Monday, August 24, 2015

The Dems' Dilemma

"I'M SO CONFUSED!!!"
`
 "I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat."

Will Rogers
 
It must be awfully confusing being a registered Democrat these days. I used to be one and I do indeed recall being quite confused and quite often. This might sound like heresy to those of you who (like yours truly) lean a tad to the left, and I know that many of us dream of following the ear-shattering precedent of the first African American president being followed into office by the first woman president. It's a beautiful dream, and maybe it could possibly happen in 2016. My only problem with that little scenario is that Hillary Clinton is not that woman. The Democrats are making a huge mistake if they decide to go down that road. Too much is at stake in 2016 to risk handing the Executive Mansion over to a party that has lost is reason.
 
I don't mean to imply that she would not make a fine president. The fact is I just don't know the answer to that question. This much, however, I can say beyond a molecule of doubt: she's a lousy candidate. As far as the email/server scandal goes, while there may be little (if any) evidence of criminal intent, there is a whole lot of proof  that she is reckless - arrogant even. The Democrats - professional and casual - may really want to think this through.

Buchanan
As has been noted previously on this site, the last time one Democratic administration succeeded another Democratic administration on Inauguration Day was on March the fourth, 1857 when Franklin Pierce tossed the keys to the White House to miserable old James Buchanan. It hasn't happened since. It could happen finally in 2016. In fact, given the quality of the of the current crop of circus clowns who are passing themselves off these days as Republican wannabes, the possibility of a Democratic victory next year is very good. If one or more of the losing candidates decides, in a furious hissy fit, to launch to launch a fourth (or even a fifth)  party uprising (Donald Trump and Ted Cruz being likely possibilities) it won't matter whom the Democrats nominate. The election is in the bag in that case. That might very well happen; then again, it might not. Why risk it all on Hillary Clinton? If the Democrats are smart (the jury's still out on that one) they'll be very careful what they wish for.

Let's look at our options, shall we?

Martin O'Malley
Martin O'Malley: Governor of my ancestral state of Maryland. You didn't even know he was running, right? Don't feel bad, most people don't. Although he doesn't seem to inspire much enthusiasm, that could possibly be because the media seems to be giving him the cold shoulder. He's an intelligent fellow and progressive where it counts. Besides, we haven't had a president named Martin since Van Buren in 1841. We're way overdue, don'cha think?

 Lincoln Chafee: Again, a candidate that no one realizes is running (Even I forgot he was a candidate until I was reminded this morning - and I'm supposed to be on top of these things!)  He was probably the last surviving "liberal" Republican before they became extinct. He got out of the GOP a number of years ago while the getting was good and became a Democrat. George W. Bush was apparently the last straw for this guy.

Bernie Sanders: What can I say about Bernie? The man had me at "hello". So far, his campaign appearances are drawing the biggest crowds. Is it because he's saying the things that need to be said - things that no other candidate is even thinking? I think that there might be something to that. Feel the Bern.

Joey and Lizzie
And it's not too late for Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren to throw their respective hats into the ring. Old Joe would probably not be a great candidate, but I've no doubt that he would make an excellent president. As for Liz, she leaves me speechless - the most inspiring progressive to come down the line since Eleanor Roosevelt.

I'm going to be profanely frank with you: If the Republicans ever again seize control of the executive and the legislative branches of our government, if they're allowed one more appointment to the Supreme Court - this country is completely fucked. Look what happened the last time. I just don't believe we need to go there again. I'm being understated, in case you haven't noticed. Hillary Clinton is quite beatable; all of the potential Democratic hopefuls are I suppose. The only hopeful news on the horizon is the non-ignorable fact that the GOP is in the progress of imploding. Thank heaven for these little silver linings.

Will the party of FDR start exploring their options? I wouldn't bet the farm on it.  The Dems have this positive genius for taking a goblet of fine champagne, an turning it overnight into a worthless cup of donkey piss. Have you ever noticed that? 

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY



Pete, Jeff and Tom Degan
AFTERTHOUGHT:

The painting at the top of this piece was done back in the Idiotic Eighties by my brother Jeff Degan. Every talent that I possess he can match and then some. I can barely draw a straight line. It is probably the one greatest regret of my life. I'd give anything to be able to paint.

