ALIENated's tags:

The Right is slamming the Left and the Left is slamming the Right. Republicans are slamming Democrats and Democrats are slamming Republicans. People are mad as hell and they are not going to take it anymore. So they march on Washington and no one pays attention, or they call them nutjobs, or Nazis, or escapees from the funny farm. Ouch. That really helps.

People get mad as hell when things no longer work the way they think things should work. What everyone seems to forget is what our new president promised for the last year or so -- CHANGE. The problem is people heard him say that and assumed that he meant CHANGE for the better, CHANGE from bad to good, CHANGE from corrupt to legal, CHANGE from bigger government control to less government control, CHANGE from war to peace, on and on and on. It was kind of like hearing a word like FOOD. We all saw a different picture in our heads, but it was a good picture of something yummy.

But now, all those people who were imagining something yummy are finding out what CHANGE really means -- the whole political game is about to CHANGE, and the process has already started. And that is what has everyone so confused and frustrated. The game is no longer what we are used to, which is either a Democrat game or a Republican game (we all imagine different pictures there, too). Obama is introducing a whole new deal -- Socialism, followed by Communism.

In my opinion, Obama wants to go down in history as the man that converted America to Socialism and eventually Communism. Considering his past, why is that so hard for you to believe? If you do not believe that, you are just too lazy to do a little research or probably because you think he is a Democrat. If that was true, I might have a hard time believing it, too, but he is not a Democrat -- he is a Socialist, if not a Communist.

If you do not understand how what is going on is moving us toward bigger government and Socialism, I am afraid we are all wasting our time even talking with you.

Everything we see and hear these days is slanted wildly to the right or wildly to the left. That is because each side is so frustrated with what is going on. Some think Obama is too liberal and some think he is too conservative. How can they both be right? Because they are. He is not concerned with appearing either conservative or liberal. He is concerned with taking more control over things by building a bigger government and a bigger beaurocracy, adding more people to the government payroll (probably ex-ACORN and SEIU people), people who will help to keep his future ONE PARTY government in control.

For that reason, I do not want the federal government to take over our healthcare system or anything else. I do not care which party is doing the taking over. The march last weekend was not about healthcare. It was about the failure of Republicans and Democrats to wake up to the CHANGE that is going on and being promoted by our new third party president, Barack Hussein Obama.

This is a president delivered by groups like ACORN and the SEIU. We now finding out how corrupt ACORN is (no thanks to the corporate-controlled media) and SEIU members are completely willing to show up at town hall meetings and assault people on Obama's behalf.

Look at the overall way Obama operates, and has operated in the past, and tell me who the fascist is. Bush got drunk a couple of times before he became president. That is peanuts compared to the corruption Obama has been a part of. How can you ignore all that?

I heard a lady earlier this evening who blew the whistle on ACORN last year. She went to the New York Times, ABC, and CNN. She told them how a group within ACORN was soliciting more money from maxed out contributors to Obama's campaign. This sounds like the kind of funny business that got Richard Nixon impeached, but all three did not act on the story. The question is ... did Obama know about any of this fund-raising malpractice? That will probably be part of the grounds for his impeachment in 2011.

Democrats and Republicans in congress had better wake up and realize what is going on here. Their usual enemy (each other) is not their enemy now. Their enemy is Socialism and bigger, monsterous government. The lady that blew the whistle on ACORN said Obama is using the same tactics that ACORN has used for years. They make up sad stories about supposedly downtrodden people and use that to get sympathy and funding. She was a liberal and even voted for Obama, hoping his version of CHANGE matched what she saw in her head, but it does not. So she is no longer a liberal. All the pretty promises do not match reality. She said she saw no improvement in the community she was in over eight years.

We are not going to see any improvement in healthcare either because that is not the core issue. Bigger government and more government control over our lives is the purpose of all this. Big Brother wants to help you, but he has to become Big Brother first. That frustration you feel is your subconscious telling you that something has CHANGEd, that the game is no longer the same, that something is not right ... or left.

As John McCain said today, why not make the changes that we all know will help first and then go from there. Well John, because the game has CHANGEd. We are no longer playing politics as usual. We are playing wipe out capitalism and replace it with Socialism ... or whatever YOU want to call it. Whatever it is called, it will destroy our country and turn it into an ACORN community.



del.icio.us Digg reddit StumbleUpon

Comments

  • beyondtheveil said on Sep 18, 2009....
    Well, I'm not a socialist either, although health care reform wouldn't make this a socialist country. And republicans are against anything but the bankrupting status quo.

