← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Texas Dissident
Thread ID: 5450 | Posts: 29 | Started: 2003-03-10
2003-03-10 08:56 | User Profile
[url=http://www.originaldissent.com/sartre030703.html]Betrayal of Republicanism[/url]
by SARTRE
The Republican Party has long pursued a path contrary from its heritage. Under President George W Bush, that direction has cumulated in a repudiation of traditional conservative principles. Any honest conservative maintains a core roster of values and policies that reflect their passionate support for the Republic. Belief in limited central government, the rule of law, fiscal responsibility, a free enterprise economy and national defense are essential positions. Despite, lip service to these ideals, the Bush administration has systematically turned its back on those standards and has chartered a course that inevitably will preside over the death of our nation.
In addition to the presidency, the Republican Party has control of the House of Representatives and a majority in the Senate. There are no valid excuses left. Where is the beef? The events of September 11, 2001 were tragic, but hardly provides justification to abandon our Constitution or deploy the military to every corner of the globe. The security of the United States is not enhanced under perceptual intervention and permanent war. The Presidency is meant to lead the country, not to transform the nation into an empire.
President Bush has overseen an expansion of the federal government, that no Democratic administration could accomplish. His use of executive orders has only increased the scope and reach of central authority. Resonantly absent are any efforts to enact fundamental conservative policies. Appointments and procedures all reinforce and expand a dominant role of bureaucratic agencies over local jurisdictions. The defense of liberty has been forsaken and is the ultimate causality of the Bush legacy.
Allowing this betrayal to continue would, amiably be giving consent to the lost of our inherited way of life. Defending the civil liberties of individual citizens was always a basic component of genuine conservative principles. Bush has turned his back on the most important purpose that made America distinct from other countries. "We the People" clearly establishes that governments exists to serve, not control. George W Bush does not deserve another term as president. His re-election risks a coronation and unending despotism.
Presidential elections have been reduced to selecting between approved candidates. Both major parties practice the same anointing course. Yet, the primary process still offers the opportunity to focus the national debate, within the party preference contest. The significance of challenging an incumbent lies in the proving the "emperor has no clothes". Most politicians are obsessed with attaining the office they seek. Many primary nominees are seeking a stage to advance their platform. And even once in a long while, you find a Statesman who seeks to reinstate the real national interest.
Redress of grievances, are seldom heard. During a primary charges become public. Restitution and restoration can be voiced, while visions for returning to our constitutional republic can be presented. Party members and delegates can be tested to chose - raw power politics - or principled purpose. Americans can view that meaningful change is possible, only through reform. Bush would not get a free ride, he would be obliged to debate or be seen as above mere mortals. Republicans would be pressed to follow their true roots or concede that have become and now only promote - internationalism, multiculturalism and imperial empire.
Since purging the traditional wing of bona fide conservatives, the GOP has adopted the neocon policies that are a direct extension of Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt. Serious defenders of America understand that Bush and his cronies are proponents of globalism. If our ranks are expunged from party membership, the haven of a third party requires consideration.
Majorities need to include their own voices of conscience or bear the responsibility of dissolution from their morals and purpose. The United States has squandered the "good will" of a generous people. Bush has isolated America from the rest of the world. His drive for interdependence has been discredited, as he pursues a course of conquest. His claims of liberation of foreign lands, have the cost of forsaking and honoring our own liberty, here on home soil.
Third parties may not become the avenue to the oval office, but supporting such movements retain the authenticity of righteousness. Just look what kind of government we received under a ââ¬Ëso calledââ¬â¢ conservative? The Republican Party needs to change and renew or their tenure in power will end in disaster. The "war on terror" has become the annihilate of dissent. When Bush says he will track down all those who make war on America, he really is saying that everyone must accept his form of rule or become an enemy of the state. That is not traditional conservatism, and Bush is no conservative.
Republican Congressmen Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo have been ostracized from the Bush GOP. They are both legitimate and proven conservatives. That is the very reason they are scorned within their own party. They represent the true America and deserve our support in confronting the pretender conservative. A ticket with the constitutionalist Ron Paul at the head would directly challenge the cozy corporate government union that replaced free enterprise. He would insist that the Federal Reserve be abolished, thus liberating our economy from the curse of debt created fiat money.