SUGGESTED READING:

The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich
by William L. Shirer

If this isn't the longest thing I've ever read, it's damned-near close to it: 1,250 pages. William L. Shirer was an American newspaper correspondent stationed in Berlin in the late   twenties and mid-thirties. In 1935 he was hired by Edward R. Murrow to cover Germany for CBS News, and remained at his post until December of 1941 when Hitler declared war on the United States. This book, published in 1960, was fifteen years in the making. It's a difficult read - not in one's ability to comprehend it - but in the meticulous way Shirer documents the atrocities inflicted upon this planet by these hideous bastards. Here is how I would summarize The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich:

The "rise" part is pretty depressing, but that "fall" bit is just oodles of fun to read about.

SUGGESTED LISTEING:

Didn't It Rain
by Evelyn Freeman

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jLOvkNRIB4

I was driving home from Monticello, NY yesterday afternoon, having attended a funeral of a friend, when what has to be the most cranking, foot-stomping gospel recording I've ever heard in my life came over W-FMU. I damn-near lost control of the vehicle.

This was recorded in 1962. CAN I GET A WITNESS!!!

44 Comments:

At 10:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You asked for a witness...Not a bad version of "Didn't it Rain". Gospel singer's are always the best. Hey Tom, leave that fake progressive behind in things of man's world and find the real progressive in Jesus Christ. That's why you witness those people with the innate love to foot stomp. That Jesus Christ--the real and ultimate in progress. The one who instructed to give....but not to take first. The one who instructed that when one gives to give with your right hand not knowing what your left hand gave [in other words anonymously] , to thus prove to yourself you're really giving, and to do so WITHOUT trumpeting your giving. All such qualities wipe from consideration any aspect that today's "progressive" politicians are in the same league of progress as Jesus.

 
At 1:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Didn't it rain, a live version by Sister Rosetta Tharpe (who was plugged in electric before Dylan ever even thought about it)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnAQATKRBN0

 
At 3:28 PM, Blogger De_Bill said...

I think Bernie Sanders has helped the party if he succeeds in pulling Hillary more to the left. Unfortunately, he can't distance himself from the label of being a socialist to be acceptable enough to the people on the center right that are needed to win, when (once again) they are horrified with the candidate their party decides to back.

I'm not a religious person, but I do like the occasional gospel song. I think the Chambers Brother's version of "People Get Ready' is one of the best.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu52CTud0G8

 
At 4:07 PM, Blogger REALITYEXPOSER23 said...

Beenie Sanders.... A former communist runnning for president. Only a mindless utopian minded librard would even condier this asshole Marxist for president. You have to be 20 yeard old and on LSD to support him. They have an excuse, they are young, the writer of this blog is full blown adult, functional retard

 
At 5:13 PM, Anonymous John said...

Tom, put:

Altered Genes, Twisted Truth
by Steven Druker

...on your reading list. A horror story - except for the bit about it being non-fiction.

 
At 5:31 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Right, O'Mally becomes the Democratic nominee and Trump becomes president.

 
At 7:10 PM, Anonymous Clear Thinking Conservative said...

You betcha, ReallyExcreted, only a 20 yeard old on LSD would condier Beenie Sanders.

Only grate thimkers like us cons kin argu this gud.

Dum librards. LOL!

 
At 7:41 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

The current economic crisis in China, is it being caused by too much govt control of their economy or too little?

 
At 7:48 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In the year leading up to the crash, enthusiastic individual investors inflated the stock market bubble through mass amounts of investments in stocks often using borrowed money, exceeding the rate of economic growth and profits of the companies they were investing in. Investors faced margin calls on their stocks and many were forced to sell off shares in droves, precipitating the crash.

 
At 9:50 AM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

Anonymous 7:48
And that is what is happening in SOCIALIST China now?

The current economic crisis in China, is it being caused by too much govt control of their economy or too little?

 
At 10:12 AM, Blogger T. Paine said...

Chuck, you will probably get a thoughtful answer to that at about the same time that Dubya answers your question about Christ. In other words, don't hold your breath, my friend.

 
At 12:42 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

TP,
Why answer a deceptive and flawed question from someone who has only shown hatred, disrespect and scorn for me?

He ignored my original point on Jesus and the Estate tax, didn't he? Why is that?

