a daily basis and you will see that nothing he presents is new information.

 

Even Osama's family has publicly taken exception to the incorrect information in that moronic film.

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5538722/

 

It is amazing how lazy people can be. Don't think it is biased propaganda? Ask people who know how to recognize it when they see it

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3923385.stm

 

Maybe if we ignore our young Australian friend he will just go away.

 

But i spent a year in America as an exchange student and i saw my high school budget slashed by 50% to fund the war.

 

I cry BS. Cite a reference. A country as small as Australia would probably have to make some pretty serious cuts to afford a war like Iraq. But as a percentage of our GNP the Iraq situation is really not that stressing (monetarily anyway) to the US. And to think that the expense is being borne by Lincoln Southwest high school is patently absurd. (Go Huskers!)

 

 

and still vote for the man who illegitemately won the last ellection

 

Wasn't that Michael Moore's acceptance speech at the academy awards? You seem to be quite a fan of him. I suggest you broaden your sources of information. The US constitution might be a good place to start. Maybe then you would realize that was the only possible legal outcome of that election.

 

After that you might try reading this entire thread. Perhaps then you will see why people are taken back by your statements.

[Kevin Shasteen]

John, that book on the Cold war looks like an intriguing book: good find!

 

For those who would like a quick look into the minds of the for-fathers regarding the Constitution and the Rule of Law referencing the duties of the law of nations (the nation state) -vs- the law of nature (common man) and how the two should or should not intermingle.

 

This book is, "The Law of Nations" by Emmerich de Vattel.

 

Vattel's book was read by many of the founders of America's constitution. It is a great look into the minds of the great thinkers regarding what freedom was intended to be. Here is a link to that entire book:

 

http://www.consitution.org/vattel/vattel.htm

 

For those who would like some a good site that offers insight to the Constitution you may want to check out:

 

http://www.constitution.org/

 

Kevin,

(Yea,Still an Inliner)

[Dan Juday]

I keep checking in with this "thread that wouldn't die" everytime it adds a new page and I shake my head.

 

Has anybody here lately noticed that this thread started out as a joke? IT'S A JOKE PEOPLE!!! Why is it that everytime somebody posts a politically flavored joke here it turns into this? A heated multidirectional argument. Isn't this thread hyjacking? Well, isn't it?

 

Yes, I'm guilty too. I did comment early on about Michael Moore. But, technically, he IS a joke. So I think I'm off the hook.

 

Please people let it go. If you must start a new thread called "I'm from political slant A. If you are from political slant B,C, and/or D post here and get slammed". It's more honest that way.

 

I know. I must be crazy. What did I just say?

[pparaska]

I dunno. I'm learning alot. Well, lets say I'm being presented with alot of new "ideas"....

 

The NWO global conspirators manifest their agenda through the skillful manipulation of human emotions, especially fear.

 

Yeah, the media is good at doing that. And people have always been subject to the problem of not letting their emotions rule their actions and beliefs. To tell you the truth, that's the problem with alot of what I see happening everyday. It seems that this goes back to something I wrote a while ago - people need to use their BRAINS not their HEARTS to make desicions. With the senses being innudated more and more with high-tech, life-like reality "news", the danger is that we won't teach ourselves to throw up a barrier to the stronger and stronger emotional reactions these images (and their real time flavor) drive us towards, before we engage the BRAIN and use LOGIC and THOUGHT to balance things out.

 

Conspiracy? I doubt it. A problem - you bet.

 

Just my view, but it's becoming easier and easier to be tormented into an overly liberal view - our senses are more and more assaulted with designer emotion-provoking imagery. And the reason seems to be more the capitalistic greed to sell papers or air time, than to really REPORT the news and provide the consumer with balanced input - or to push us all in the direction of a conspirator's power-hungry plans.

 

Yet this may backfire if it were true. If the NWO and all the similar conspiracy theories are any bit true, the emotion-provoking imagery will put Kerry in the Whitehouse and knock the Illuminati out of the there!

 

What I've been reading tonight on the http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/, LaRouche, and rotten.com sites has been more interesting than any TV show I could think of! Very entertaining!

 

Anybody see "I, Robot" yet?