Tom Tancredo would secure our nation and put an end to "Open Borders". This is the single most important public policy that will lessen the threat from aliens, who are hostile and willing to do harm to our citizens. Under Bush guarding our borders means scrutiny for those who want to leave, while smiling at those who rush to enter. Tancredo embodies the common sense pro American viewpoint that only a politician of courage would dare demonstrate.
A litany of policy positions are not necessary to support a Paul/Tancredo ticket. Only a profound commitment to stop the madness of George, the man who would be king. Pressure from within the Republican Party will have the great advantage of slowing down the rush into the abyss. Voters deserve and warrants a real alternative. The GOP, especially needs the opportunity to remember their true purpose. It has been obvious that Republicans are unable to retain the majority, and rule as conservatives. They need to hear this message loud and clear. Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo are the only elected officials that have the credibility, courage and honor to carry this fight into the camp of their own party.
Policies that Pat Buchanan advocate would not cause world animosity, but George Bushââ¬â¢s administration has achieved "America the Isolated". Paul and Tancredo will carry on the same America First tradition that Buchanan championed, but will add the stature of being members of the U.S. Congress, to their candidacy. The prospects that haunts us all, is a country run under the "Patriot Act", guarded by "Homeland Security" with a constant "War on Terror" being waged upon American citizens. That is George Bushââ¬â¢s formula for our future. Put an end to his term as President, he deserves an early retirement. Support Paul and Trancredo - real Americans.
*March 07, 2003 SARTRE is the editor of Breaking All The Rules. Contact him at [sartre@frontiernet.net]. *
2003-06-10 12:56 | User Profile
TD,
While convinced the Republican Party is being sabotoged by Bush and company, neo-cons in and outside politics, and the blabber mouths on talk radio, I don't think Paul or Tancredo have a snowball's chance.
They are voices crying amid the increasingly cacophonic 'poltical quasi-philosophy' of a self-serving bunch of corrupt little men. And the numbers of such are multiplying.
So who then to nominate to high office??
Uncorruptible, honorable men - but who might they be??
Men who could be identified by the profile of senior Senator Chuck Hagel (R, Nebraska).
He is a military combat veteran (Vietnam), with two purple hearts, and has adamantly opposed the unprecedented, 'pre-emptive', and totally unjustified invasion of Iraq and overthrow of a government BY SHEER FORCE OF ARMS.
A shame on all Americans who, when polled, couldn't care less for the pseudo-state of israel and its well-deserved enemies. And THAT invasion was on the agenda of what I call "zionazis" - Perle, Wolfowitz et al - and their 'sacred icons' in israel since the early 90s.
Hagel also appears a throw-back to the Constitutional Conservatism of a bygone Republican Party, and ... unfortunaely, is most likely not interested in higher office.
What to do??
Analytic
2003-06-10 16:40 | User Profile
Originally posted by Analytic@Jun 10 2003, 07:56 ** Hagel also appears a throw-back to the Constitutional Conservatism of a bygone Republican Party, and ... unfortunaely, is most likely not interested in higher office. **
Welcome to the board, Analytic. I appreciate your comments.
Not to be picky or anything, but Hagel and Constitutional conservatism of a by-gone era??
Correct me if I'm wrong but did not Hagel endorse McCain in the 2000 GOP primaries. Even further, did he not demand the use of ground troops in Serbia?
I'm not sure that qualifies him for the constitutional conservatism I could endorse.
2003-06-10 20:55 | User Profile
Analytic,
Hagel is the darling of the Bilderberg and Trilateral crowd. Sorry, he doesn't pass the smell test . . .
SARTRE :ph34r:
2004-02-18 00:33 | User Profile
America, once the land of opportunity, has become a magnet for "foreign" (non-Patriots) opportunists who benefit greatly at seeing our country divided. These opportunists are enjoying pitting one against the other and causing a great division in our country. Political parties need to set aside their differences and focus on removing this evil as this is America's greatest threat! We can all go back to political bickering once the snake's head is cut off.
The first thing America needs to do is cut out the demon's tongue. We can do this through a massive bombardment of correspondence to our employees (elected officials) and throught the FCC. Demand the media monopoly stop! These socialist neo-con pigs intentionally hire the underqualified to keep America at war with itself while they rob us blind and destroy our country. Once we get our voices back, it will be easier to tackle other affairs such as high immigration and illegals.
Excerpts from George Washington's farewell speech:
It serves always to distract the Public Councils and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill founded Jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot & insurrection. [B]It opens the door to foreign influence & corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country, are subjected to the policy and will of another.[/B]
The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave.
A passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favourite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels & Wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification: It leads also to concessions to the favourite Nation of priviledges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions--by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained--& by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom eql priviledges are withheld: [B]And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens[/B] (who devote themselves to the favourite Nation) facility to betray, or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition corruption or infatuation.
[URL=http://gwpapers.virginia.edu/farewell/transcript.html]George Washington's Farewell Speech[/URL]
2004-04-16 20:42 | User Profile
"The Constitutional Conservatism of a by-gone Republican Pary"? Hogwash. I've got news for you folks who still have some vestigal affection or loyalty for the GOP -- the Republicans were born as a radical party and they have governed as a radical party. It was the Republicans that launched the invasion of the South, it was the Republicans who enacted Reconstruction, it was the Republicans who ended the backing of dollars with gold, it was the Republicans who declared the War on Drugs, and it was the Republicans who invaded Iraq. The few periods of real conservatism under Republicans, such as under Taft, were the aberrations, not the rule. The Democrats were the conservatives, and they remained so (at least in the South) up until the 60's. Now both parties are rotten to the core and are completely beyond salvage. I will shed no tears over whatever happens to the GOP.
2004-04-17 04:13 | User Profile
Quantrill is right. The national Democratic Party was, in general, the conservative party until FDR's New Deal, and in the South it remained conservative until the 1960s-early '70s. George Wallace's campaign for the presidential nomination in 1972 was the "Last Hurrah" for the Party of Jefferson and Jackson.
Of course, the Democrats still honor Jackson, but nowadays they mean Jesse, not Andrew.
2004-04-17 08:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Analytic]Hagel also appears a throw-back to the Constitutional Conservatism of a bygone Republican Party, and ... unfortunaely, is most likely not interested in higher office.[/QUOTE]
On the contrary, Hagel wants to be President and probably would have been McCain's running-mate in 2000. He'll likely run for President in 2008.
2004-05-12 02:46 | User Profile
Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo are two reasons why I'm still a registered Republican. Sure it's the a the party of Nixon and the two Bushes, but is also still the party of Robert Taft, Barry Goldwater and Ron Paul.
2004-05-12 10:31 | User Profile
I don't think we can really say that the Democratic Party was the conservative party in general up to FDR. What about its 'Populist' tendencies? {'an increase in the circulating currency (to be achieved by the unlimited coinage of silver), a graduated income tax, government ownership of the railroads, a tariff for revenue only, the direct election of U.S. senators,' EBrit.} What of Wilson?
I would say that conservative principles have been protected by both parties, and attacked by both parties throughout their history. With Eisenhower and Reagan, the GOP established itself as the conservative party in principle, even as both (esp. Eisenhower) has their liberal tendencies. W. is best seen as an abbertation of 20th GOP principles, although there are no guarantees that his administration wont have warped these for some time to come.
[QUOTE=Fernando Wood]Quantrill is right. The national Democratic Party was, in general, the conservative party until FDR's New Deal, and in the South it remained conservative until the 1960s-early '70s. George Wallace's campaign for the presidential nomination in 1972 was the "Last Hurrah" for the Party of Jefferson and Jackson.
Of course, the Democrats still honor Jackson, but nowadays they mean Jesse, not Andrew.[/QUOTE]
2004-05-12 13:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=darkstar]I don't think we can really say that the Democratic Party was the conservative party in general up to FDR. What about its 'Populist' tendencies? {'an increase in the circulating currency (to be achieved by the unlimited coinage of silver), a graduated income tax, government ownership of the railroads, a tariff for revenue only, the direct election of U.S. senators,' EBrit.} What of Wilson?[/QUOTE] This is true (although the income tax was first introduced by Lincoln.) The Democrats were more conservative socially than the Republicans. Also, it should be noted that many of these populist ideas came from conservative principles. The robber baron industrial capitalism of the late 18th-early 19th centuries was a profoundly revolutionary and destructive system. Conservatives, such as the Southern Agrarians, fought against it however they could. Most old school conservatives, then as now, had a strong anti-capitalist streak.
PS -- Your point is well taken regarding Wilson however. He was a reckless, deluded, utopian fool.
