LowerCaseRepublican

Jas can't even work on a database without it crashing. Do we really want him to be in charge for us in Latvia, Heads?

I was just listening to Alex Jones. One of his video cameras was confiscated and busted by the cops when he was just videotaping an event that had a permit and he was standing in a designated area. He talked a lot about cops using orange nets to round big groups of people up and detain them and bring them to a detainment camp that used to be an old bus station. That with the free speech zones that have been going down at a lot of protests (happened at the DNC as well as the FTAA protests in Miami). It's getting more and more like a police state and the cops are getting a lot more brutal about things, especially in Miami when there was little to no Black Bloc presence there at all. I just question police backlash at protests after the events at the G8 in Genoa. Carlo Guiliani, one of the leaders of the Italian anti-globalization movement, was killed along with other unarmed protesters after the police noticed a riot starting due to the "anarchist", no wait scratch that "dumbass" group the Black Bloc. However, video and other evidence shows that the people who really started the riot were not Black Bloc members but rather Italian police leaving squad cars dressed up as the Black Bloc in order to start a riot, discredit the protesters and allow for the cops to shut down the protest in the name of defense.

The Dixiecrats in the South were Democrats opposed to the Civil Rights legislation and thus after it was passed left the party and joined the Republicans since the blame for its' passage in their eyes was on LBJ. (as is most stuff...good/bad economies, legislation signed into law etc.) FDR used the Southern block as his key voting strategy when he was in elections and didn't do too much to upset the apple cart in exchange for getting a s***load of votes from them. That all changed with the VRA of 1965. In his remarks upon signing the Civil Rights Act, President Lyndon Johnson praised Republicans for their "overwhelming majority." He did not offer similar praise to his own Democratic Party. Moreover, Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen, an Illinois Republican, collaborated with the White House and the Senate leadership of both parties to draft acceptable compromise amendments to end the southern Democrats' filibuster of the Act. It was Dirksen who often took to the Senate floor to declare, "This is an idea whose time has come. It will not be denied." Dirksen's greatest triumph earned him the Leadership Conference of Civil Rights Award, presented by then-NAACP Chairman Roy Wilkins, for his remarkable civil rights leadership. As for the delegates, I've been part of campaigns that send delegates to the convention. They ask for a wide spectrum of people to be chosen...preferably ethnic minorities and women first. So numbers from both sides are skewed because of that. Traditional small government Republicans are really good people. (many of them are now Libertarians since the Republican party has shifted more towards the religious right and the neo-conservative movement since the late 1970s) It's the neo-conservative movement that is bi-partisan...starting with Clinton and continuing with the Bush administration, that this ideology has really gained a strong foothold of pro-corporate agendas and f*** everybody else. Unfortunately for all John and Jane Q. Public Americans, we've been f***ed over by this movement to a very corporate influenced world and government. Both parties have really forgotten their original platforms and the current ones are just scary, insane and police state-ish.

Be cause they are on edge gives them free reign to deny civil liberties? Mass arrests without provocation is completely authoritarian and as a judge so aptly put it "odious to democracy". There were testimonials of tourists coming out of the subway that got rounded up, people who didn't know why they were getting arrested (non-protesters who just happened to be in wrong place at wrong time) along with other protesters who were detained without charge.

He has the same Congressional voting record on intelligence and the military as Kerry during his service in Congress so he really has no room to critique Kerry (just as you said MM has no room to critique others' appearances since his ass is so large that it could have its own senator)

No, PA. I applaud Bush for saying we can't win IT. In the video from the Today show the emphasis was on "it". (inferring that we can with other wars but not this war on "terror") In his most important policy speech, on September 20, 2001, the president called the war on terrorism "a task that does not end." A few days earlier, Dick Cheney said: "There's not going to be an end date when we're going to say, 'There, it's all over with.''' Donald Rumsfeld agreed that we "surely will not" eliminate terrorism "completely from the face of the Earth." So what would constitute victory, a reporter asked Rumsfeld. His answer gave away the game. This will always be a dangerous world, he replied, full of "powerful weapons and with people who are willing to use those powerful weapons." Victory means simply being able to "continue our way of life. . to a point that you are satisfied that the American people are going to be able to live their lives in relative freedom and have the kinds of linkages with the rest of the world that we feel are so central to our well being." The U.S. will have won when "the American people and our interests and friends and allies and deployed forces can go about our business not in fear." "Business" and "linkages" are the operative words, as Bush made clear a few weeks later: "We cannot let the terrorists achieve the objective of frightening our nation to the point where we don't conduct business or people don't shop. Terrorists want to turn the openness of the global economy against itself. We must not let them.. Out of the sorrow of September 11th, I see opportunity to expand our ties of trade." Right now, we're living with a bi-partisan administration (Bush and Kerry) who are looking to keep the specter of endless war on the population in order to keep us quiet and not questioning via the PATRIOT Act and the VICTORY Act (Orrin Hatch and DOJ legislation that was written and is a LOT worse than PATRIOT I...but it was leaked and the DOJ got nailed with a lot of egg on its face) When Bush went on Rush Limbaugh's show to do damage control, the truth slipped out once again. Limbaugh suggested that terrorism is "always going to happen because it always has." Bush simply replied: "Right." Then he turned the conversation to his real goal: making predominantly Muslim nations more friendly to U.S. interests and more willing to follow the U.S. model. That goal won't be up for debate in this campaign season. The Democrats are just as committed to it as the GOP. Just two days after 9/11, Democratic pundit Thomas Friedman explained what the war on terrorism is all about. There is a battle raging throughout the Muslim world, he said, between the modernizers, who accept the dominance of US-style globalization, and the traditionalists who oppose it. The goal of this new war is to break the power of the traditionalists forever. That's the same Tom Friedman who once wrote: "The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist called the U.S. Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps. Macdonald's cannot flourish without MacDonnell Douglas." American taxpayers won't cough up nearly a half-trillion dollars a year to promote the multinational corporate free market. They need to believe that are protecting themselves against some imminent threat. So the war against terrorism must be "a task that does not end."

