Sunday, February 03, 2008
6 comments:
-
Anonymous said...
-
See? I told you this was going to happen. But did anyone listen? Nooo . . . .
-
2/3/08, 1:05 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
mcvain is the republican equivalent of shrillary.
I *IN NO WAY* consider mcvain to be a republican in thought or deed. mcvain-Feingold? Shamnesty? Righteo...
I start to wonder if those rumors that mcvain was turned while a "guest" of hanoi might possibly be right?!?!?
I'm writing in Fred! or just voting for ron paul, if we are going to hell then just lets get it over with.
Interestingly, we got our ballots for the primary here in WA yesterday and Fred! is still on the ticket, saves me the trouble of writing him in :-). Stick on the poll tax and off it goes (not that it is possible to be meaningful in WA state where I am sure they will "correct" the ballot to what I really meant...) -
2/3/08, 1:11 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
"There is not a dime's worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican Parties!"
George Wallace said that in 1968 during a campaign for PotUS. The context in which he said it related primarily to segregation, but it was very accurate except for a precious few issues. To me Libs and Cons are indistinguishable from one another once they’ve been in Washington for more than one term in any power position except SCotUS.
Ralph Nader likes to lump ‘em together, too, and has repeatedly accused hi-placed elected dipwads of being insulated, isolated, out of touch, and deluded by their own press releases. O.K. He didn’t actually say ALL that, but if you dig around, you can extract the essence of it from both his and Perot’s analyses.
Basically Democrats say they’re for the common people, immigrants, minorities, women, blue-collar workers. They consistently raise the taxes of those very people while Reagan and Bush pushed tax cuts which put dollars back in their pockets as well into the national coffers. Also, Bush has placed more women and minorities in power positions than Clinton or Carter ever did.
As soon as their butts have warmed their chairs, both Democrats and Republicans begin planning their re-election campaigns, and that means special interest groups, and that means abandoning their constituencies. Even though the majority of politicians enter the milieu with noble purposes and unstained ethics, by the time they’ve finished that first term, they’re hopelessly contaminated by wads of cash from all manner of sleazy characters and ass kissers. Like teenaged boys in hormone riots, they quickly become slaves to the power of lust and whores to the lust for power.
What George Wallace didn’t say, but should have, is that the best case to prove the merits of term limits is Democrats and Republicans. Hell, in anything remotely resembling classic democracy, we’d have something like Israel’s Knesset, in which virtually all groups are represented in government and can vote. In our electoral winner-take-all system, if you don’t get the biggest number of votes, you can’t come to the dance.
Generally what happens to 3rd parties in this country is that the two-party system merely absorbs their ideas, as with Prohibition and Abolition, and what-not. We have a pretty good system, but even the best engine needs occasional tweaking. I think we could peak our government’s horsepower and drastically improve fuel economy with a few simple modifications, beginning with line-item vetoes and term limits. -
2/3/08, 1:19 PM
-
MoFiZiX Gr4FiX said...
-
By US Constitutional definition, McPain isn't even eligible for the office of POTUS...
-
2/3/08, 4:04 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
March 26, 1790, under the first naturalization law: "And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens."
The Panama Canal Zone was under United States sovereignty between 1903 and 1979. Once the fourteenth amendment was passed, it has never been fully addressed whether children born to Americans overseas are "natural-born citizens" and thus eligible for the Presidency or are "citizens under the law" and maybe not eligible. Given the lack of illegal immigration law enforcement, we're grasping at straw here folks.
While we're on McVain, I posted this over at Kisp:
I’m puzzled:
Romney has won 9 states, McCain won 3.
Romney got 9 delegates for winning Wyoming, but only 1 for winning Maine. Wyoming has less than half the population of Maine but nine times the number of delegates.
WTF, over?
McCain is ahead for one reason only; he got 57 of his 93 delegates in the winner-take-all Florida primary. Now, Florida’s population is about 15 times Maine’s, so why do they have 57 times the number of delegates?
This smells like a big dead fish in the back room of GOP politics, my friends.
Lt. Col. Gen. Tailgunner dick -
2/3/08, 4:53 PM
-
closed said...
-
Barry Goldwater was born in the Arizona Territory, and was naturalized when Arizona became a state.
This is already water under the bridge ... once you are naturalized, the SCOTUS has already determined that you are, legally, a natural born citizen. -
2/4/08, 11:14 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)