2004-05-15 02:51 | User Profile
They control the FAKE money, but our society en masse behaves as it is the REAL money, as planned and controlled. How can a man live, even he foments all the lusts of his flesh-rotten self, to the obvious destruction of the Earth, I guess a finger in a hole is worth more than anything to the average man, he has nothing other.. the simple pleasure of sticking one's throbbing member into any open orifice of another fleshly being is the desire of man. Rot begets rot. And concerning Man-Woman sex, ROT still begets ROT. There is no GLORY in the flesh, No manifestation of your God, and NO GLORY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2004-05-15 03:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Exelsis_Deo]How can a man live, even he foments all the lusts of his flesh-rotten self, to the obvious destruction of the Earth, I guess a finger in a hole is worth more than anything to the average man, he has nothing other.. the simple pleasure of sticking one's throbbing member into any open orifice of another fleshly being is the desire of man. [/QUOTE]
Don't you think this judgment is a little...harsh?
2004-05-22 11:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]Don't you think this judgment is a little...harsh?[/QUOTE] Ready for the rubber room is more like it.
2004-05-25 00:12 | User Profile
I'm not ready for the rubber room. We live in a rubber room.. Perhaps I've just had it up to the gills with the exploitation and in-your-face " sexuality " that is pervasive throught our currect " society " ( no longer being one because it is itself now based upon non-socially based constructions where everyone goes home and forgets about it ). To be true, I can see how Valley noticed what I said was a " little harsh ", but isn't the Truth harsh by definition if you believe in Christianity, Judaism, or Islam ? Indeed it is. Generations of easy living, alienation and differentation including a general breakdown of all the most basic and elemental natural desires of manhood can have that effect. I'm not talking about me personally, I can see the difference, but will they see it 50 years from now ? And as far as sticking it in the hole, well any Christian man worth his salt knows that there is no Glory in the Flesh and I don't see why what I said should be such a wacko statement at all. If you could reach immortality through science, would you believe that it is true immortality ? Ask yourself a larger question. By focusing on our material appetities, what can this do but bring more rewards in the material ? Sexual Gratification in ITSELF, even when blessed by the Lord, is a work of This World.
2004-06-27 17:24 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Exelsis_Deo]I'm not ready for the rubber room. We live in a rubber room.. Perhaps I've just had it up to the gills with the exploitation and in-your-face " sexuality " that is pervasive throught our currect " society " ( no longer being one because it is itself now based upon non-socially based constructions where everyone goes home and forgets about it ). To be true, I can see how Valley noticed what I said was a " little harsh ", but isn't the Truth harsh by definition if you believe in Christianity, Judaism, or Islam ? Indeed it is. Generations of easy living, alienation and differentation including a general breakdown of all the most basic and elemental natural desires of manhood can have that effect. I'm not talking about me personally, I can see the difference, but will they see it 50 years from now ? And as far as sticking it in the hole, well any Christian man worth his salt knows that there is no Glory in the Flesh and I don't see why what I said should be such a wacko statement at all. If you could reach immortality through science, would you believe that it is true immortality ? Ask yourself a larger question. By focusing on our material appetities, what can this do but bring more rewards in the material ? Sexual Gratification in ITSELF, even when blessed by the Lord, is a work of This World.[/QUOTE]
Between your last vile and totally unprovoked post in another thread, and now, this veryââ¬Â¦strangeââ¬Â¦post, I would say you have a demented outlook on life and Godââ¬â¢s creationââ¬Â¦I suggest you seek help ASAP, for your own safety and that of those close to you. It is strange people like you who give Christianity and God a most undeserved bad name.
2004-06-29 03:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Gabrielle]Between your last vile and totally unprovoked post in another thread, and now, this very…strange…post, I would say you have a demented outlook on life and God’s creation…I suggest you seek help ASAP, for your own safety and that of those close to you. It is strange people like you who give Christianity and God a most undeserved bad name.[/QUOTE]
Of course, to agree with you would make me " normal ". Have you noticed that this thread has sat on top view for two months without a reply ? Gabby, ask yourself why. Why would MEN on OD let this post SIT for two months without a reply ?
I am happy that you finally replied, although I do not condone this thread going further. I think you're a good hearted woman, and if you could stretch your mind to understand what I was saying, perhaps you wouldn't think I'm crazy. Because I'm not at all.. I apologize for the rash description of the sexual act. But I live in a pornographic society, and I am taught to think that sex is the answer to all my problems. I see commercials all night when watching tv with my family about how I can have a rock hard erection . And my neice is in public school who is 11 years old and she's told me how the special class tells them to " open up " , when they already taught them at age 9 like a plumbing class how " sex " happens.