    I've seen what the American brand of capitalism, along with republican dismantling of regulation can do. We saw that in September of 2008, which was bringing us to the brink of collapse.

    I'd like to hear your cure for our ills without 'killing all the old people' by eliminating medicare (which republicans fought to legislate with a vengeance) or eliminating social security which would put the old people out on the street (which republicans fought with a vengeance to legislate), and think both are pretty good now.
  • noparty said on Sep 18, 2009....
    I do support Obama's health care proposals, except for creating the so called public option, why not expand medicaid a government run program to help the poor.  I don't believe regulating insurance companies could be classified as socialist, but will agree the public option is socialist.  But when you get right down to it medicare and medicaid are forms of socialism.  I say pass laws which prevent insurance companies from dropping people when they get sick, not allowing coverage for pre-existing conditions, and denying coverages for procedures they (not doctors) say won't work.  I read on the net a man testified before congress of how he had to fight the insurance company to pay claims for his 2 year old daughter, every step of the way.  These kinds of stories push people to wanting the government to take over because of the perceived cruelty of the insurance companies by many sick people.  I have to jump through regulatory hoops put up by the insurance company every year because I have to take a brand name drug instead of a generic.  Some generics work on me and some do not. It is just inconceiveable to me why our two parties cannot come together and craft a compromise which will end the way insurance companies treat sick people and healthy for that matter.  I do wish Sen McCain would step forward and provide more leadership in trying to get the two parties to work together.  You are right Alienated, Obama's campaign rhetoric does not match his actions to date.  But I'm afraid he is not the first politican of either party to say one thing and do another.  The beauty of a two party system is that it should check the extremes of each party.  Our parties have for the time being are failing to reach across the aisle and work together for the common good.  Compromise must be the guiding force in our democracy.  . 
  • ALIENated said on Sep 18, 2009....

    I am not against Medicare, the VA, or Social Secuity. I may need them all pretty soon. These are programs that working people pay taxes to support and they help people who can most likely no longer help themselves. However, I have heard horror stories about Medicare. I heard one lady talking about her father's death probably being caused by Medicare stupidity, and he even had his own private insurance. It was something about the hospital had to go by Medicare regulations and his private insurance got overridden. He had some measurable condition (temperature, heartrate, I do not remember) that fell outside the Medicare guidelines for keeping him in a hospital. He was transferred to hospice care and soon died. The lady felt that he would have been fine if he could have remained in the hospital. The lady was trying to demonstrate how we are at the mercy of doctors and hospital administrators -- the people in white coats. She said they just assumed the doctors knew what they were talking about and it probably cost her father his life.

    Anyway, the main thing I am against is such a major change. As I have said before, if this is what Democrats claim it to be, it could be incremental. Why not make the cost savings changes Obama claims can be made and see how that works out? Because that is not the bottom line. Keep in mind Obama's real motive -- bigger government, more control over our lives, jobs for his ACORN and SEIU buddies, and moving us toward Socialism.

    I have no problem with concentrating on helping the helpless among us (the old, the veterans, the poor), but those who can help themselves should help themselves. And the insurance companies should have to practice what they do in an ethical way. Government should be shining the spotlight on unethical companies, not trying to take them over. Remember how the Nazis took over Volkswagen and everything else? Good times. Not.

  • pickersplock said on Sep 18, 2009....
     
     
     
     

    THIS is what happens when the government gets involved in human services.
     
     
     
     
     
  • ALIENated said on Sep 18, 2009....

    Exactly. I have mentioned that before. Government can do stuff that can be programmed. Things where people can follow a script or something. Or building stuff like roads or bridges. Of course, governments contract that out. But panels of beaurocrats cannot make life and death decisions for us.

  • stopmediabias said on Sep 20, 2009....

    "I've seen what the American brand of capitalism, along with republican dismantling of regulation can do. We saw that in September of 2008, which was bringing us to the brink of collapse."

    Why do Liberals throw this out all the time but very rarely even try to back it up.  I am still waiting to hear about what de-regulation brought us to the brink of collapse.  What is monumentally laughable is Republicans tried 17 times to technically put more regulation on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government chartered groups that caused this whole mess and were shot down and on one occasion the race card was used in shooting them down. 