[Guest Phil1934]

I was going to leave this alone after the comments there will be more terrorist attacks. I thought so too, as I recall George W sitting at his desk with a smirk and daring the terrorists to "Bring 'em on." But I guess someone has to bring this thread back to reality. The hanging chads got all the press, but the fact is before the election several thousand names were eliminated from the Florida voting roles as people guilty of crimes which would make them ineligible to vote. Bush won by over 500 votes but a check of those roles showed over 3000 people only guilty of misdemeanors had their names erased. This election over 40,000 names were removed, mostly blacks, who vote democratic, and almost no Hispanics, who typically vote Republican in FLA. Felons can become voters after serving their time and probation by reapplying, and a Federal judge ordered the governor, Jeb Bush, to assist them, but instead he eliminated the form. That some Democrats are asking for UN overview of our elections shows how this has become a win at any cost event.

[JMortensen]

http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/fahrenheit911/foxcall.htm

 

It appears that Mr. Moore has left us with plenty of deprogramming chores to do...

[johnc]

THis thread has been remarkably civil. I was expecting to have to delete it 3 or 4 pages ago.

 

Anybody see "I, Robot" yet?

 

Read the book (repeatedly, I'm an Asimov fan) and loved it. Saw the moving and walked out about half-way through.

[Trevor]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any country that allows a man to become president who got less votes than their opponent, i can't understand how that could happen.

 

That's OK. Michael Moore doesn't understand the Electoral College either.

 

http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecmenu2.htm

 

Michael Moore releasing a movie is like Microsoft releasing an operating system. At first, everyone's impressed, until those who pay attention decide to rip it apart.

[johnc]

This thread ain't dead yet!

 

Anyway, I thought this was a thoughful analysis of base cause of the troubles Kerry is going through right now.

 

Both Sides Now

 

John Kerry's troubles have largely been forced on him by the Democratic Party platform. He has been given the unenviable task of presenting it as the War Party when in fact it is not, nor does it want to be. The Democrats could have chosen to become a real anti-war party, in which case it would have nominated Howard Dean or it could have elected to become a genuine war party and chosen Joseph Lieberman. Instead it chose to become the worst of all combinations, an anti-war party masquerading as the war party.

 

To carry out this program, it required a Janus-like figure and found it in Senator Kerry; the only man of sufficient stature who could look two ways at once. It would have been a desirable trait, as Christopher Hitchens pointed out, in a peacetime President.

 

"He still gives, to me at any rate, the impression of someone who sincerely wishes that this were not a time of war. When critical votes on the question come up, Kerry always looks like a dog being washed. John McCain was not like this, when a president he despised felt it necessary to go into Kosovo. We are looking at a man who would make, or would have made, a perfectly decent peacetime president. ..."

 

"Why, then, the penumbra of doubt that surrounds him? (Doubt on his own part, I mean, not just doubt by others.) The answer is not complex. One of these books, ''John F. Kerry,'' by a Boston Globe team, makes reference to the song ''Give Peace a Chance,'' as sung by John Lennon in Kerry's presence in far-off days. The second, ''The Candidate,'' by the journalist Paul Alexander, has a verse from Bruce Springsteen's ''No Surrender'' as its epigraph, speaking of ''blood brothers in a stormy night'' and refusing the idea of any retreat. (This stirring song, indeed, was played at top volume by the party managers in Boston to herald Kerry's acceptance speech at the Democratic convention.) The third, ''A Call to Service,'' by Kerry himself, merits Mark Twain's comment on the Book of Mormon -- ''chloroform in print.'' It has no music at all. But if it were to draw its title from any popular song, it would have to bow toward Joni Mitchell and announce itself as ''Both Sides Now.''"

 

But the Democratic Party decided to package this man, who was decent on his own terms, in the most dishonest possible way: to use his Vietnam service to deodorize the monstrous fraud at the heart of their own platform. Kerry's problems with Swiftvets are not because his credentials as a warrior are insufficient. Rather they are because no credentials are sufficient to foist this bait-and-switch on the American electorate without exciting adverse comment.

 

If any proof were needed that the Sixties were dead, the subterfuge of the Democratic Party would be Exhibit A. Instead of running under their own colors, or barring that, changing them, they have decided to sail beneath a false flag, as if under a cloud of shame. That in itself is tacit admission that they can no longer walk in their own guise; and what is worse that they cannot look themselves in the face, nor go into battle daring to win nor willing to lose in their own name, as is the mark of men.

 

 

posted by wretchard