Indeed, by objecting to me, you lay bare your own predelictions, which are for FREE SEX and PHYSICAL ABANDONMENT. How dare you compare your BASE hormonal mind with mine.. You are the one who needs to look deeper, Not I.
2004-06-29 03:30 | User Profile
Gabrielle, and all on OD, I remember in my mind the post that I pressed " go" for, the one which was offensive, and it's offensive to me also. I really feel bad about it. I know it was not fully provoked and all I can do is ask the Original Dissent community to look back at my hundreds of posts and judge them for yourself. Even a good man gets sullen at times, and unfortunately with the influence of alcohol I offended Gabrielle and possibly other members. I can only ask your forgiveness and let you know that it was not personal... I am coming to grips myself in all this, tonight I saw a blackk man with a white woman at my local video store. It stirrred something in me, but then I really saw how happy he was, he was SO HAPPY. AND SO WAS SHE. She loved Him. Being as racially observant as I am, the innate ability I have to be able to tell what racce you are, she was a South American Indian upon closer look .
I suppose that by identifying people, or having a REAL ABILITY to do so is an offfense to you..... if I told you that I can physically identify a Jew, which I can, no matter what name he/she hides behind ..
And if you think I hide, then here is my email, so you can write me if you want. [email]rd868@juno.com[/email] ..
2004-06-29 06:47 | User Profile
This member of the 'OD community' again expresses his view that you should immediately seek the help of a mental health professional licensed to prescribe powerful medications.
Alcholol might let out the inner demons--but most of us don't have those sort of demons inside, drunk or sober.
[QUOTE=Exelsis_Deo]... all I can do is ask the Original Dissent community to look back at my hundreds of posts and judge them for yourself. Even a good man gets sullen at times, and unfortunately with the influence of alcohol I offended Gabrielle and possibly other members...[/QUOTE]
2004-06-29 17:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Exelsis_Deo]Of course, to agree with you would make me " normal ". Have you noticed that this thread has sat on top view for two months without a reply ? Gabby, ask yourself why. Why would MEN on OD let this post SIT for two months without a reply ?
I am happy that you finally replied, although I do not condone this thread going further. I think you're a good hearted woman, and if you could stretch your mind to understand what I was saying, perhaps you wouldn't think I'm crazy. Because I'm not at all.. I apologize for the rash description of the sexual act. But I live in a pornographic society, and I am taught to think that sex is the answer to all my problems. I see commercials all night when watching tv with my family about how I can have a rock hard erection . And my neice is in public school who is 11 years old and she's told me how the special class tells them to " open up " , when they already taught them at age 9 like a plumbing class how " sex " happens.
Indeed, by objecting to me, you lay bare your own predelictions, which are for FREE SEX and PHYSICAL ABANDONMENT. How dare you compare your BASE hormonal mind with mine.. You are the one who needs to look deeper, Not I.[/QUOTE]
Firstly, itââ¬â¢s not merely that I think youââ¬â¢re crazyââ¬Â¦Iââ¬â¢m sorry to say it, but, judging from your posts, it is very clear that you are ââ¬Ëa few short of a dozen,ââ¬â¢ so to speakââ¬Â¦
Secondly, why donââ¬â¢t you stop watching TV? Not only is it full of immoral crap (as you yourself pointed outââ¬Â¦), but you donââ¬â¢t seem to be able to handle itââ¬Â¦and, before you say itââ¬â¢s impossible, no, it isnââ¬â¢tââ¬Â¦there are films that you can personally choose ââ¬â American, British, etcââ¬Â¦.and, of course, when you run out of movies to watch, there are still things that people did long before moving pictures were inventedââ¬Â¦you know: walking, talking, playing games, reading (if youââ¬â¢re not a big reader, try listening to books on tape/CD), associating with other people, etc.?
Lastly, I donââ¬â¢t believe in sex before marriageââ¬Â¦I hate to disillusion you on that score, but I guess that blows away your ââ¬ÅFREE SEX and PHYSICAL ABANDONMENTââ¬Â theory. :rolleyes:
2004-06-29 17:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Exelsis_Deo]Gabrielle, and all on OD, I remember in my mind the post that I pressed " go" for, the one which was offensive, and it's offensive to me also. I really feel bad about it. I know it was not fully provoked and all I can do is ask the Original Dissent community to look back at my hundreds of posts and judge them for yourself. Even a good man gets sullen at times, and unfortunately with the influence of alcohol I offended Gabrielle and possibly other members. I can only ask your forgiveness and let you know that it was not personal... I am coming to grips myself in all this, tonight I saw a blackk man with a white woman at my local video store. It stirrred something in me, but then I really saw how happy he was, he was SO HAPPY. AND SO WAS SHE. She loved Him. Being as racially observant as I am, the innate ability I have to be able to tell what racce you are, she was a South American Indian upon closer look .