    Enjoy it now Dems, because as soon as all these corrupt media groups go out of business because they decided to be a mouthpiece for the left then you guys will never see another ounce of power or influence, the same power and influence that brought us to "brink of collapse."

  • GANK said on Sep 21, 2009....
    Well, the difference between capitalism and communism is like comparing A/C to D/C; It performs the same function, yet takes different paths.  The difference in path is the fact that those born into a Communist environment accept the idea that they are not free from the cradle.  And for the hammer and sickle to be functional, fingers must curl around them.  All must work for it to function.  In Capitalism, one is given the choice as to what degree of capital slavery he sells himself to.  He does this through impulse and instinct.  Impulse comes from the "Keeping up with the Jones's" mentality, while instinct can be seen in the reproductive sense that seems to keep money changing hands as well.  Once again, all must work in order for it to function appropriately. 
      What we have is a Rubik's cube-of-a-special-interest-system.  Capitalism and Communism are hitting the middle-class from both directions that's similar to a gang-raping.  One side feels entitled to everyone's money by raising prices to fatten their profit margins and personal gains.  And the other side feels entitled to everyone's money due to the fact of being in denial for their wrong choices, as well as believing that they are owed a living.  But if everyone was to adapt to believing that they are owed a living when the middle class quits working because they are exhausted into believing that they are owed a living, then where is the money going to come from?
  • ALIENated said on Sep 21, 2009....

    I think what you are missing is the freedom aspect of America. People are taxed in both systems. It is just a matter of how much. Which American president killed his countrymen as Stalin did? Which American president killed his countrymen as Hitler or Castro did? We are losing our freedom to people like Obama and those with which he surrounds himself. It is very popular these days to say everything sucks, not just this side or that side, this philosophy or that philosophy. That is what every school boy says about school and authority -- everything sucks, everyone sucks. While that may be true, in my opinion America, capitialism, freedom, and liberty suck less than all the rest, if that is the only way we can describe things.

  • javadewd said on Sep 22, 2009....
    Capitalist slavery? Personal sovereignty...?
  • stopmediabias said on Sep 22, 2009....

    These people need to go live in Iran for a couple of years.  It's funny how millions of people both legal and illegal are trying to get this "capitalist slavery."

    Alien-Absolutely brilliant... regarding your last comment.

  • javadewd said on Sep 22, 2009....
    Well, I guess if you're going to be a slave, the yolk seems pretty easy to carry... Unless you have some sort of entitlement mentality, of course, then I suppose you might consider it the fifth level of hell or something.
  • ALIENated said on Sep 23, 2009....

    We have always complained about politicians being able to vote themselves a raise and now we vote for politicians who promise to give us all a raise, give us all something for nothing. As I have said many times, the Democrats / Socialists try to tell everyone that the "rich" will pay for it. Let me assure you, the rich they are talking about are you and your working, legal neighbors. The real rich people did not get rich and do not stay rich by paying high taxes. They have lawyers that see to that. Just like the lawyers/politicians who made the tax rules in the first place.

  • andycox said on Oct 07, 2009....
    Yes, well, I think an awful lot of tripe is being spouted about communism and capitalism here. Communism/socialism has nothing to do with the state running capitalism. That is properly called 'state capitalism'. Communism refers to a democratically run world-wide society in which people would be able to freely access goods and services, and the means of production would be held in common. Money, wages and profits would not exist. Capitalism is all about 'commodity production', producing goods and services to sell with a view to realising a profit. I know which I prefer.
  • pickersplock said on Oct 08, 2009....
    Funny, all those people escaping over the Berlin wall waaay back in the the eighties.  Escaping all of that access to free goods and services!  Weird wasn't it?
    Not to mention all of those people leaving Cuba on tiny, little, itsy, bitsy, boats to escape all of that free access to health care.
  • andycox said on Oct 08, 2009....
    You obviously don't know too much about Cuba or the now defunct GDR , do you, Poppycock?
  • javadewd said on Oct 08, 2009....
    Oh, I forgot, Cuba has the best health system in the world and it's free... Just ask the traitors who were walked through the socialist propaganda from California.

    Also, Berlin called again. They really want their wall back... They seemed to prefer not to have the responsibility for their own country then and now is no different.

    Go away, Pip. Nobody likes you.
  • pickersplock said on Oct 09, 2009....
    USA
     
    CBS news
     
    and
     
    The Washington Post
    must be pretty dumb as well.
     