I just don't see where Miller gets off b****ing at Kerry for being so horrible saying "[Kerry] has voted--he's been on the wrong side of foreign policy issues for the last 20 years." when Miller has done the EXACT SAME THING.

Yeah...damn flip flopping of Kerry sooner or later they'll say that you can't win the war on terror and then the very next day say that you are gonna win it -- oh wait. It seems they are running on flip-flopping because there are no issues that Bush can run on. Underfunded NCLB, a purely elective war in Iraq that has bogged down the military, a sputtering economy (consumer confidence down in August and not one net job created by Bush administration yet), cutting veterans' benefits, decreasing Pell grants, etc. etc. etc. Neither one of these neo-conservative twits deserves to be on the ballot.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0902-08.htm There were also stories on, I believe it was the New York Daily News (can't remember for sure...trying to find the story again) that said that there were a lot of mass roundups of people, including random tourists and that even reporters were rounded up and arrested (and jabbed with bicycles with cops riding them) and the reporters had video of cops driving their scooters into crowds...nearly running over people and hitting them etc. (with no room to get out of the way and the cops did not even specify that they needed to get through)

Where'd all the Zell Miller supporters go now? ::crickets chirping::

http://smash_the_right_wing.tripod.com It's my web site. I haven't updated too recently (too busy to sit down and write another article) Say what you want about my politics but they are pretty well backed up.

The Purple Hearts were a slap in the face to all veterans. The Jesus photo is what we call sardonic satire. This satire = funny.

MM is an entertainer, no more and no less. And since when is commenting about somebody's weight a means to discredit whatever point they are going to make? If the thinnest, most fit person around is the best on political opinion then we better all bow to the Einstein of political theory...fitness guru, Tony Little. There are more and more people coming out against the war. As HL Mencken once stated: "The notion that a radical is one who hates his country is naive and usually idiotic. He is, more likely, one who likes his country more than the rest of us and is thus more disturbed than the rest of us when he sees it debauched. He is not a bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good citizen driven to despair." So the knee-jerk: "They are critiquing American policy so they must hate the US!" is childish and asinine. Surely people like Republican Congressman Ron Paul, who holds deep anti-Iraq war views would not meet the same vitriol that you have spewed against MM. http://smash_the_right_wing.tripod.com/id38.html is my site that has a lot of information on Iraq and the reasoning behind the war. Now that it has come out that the INC lead by Chalabi was a spy for Iran and the Israeli spy was busted as one of the main intel sources for the war, we find that the two countries who had a vested interest in seeing the US invade Iraq had representatives who gave us the shaky intelligence. Here's one where Rummy gets busted in a lie on national TV: http://www.infowars.com/print/iraq/rumsfeld_inalie.htm As for war-time profiteering, top members of the Pentagon like Richard Perle also sat on the boards of many weapons manufacturers. They made money hand over fist advocating the war. As for war-time profiteering: http://www.alternet.org/story/15445 http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5333896/ Between December 2003 and May 2004, news reports repeatedly documented a pattern of fraud, waste, and corruption by Halliburton in Iraq. In December, a Pentagon investigation found evidence that Halliburton's Kellogg, Brown & Root (KBR) had overcharged the U.S. government some $61 million for fuel deliveries from Kuwait to Iraq. In January, Halliburton admitted to the Pentagon that two of its employees took up to $6 million in kickbacks for awarding a Kuwaiti-based company with work in Iraq. Then in early February it was reported that the company had agreed to repay the U.S. government some $27 million for meals that were never served to American troops. In May, the Coalition Provisional Authority's inspector general started raising questions about the bills that Halliburton had racked up at a five-star beachfront hotel near Kuwait City. And twelve Halliburton truck drivers claimed they risked their lives driving empty trucks in Iraq while their employer billed the government for hauling absolutely nothing. *In late May, Time Magazine obtained Pentagon emails which said Vice President Dick Cheney's office coordinated the awarding of an Iraq contract to Halliburton, despite Cheney's insistence that he had no influence whatsoever over contract decisions regarding Halliburton. In June, Rep. Henry Waxman's office obtained even more documentation of the White House's involvement in awarding lucrative Iraq contracts to Halliburton. To summarize, Cheney, the former Halliburton CEO, pushed for the Iraq war in his capacity as vice president, and then helped his former employer get some $9 billion in contracts to "reconstruct" the country that had been destroyed in the war. Meanwhile, Cheney continues to be paid more than $150,000 annually by Halliburton. * As if that weren't all enough, this week, five more Halliburton whistleblowers accused the company of wasting millions of taxpayer dollars in Iraq. They say that Halliburton: Lodged 100 workers at a five-star hotel in Kuwait for a total of $10,000 a day while the Pentagon wanted them to stay in tents, like soldiers, at $139 a night; Abandoned $85,000 trucks because of flat tires and minor problems; Paid $100 to have a 15-pound bag of laundry cleaned as part of a million-dollar laundry contract in peaceful Kuwait. The price for cleaning the same amount of laundry in war-torn Iraq was $28; Spent $1.50 a can to buy 37,200 cans of soda in Kuwait, about 24 times higher than the contract price; and knowingly paid subcontractors twice for the same bill. War profiteering should make people of any political party sick and questioning the reasoning, intelligence and rationale for the war is not un-patriotic but rather is the total essense of democracy. In "Weapons of Mass Deception" by 2 media critics Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber, they show through a whole s***load of sources that Bush wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11 and developed reasons to do so that would influence the American public to get behind them (i.e. WMD, AQ connections) It's a very good read and shows the incompetence/deception behind putting America in this foreign policy maneuver. Democrats aren't falling all over themselves for 9/11...they didn't put their convention blocks away from Ground Zero, didn't move it back in time than normal to be closer to 9/11, didn't have all sorts of 9/11 rememberance ceremonies in their convention. Here's an interesting take from a guy who was in the RNC interviewing delegates. http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?emx=x&pid=1744