Besides, China is under a communist dictatorship. It ain't a country full of Bernie Sanders type democratic socialists, now is it? No, it is not.

The Great Deceiver has an army of hateful minions like Chuckie working for the dominant Party of Mammon, enslaved to their false god called the "free market".

 
At 1:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I went to wikipedia and looked up "Chinese Stock Market Crash of 2015" and under "Causes of the crash" I found this:

In the year leading up to the crash, enthusiastic individual investors inflated the stock market bubble through mass amounts of investments in stocks often using borrowed money, exceeding the rate of economic growth and profits of the companies they were investing in. Investors faced margin calls on their stocks and many were forced to sell off shares in droves, precipitating the crash.

Would you like me to spell it out in alphabet blocks for you, "Chuck" (SoreLoser/Harry/AlSharptoon/Vanessa) our resident troll and T. Paine, our resident polite wingnut?

 
At 4:14 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

Was the crash in China was caused because in their socialist communist economy, the Govt did or did not control the economy IE: Investors. stock market, borrowing, rate of growth? I seem to recall here someone posting that socialism controls the economy in a way that prevents massive swings in the economy. Was that Davy or Mozart?
I see the answer is not Uncle Bernie's kind of socialism, his is different and so much better.

Davy,
Having another pity party I see. Enjoy.

Hey TP,

Did your read the latest from our buddy Davy?
"The Great Deceiver has an army of hateful minions like Chuckie working for the dominant Party of Mammon, enslaved to their false god called the "free market"."

Sounds like something ripped from either the Onion or the Peoples Cube.

 
At 4:22 PM, Blogger T. Paine said...

Free market capitalism is an ugly system. The only thing worse is all of the other economic systems because of selfish human nature making them unfeasible.

The free market in America has been the reason why we have gone from our founding 240 years ago to being the economic powerhouse and only remaining superpower in the world, despite our president and those touting the socialist agenda attempting to tear down this country in the name of "fairness".

Yes, we do need restrictions on capitalism to prevent monopolies, protect the environment, and provide workers' rights, but by and large most of the greatest inventions and wealth created for the greatest number of its citizens has occurred right her in America because of free market capitalism, Dave.

Other than giving corporations "voting" status as persons, I don't see much wrong with our brand of capitalism. Most of the poverty we encounter in this nation is not due to too much, but rather to too little of the free market being allowed to flourish, my friend.

It is the elite in the communist societies and indeed in our own would-be socialist society that reward themselves and their cronies without regard to the average person. Look at the Solyndra's and union leaders rewarded under Obama. THOSE are the true servants of Mammon. They just have a better marketing strategy because they "claim" to care for the poor while they create millions more of them living below the poverty level under this "enlightened" socialist administration.

Chuck understands this, my friend.

 
At 4:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Was the crash in China was caused because in their socialist communist economy, the Govt did or did not control the economy IE: Investors. stock market, borrowing, rate of growth?

[Jerking off motion]

 
At 5:02 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

TP,

I wouldn’t be to quick to gloat about the “economic powerhouse and only remaining superpower”. History teaches us what happens to all empires.

The free market in America has been the reason why we have gone from a growing middle class (Damn those unions) to off-shoring jobs resulting in a service economy for workers.

The so-called socialist agenda attempting to tear down this country in the name of "fairness". pales compared to the corporate takeover and permanent war in the name of “security”.

Yes, we do need restrictions on capitalism to prevent monopolies, protect the environment, and provide workers' rights, But these are all being dismantled by the “free market” corporatocracy. Not one Republican and too few Democrats even care anymore.

Most of the poverty we encounter in this nation is not due to too much, but rather to too little of the free market being allowed to flourish, my friend. If you say so. See above.

Allow me to amend:

It is the elite in the communist AND capitalist societies and indeed in our own would-be socialist society that reward themselves and their cronies without regard to the average person.

Crony capitalism still prevails. Look at all that “trickle up” going to the elites. The winners win big and the losers keep losing. What is so difficult to see about this?

THOSE are the true servants of Mammon.…Chicken feed, my friend, as we ignore Wall Street, the Koch’s buying an entire political party, Donald Trump, ALEC, and any other economic power opposed to democratic representation.