    Oh, I forgot, I spoke personally with a woman who escaped over the Berlin wall in the Sixties.  Her brother was captured, but she made it over.  She must be pretty delusional also, because she said it wasn't so hot over there.  Hence the "defection".
  • andycox said on Oct 09, 2009....
    Picker, your poor woman merely escaped from a state capitalist tyranny. I guess I'd have attempted the same in her situation. This has nothing to do with the merits or otherwise of a society where people would be able to freely access goods and services, the means of production would be held in common, and money, wages and profits would not exist. Or are you trying to say that this is how it was in GDR? If so, then you're a tad misinformed.
  • ALIENated said on Oct 13, 2009....

    Trying to lump Capitalism with Socialism and Communism is just silly. You are trying to describe crap by calling it corn. Crap may have a little corn in it, but it is commonly called crap. Your definition of Socialism is not the commonly held definition either. What you are describing, most people would call fantasy land or something similar.

  • pickersplock said on Oct 14, 2009....

    Humph, I say, ask the parents of any teen what free access to goods and services accomplishes..........how about sloth?

    Neither a freeloader nor an enabler be.

    Don't bother to respond, I already know what your answer will be.
    "I don't know nuthin, cause I's ignorant."
  • andycox said on Oct 14, 2009....

    No Picker, I wouldn’t say that - I don’t know you from Adam. But I will say that you are looking at the proposition from the wrong end of the telescope, projecting a mentality that is firmly rooted in capitalism onto a very different sort of society. To see where I’m coming from you need to appreciate that it’s not just one or two facts that validate what I’m arguing for, its thousands of them. From the causes of war to march of technology, from the needless destruction of goods because there’s no market for them to the vast number of jobs that serve no purpose’s in addressing peoples actual physical and psychological needs. With regard to the free access question, let me ask you just how many hamburgers you’d wolf down in a single sitting, how many cars do you need to get from A to B, how many shirts you’d want to wear in a day? Its capitalism that artificially stokes our desires (why else would billions be spent on advertising?). It encourages avarice and materialism because, bottom line, that’s what it’s all about. Simultaneously modern capitalism particularly devalues decent human values, like cooperativeness, altruism, sharing, and restraint, in favour of decadent hedonistic parasitic lifestyles in which conspicuous consumption and bling epitomise the Good. (I read recently of a Chinese capitalist who paid $600.000 for a dog and ordered 30 luxury cars to come to the airport to greet her and the animal. What’s that all about?) In a culture where the likes of Paris Hilton can be accorded an iconic status, is it any wonder that the youth of today think I just wanna be rich and famous like her as quickly and with as little effort as possible. In short, the work ethic is dead because for decades capitalism has pushed the consumerist ethic instead. And you can’t blame the youth for being ‘on-message’

    Alien, we’ve had this argument before, and you know my position full well: Yes, the way you use the terms is how most people in America use the terms – I’ve never denied that. But I refuse to accede to this corrupt definition, which you still don’t see is actually – in a backhanded way – a sort of grudging endorsement of the tyrants who twisted these words to bolster their legitimacy. Moreover, by declining to accept the ‘state capitalist’ tag, you are by implication denying that the basic features of capitalism operate in countries that call themselves ‘socialist’ or ‘communist’, and in this, my friend, you are seriously mistaken. State and private capitalism have far more in common, than things that separate them, and with every decade the distinction is being eroded further and further. No one even describes Russia as ‘communist’ now

    Socialism /communism is only a fantasy insofar as it doesn’t exist right now (Is this an admission that we use the terms differently?). But the fact of the matter is that it IS a viable alternative to the morass we live in today. The arguments for this are powerful. And if we refuse to take up this option then, I fear we’re headed for Armageddon, one of our own making.

  • ALIENated said on Oct 14, 2009....

