{BS} Nancy Pelosi: "this team..these Democrats"
in [Toyota]
|
Prev: Great Day for America. Obama Secures His Place as One of theGreatest Presidents in History
Next: IM SELLING MY TAGGED.COM MAFIAWARS ACCOUNT
From: Jane Galt on 23 Mar 2010 23:49 =?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote : >> Cloward & Piven. Wiki it. > ><DING!> That's the one. It sure seems to be in play here. > > Next up: Immigration Reform. Read: "Let's get them all naturalized and > registered so wee can get back the voter base we blew off by doing what > the people didn't want us to..." Yes, and give them lots of loot from the "dirty rich" ( you know - the people who used to provide jobs with their wealth ) in return for voting socialist forever. >> "Well, first of all, then you'd have to say that the American public >> overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama. >> Let's not act as though the president didn't tell the American people..." >> - Al Sharpton, to Geraldo Rivera, 3/21/2010 > > > And he did when he told Joe the Plumber "We have to start by > redistributing wealth." That SHOULD have been the deal killer right there. People were entranced by his color and speech giving talent. > But the Sheeple in their search for Anything But Bush, and the media's > excellent play as painting McCain with the Bush brush got this Bozo > elected. Yep. >> "There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the >> means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave >> men by force, socialism - by vote. It is merely the difference between >> murder and suicide." -- Ayn Rand, from "Foreign Policy Drains U.S. of >> Main Weapons" > > > Socialism is fine until you run out of other people's money; Margaret > Thatcher. "We have allowed our constitutional republic to deteriorate into a virtually unchecked direct democracy. Today's political process is nothing more than a street fight between various groups seeking to vote themselves other people's money. Individual voters tend to support the candidate that promises them the most federal loot in whatever form, rather than the candidate who will uphold the rule of law." --Rep. Ron Paul
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 24 Mar 2010 18:05 On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:49:12 -0500, Jane Galt wrote: >> Socialism is fine until you run out of other people's money; Margaret >> Thatcher. > > "We have allowed our constitutional republic to deteriorate into a > virtually unchecked direct democracy. Today's political process is nothing > more than a street fight between various groups seeking to vote themselves > other people's money. Individual voters tend to support the candidate that > promises them the most federal loot in whatever form, rather than the > candidate who will uphold the rule of law." --Rep. Ron Paul Wow. That pretty much hits the nail on the head. However, Republicans are generally for letting YOU keep more of YOUR money than Democrats, as we have just seen.
From: Jane Galt on 24 Mar 2010 20:47
=?iso-2022-jp?q?Hachiroku_=1B$B%O%A%m%=2F=1B=28B?= <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote : > On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:49:12 -0500, Jane Galt wrote: > >>> Socialism is fine until you run out of other people's money; Margaret >>> Thatcher. >> >> "We have allowed our constitutional republic to deteriorate into a >> virtually unchecked direct democracy. Today's political process is nothing >> more than a street fight between various groups seeking to vote themselves >> other people's money. Individual voters tend to support the candidate that >> promises them the most federal loot in whatever form, rather than the >> candidate who will uphold the rule of law." --Rep. Ron Paul > > Wow. That pretty much hits the nail on the head. > > However, Republicans are generally for letting YOU keep more of YOUR money > than Democrats, as we have just seen. Depends on whether they're ( REAL ) conservative Republicans or neocons/progressive Republicrats. Problem is, like most other parties ( or religions for that matter ), there's no objective definition of what a Republican is. In fact the only party I've seen that objectively defines itself is the Objectivist Party, of which I'm a member. |