I suppose that by identifying people, or having a REAL ABILITY to do so is an offfense to you..... if I told you that I can physically identify a Jew, which I can, no matter what name he/she hides behind ..
And if you think I hide, then here is my email, so you can write me if you want. [email]rd868@juno.com[/email] ..[/QUOTE]
LOLââ¬Â¦Ã¢â¬Ënot fully provokedââ¬â¢?! Not provoked at all!
Why is it I posted the same exact question at Stormfront and not one person there thought it was sexual?
Here it is: [url]http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=138111[/url]
Why is it that every person who answered there was polite and stuck to the topic, but you couldnââ¬â¢t? As a matter of fact, as far as I know, only one of the posters there was Christian. Who do you think acted more like a Christian ââ¬â you or them? Did you bring glory to God or shame to Christianity?
Please do not blame alcohol for your twisted mind. Yes, you most definitely should not drink any alcohol, but the perversions and the obsession with male body parts is already in your demented mindââ¬Â¦the alcohol just freed you up to write what was already on your warped mind.
2004-07-02 03:58 | User Profile
Exactly. Lest you missuunderstand, I am a fully functional member of our Society. I spare my perception of reality for you and for my family and friends. But my family and friendds still bellieve in tthe media onslaught..I am still working as you should be to show the tttruth. It;s not easwyy to change the mindds of the people........ but the death kneell is coming aand we all have to make peace with our makerr. As far as my old posts, I am the ONLY one who said that France would not stand for this bullshit. All the OD overlords said that France would follow the line back in 2002.... France did not. Go back into my historical posts aand you will see mystical predictions which come to fact, and you can;'tt eeven lay a line equal to what I say, and all of OD knows that, so wwhatev er you say you must realize that my insights are NOOT to be ttrifled with. Dare you ask further ??
2004-07-03 03:48 | User Profile
I am sorry, Gabrielle.. i guess that the personal end of the internet is something I have to be more conscious of, and it was wrong of me to let such a good woman as yourself be the victim of my rant.
May God Bless You, truly.
2004-10-23 14:58 | User Profile
Bush II is to the left of Jimmy Carter on every issue that matters. It's important for America that his rotten swarm of parasites is ousted.
2004-10-23 18:30 | User Profile
Greetings, Howard.
I regard Jimmy Carter as the most incompetent president this nation has ever been afflicted with. With the Bush presidency I may have to rethink that. At the end I may split this lemon in half and make it a bipartisan distinction- the worst Democratic administration, Carter. The worst Republican administration, Bush II.
Bush sure as hell isn't John Quincy Adams, now is he?
2004-10-24 16:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Analytic]Hagel also appears a throw-back to the Constitutional Conservatism of a bygone Republican Party, and ... unfortunaely, is most likely not interested in higher office.[/QUOTE]
Its my understanding that Sen. Hagel is widely believed to be interested in (albeit not committed to) running for President in 2008, irrespective of who wins thiis year. He definitely has a reputation for ambition and has been networking with Republican activists across the nation....
2004-11-20 00:11 | User Profile
Bush is just a traitor David Duke was right, a traitor is worse than an enemy I'm afraid with Bush there's no Republican party any more but jewishsupremacism in action
2004-11-20 00:16 | User Profile
[QUOTE=marybonita]Bush is just a traitor David Duke was right, a traitor is worse than an enemy I'm afraid with Bush there's no Republican party any more but jewishsupremacism in action[/QUOTE]
Ahhhhhhh Maria bonita, Maria la Oh,,,,,,,,you are so right.
2005-01-11 08:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=marybonita]Bush is just a traitor David Duke was right, a traitor is worse than an enemy I'm afraid with Bush there's no Republican party any more but jewishsupremacism in action[/QUOTE]
You have a point, Ms. Mary.
Neo-Conism has melded the worst of Zionism; plutocracy and flag-humping FReakerism into an apelike amalgam...