    I want a government where I am free and the work I do benefits me. If I have to pay some tax for highways, police, military, firefighters, etc., so be it. I do not want a government where I am not free and I work for the government. Label all that however you want. If people receive goods and services equally, whether they have done any work for them or not, it is only a matter of time before everyone figures out that they can do as little as possible in regards to work, and still survive. That is simply human nature. Therefore, in a society where people receive goods and services equally, they will eventually have to be made to work by the government. That is simply logic. This country, America, works and has worked better than most other nations on the planet because of capitalism and freedom. I walked into a super market tonight to pick up something for my wife. I noticed the shelves stocked with food and all the fruits and vegetables, bread, you name it. What other country in the world is so rich and blessed? Obama wants to ruin all that as far as I can tell. If not, he would be concentrating on the economy, concentrating on how to get people working again ... hint: reduce the burden on businesses. Instead, he wants to "redistribute the wealth". If you take from productive people and give it to the non-productive people, you will eventually have no productive people. People do not need a free ride, they usually need a kick in the pants and a push towards a job, which leads to self respect. Obama wants to give people fish. I want to teach people to fish and provide for themselves.

  • pickersplock said on Oct 15, 2009....
    Confusing capitalism with greed, so predictable.
  • andycox said on Oct 15, 2009....

    Picker, what is greed? It’s ‘the excessive desire to acquire or possess more (especially more material wealth) than one needs or deserves’ (wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn) So when your big-time capitalist purchases an 8 bedroom mansion in the Hamptons, a pied-a-terre in London’s Mayfair area, a game reserve in South Africa, a luxury apartment in Nice, along with several yachts, a private jet, a fleet of vintage cars etc, is this not a tad more than he needs – and, dare I say it, deserves? When shareholders of a public company are presented with an option that will net them a sizeable windfall, will they not vote for that even if it meant, say, that many of the company’s employees might lose their jobs? Come off it. Greed is at the heart of capitalism. It’s the psychological motor driving the system. Fear also goes hand in hand with greed. Because if capitalist investors don’t continually strive to be on top of the game, to find the most profitable ventures, they may find their capital beginning to dwindle, if they settle for ‘underperforming’ companies to invest in. In other words, the system itself compels them to be greedy, and what’s more, stockbrokers acting on their behalf will likewise be compelled to seek out the most lucrative options on behalf of investors or they themselves will go to the wall. Then too there is vanity and status-mongering working in collaboration with greed. The notion of conspicuous consumption hardly needs elaboration: The brash display of glittering wealth witnessed at the galas and get-togethers of the rich, the famous, and the powerful is often subconsciously about elbowing ones way up the greasy pole towards universal acclaim – simply on the basis of one’s wealth. Then, of course, there is sloth. You seem to harbour a curmudgeonly view about the sloth of teens.  Well what about the sloth of so many our parasitic capitalist class, for whom life is just one very expensive holiday? Yes, what about them and their ne’er-do-well, cocaine snorting, party going, tuxedoed offspring? I presume you’re happy to just draw a veil over such excesses. But this notion of sloth also ties in with the above definition of greed because it calls into question how deserving these people of their wealth. However, I, for one, wouldn’t want to get into an ‘ethical’ debate on the issue: That’s pointless. Though it’s seemingly de rigueur for capitalists to indulge in every cardinal sin going, let’s not lose sight of the fact that it is the system itself that both requires and in promotes greed. This is how it is, Picker, and any suggestion that capitalism is some sort of noble selfless project is pure nonsense

  • andycox said on Oct 15, 2009....

    For my part, Alien, I don’t want a government – in the sense that you use the term – period. What I mean by this is the executive component of the state. Because to put it simply, the state itself will wither when communism is established. It’s oblivious when you think about it: The coercive features of the state could simply have no application in such a society (whether we’re talking about compelling people to pay taxes, or arresting them for theft). It’s not the case that in communism, people will ‘receive goods and services equally’ – people, will in fact, help themselves to goods and services. The word ‘equally’ implies a sort of rationing system would operate. Now whilst a fair rationing system may be required in case of a few goods and services, most would be freely accessed, And no, you wouldn’t reach a situation where the government compelled people to work, because as I’ve said no such government would exist. As a matter of fact, as I’ve argued elsewhere, if there was to be a problem in regard to work, it may be that there wouldn’t be sufficient work opportunities to go around. Other meaningful activities might then have to be devised. With regard to your comments on America, I don’t know what index you have in mind when you say ‘America works and has worked better than most other nations’. In some respects, America performs poorly, in others it compares well. But citing capitalism as the reason for Americas ranking in regard to whatever yardstick you have in mind is not valid since capitalism is universal these days. In every country, you’ll come across wages, profits, property, buying and selling .In short, commodity production, which is what capitalism is all about.  

  • ALIENated said on Oct 15, 2009....