Slandering a person who did something brave really stings, eh? Well maybe you should rail against the Not So Swift Boat Vets for doing the same thing to Kerry. It's the same moral throughway.

Yeah, Rick Santorum who makes bigoted statements against entire groups of the population and is a bigger man than me how? "[The] right to privacy…doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution." –Rick Santorum Newt is also a guy who divorced his wife while she was recovering from cancer after living with his mistress for a long period of time (that'd be carrying on an affair) If he is a good moral Christian then how does he rectify that? Wow, Tom Delay found time to not go after Subway (he was trying to get legislation passed to condemn Subway the restaurant) for quoting Michael Moore and putting Super Size Me ads with an obese Statue of Liberty eating McDonalds in...:drum roll: the nation of Germany! Good for him. And Zell Miller is an idiot. He's become nothing more than a partisan hack bashing the Democrats. From Meet the Press: SEN. MILLER: [Kerry] has voted--he's been on the wrong side of foreign policy issues for the last 20 years. If he had had his policies adopted in the Senate instead of the Ronald Reagan policies being adopted, we would still be in the Cold War. We'd still have a Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall would still be up. This... MR. RUSSERT: Now, Senator, how can you say that? SEN. MILLER: Because this is a man... MR. RUSSERT: I... SEN. MILLER: This is a man who voted to cut every single one of the weapons systems that won the Cold War. MR. RUSSERT: But aren't you... SEN. MILLER: This is a man that voted against the weapons system that we're using to fight the war on terror. This is a man who voted against increases in intelligence funding. He wanted to cut intelligence funding. MR. RUSSERT: But on defense and intelligence authorization bills, you have the same voting record as John Kerry. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5574180/ -- transcript can be found there.

::waits for this to be bottled and sold:: Gotta love the free market.

Marc Perkel put it wonderfully today: I also found it hys-f***ing-terical last night that Zell Miller challenged the host of Hardball to a duel and also that Rick "Consentual gay sex = bigamy, beastiality, incest etc." Santorum was discussing how the Republicans are the party of acceptance and inclusion.

Goddamn b**** set me up!

Neither of these candidates should be running for President. A sad day in this country that these two momos are the "best" candidates for the 2 main parties. As for Fox/CNN...is it just me or is everybody tired of the 'Fair and Balanced' & s*** like that? For all sources, f***ing admit the agenda and let people go from there.

Jas...Arnold can't run for President as per the rules in the Constitution.

Corrupt, yes. When Bush was leader of the CIA, they financed the introduction of crack cocaine to neutralize the black population and pay for their wars in Central America. In WW II, there is evidence that he bailed out of his bomber instead of following protocol to save his own ass and left his crew to die. Pair this with his involvement in Iran-Contra to his deep relationships with defense contractors and the bin Ladens via the Carlyle Group and there is a big case to be made for the corruptness of George HW Bush.

Just internet radio. Viva internet radio.