    Sorry dude. I just cannot read all that because I know it is all just theory. I would rather discuss real world situations. The kind of society and world you are talking about will never exist in our lifetime, or anyone's lifetime I would predict. We have come a long way as far as civilization goes. Who can say what future generations will do or how they will govern themselves. However, if you are serious about what you are saying, and not just blowing theoretical wind, you kind of scare me. You may be as out of step with human nature as Barack Obama.

  • pickersplock said on Oct 16, 2009....
    So you resent the rich?
     
    That which has not been created, can not be shared. 
  • andycox said on Oct 16, 2009....

    Picker, you're missing the point: I don't resent the rich, I resent the system. The rich are, in a peculiar way, just as much enslaved by the system too. That was one of the points I was trying to make. I'm not sure what you driving at with your rather cryptic remark about not being able to share what has not been created. Sounds blindingly obvious to me.

    Alien, well, its quite possible that communism of the sort I'm talking about may take a few generations to grab the popular imagination. That, however, doesn't invalidate my own small efforts to get the whole project off the ground, or anyone else's. Go to http://andycox1953.webs.com/, and you'll where I'm coming from on this. And yes, I am deadly serious about the whole idea. I think the problem with your way of thinking is that you live totally in this little bubble called 'the present' and can't see beyond that. Far from being 'out of step with human nature', I'd say my understanding of human nature takes account of its tremendous malleability. You, on the other hand, seem to equate human nature with the way in which human beings are driven to behave in capitalist society, and that's a totally ahistorical and de-contextualised conception of human nature. It just doesn't accord with the facts.

  • pickersplock said on Oct 16, 2009....

    So cryptic, yet so obvious.

    Let me know when you figure it out.

  • ALIENated said on Oct 16, 2009....

    I heard a great statement today that sums it all up:

    Republicans want to help the poor get richer and Democrats (and Socialists) want to help the rich get poorer.

  • javadewd said on Oct 16, 2009....
    I thought spamming wasn't allowed on SoulCast...
  • ALIENated said on Oct 16, 2009....

    Are you referring to Andy's link? That is more than I would ever want to read either. Especially considering what it probably says.

  • javadewd said on Oct 16, 2009....
    I think I actually tried to read it once. I think the New York Times makes better toilet paper, though.
  • andycox said on Oct 16, 2009....
    For your information, the site is not a commercial one, it merely contains my blogs, 'A Point of View' 1 -3 that you can access here at SoulCast in any case. Javadewd, you really are a deeply unpleasant individual. I frankly don't inderstand what you're doing here on SoulCast ( which, need I remind you before you start  textually yelling at me to 'FUCK OFF' and 'Go away'- as you habitually do, is a site devoted to UNCENSORED BLOGGING) Why do you feel the feel the need to villify everybody? Why can't you give your little inflammed ego a rest and try engage in civilised discourse, for a change? We don't have to see eye to eye about everything, but at least we can learn from each other. You, my friend, really need to learn how to be civil, and stop being so obnoxious. Its boring.
  • javadewd said on Oct 16, 2009....
    Go away, Pip. Nobody likes you...

    { Statement goes totally over andycox's head while everybody who understands the reference laughs hysterically behind andycox's back }

    ...Perhaps one day you'll understand... When you grow up or something...
  • andycox said on Oct 16, 2009....

    I rest my case, Javadewd. Oh, and sorry to disappoint  you, but I'll just hang around and fight my corner. You carry on with your vulgar conceitedness if it makes you happy. The joke is that everyones probably laughing at you.

    Goodnight!!

  • javadewd said on Oct 16, 2009....
    Sigh. Poor Pip...
  • ALIENated said on Oct 16, 2009....

    http://members.tripod.com/~sprules/pip.wav

    http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp&p=go+away+pip+nobody+likes+you

  • javadewd said on Oct 17, 2009....
    LOL

Comment on "The Game Has CHANGEd"


(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)

Weak on foreign policy, sold out to the nutty left on domestic policy, now lets fuck with national security and have trials for terrorists in federal courts....
Every week, I delve into our local city entertainment/op-ed/newspaper....
He didn't even try to answer it. What would be your answer? Were we right in dropping the bombs on Japan?...
The only human being on the planet that can eject a huge turd, yet somehow dupe the media into thinking it's a golden egg that smells like roses....
How's Obama doing with the economy and his stimulus.......