Are you really saying Solyndra and union bosses “claim” " to care for the poor while they create millions more of them living below the poverty level under this "enlightened" socialist administration?

That sounds like a heckuva claim in itself. No evidence to share for this round of the blame game?

Chuckie understands nothing. Beliefs are all that matters. He believes Morgenthau’s 17.2% is “just as much” as 24.9%, remember?

Are you better informed now about the “global cooling” conspiracy from the ‘70s now that I’ve shown you that was a small minority opinion?

Sorry that the truth doesn’t fit the programming.

While I’m at it, maybe I should reiterate the fact liberals don’t really want more unemployed “takers”. We don’t hate America. And we are not “destroying America”. See history and empires.

Of course, Chuckie understands nothing the Republican Party doesn’t want him to understand.

His false beliefs and hate are willfully held.

 
At 5:54 PM, Blogger T. Paine said...

History does indeed teach us what happens to empires. Of course, we are a republic and not an empire. Or at least that is what we purport to be. Any decline in our nation is not due to a collapse of our “empire” or the ascension of some enemy, rather it is because we foolishly keep printing money out of thin air with quantitative easings. We spend trillions of dollars on social programs only to find that there are ever more people being added to those rolls with their hands out. Our enemy of our republic is not from outside of our border, but rather is from within.

“The free market in America has been the reason why we have gone from a growing middle class (Damn those unions) to off-shoring jobs resulting in a service economy for workers.”

Ironically you have hit the nail on the head for part of this. Unions have made the cost of unskilled or semi-skilled labor so damned expensive that American corporations cannot compete on a global level. Add to that the myriads of regulations and costs of doing business added by federal and state governments, and it is no wonder why large corporations seek to cut their labor costs by moving to more attractive locations. You can thank your big government progressives and labor unions specifically for this problem, sir.

As far as crony-capitalism, that is a perversion of the free market. It should be discouraged through law and regulation, although I am sure George Soros and progressives from both parties will find ways to skirt those laws without consequence. Don’t even dare talk to me about the Koch brothers buying a political party when George Soros, Hollywood, and indeed much of Wall Street are all in bed with the Democrats. Remove that beam from your own eye first…

“Are you really saying Solyndra and union bosses “claim” " to care for the poor while they create millions more of them living below the poverty level under this "enlightened" socialist administration?”

That was not an artfully crafted statement, I will admit. What I meant is that the Obama administration touts how much they care for the poor, and yet they reward sympathetic special interests and cronies, while the poor become poorer under his governance. What is that joke? Obama so love the poor that he created millions more of them.

As for Chuck, I will let him speak for himself, as he has proven he is quite capable of doing so. That said, you skimmed over my comments, evidently. I admitted that the unemployment rate under FDR went down, as it should have been considering the amount of GDP that we spent on it. It helped PARTIALLY with the symptom but did not fix the problem. Government never does fix the damned problem. They create them most of the time,

 
At 5:54 PM, Blogger T. Paine said...

As for “climate change”, yes, I did see your statement regarding cooling in the 70’s. I didn’t bother to research it because I don’t really give a damn. You never explained why, if anthropogenic global warming is indeed real, why East Anglia’s emails detailed them falsifying and cherry-picking data to support their assertions, or why Antarctica has record ice levels, or why honest environmentalists including the head of Green Peace left the organization because he said the movement is not scientific but rather is politically based. Why don’t you address those issues, Dave? How about all of those researchers that want government grants to continue their research on global warming. If it isn’t true, it is awfully hard to get more grant money, isn’t it?

And I truly do believe you that the rank and file liberal does not want more unemployed takers; however, your progressive leadership absolutely does. Why do you think they want to grant amnesty to millions of poor illegal immigrants? It is because they know that with their votes they can cement in their power base and never lose office again. If the progressive leaders really gave a damn about simply wanting to help these people rather than simply bring in more voters for themselves, I have an easy way to prove it. Let’s grant amnesty to those illegals already here. They can have legal status and remain in the country to live and work and pay their taxes. But they cannot ever have full voting citizenship as the price for them illegally entering our country. That would solve the problem for them, but there is no way the progressive leaders would allow that, because it really isn’t about the poor illegals. It is about them! And yes, these progressive leaders are absolutely destroying America, and I curse them for it.

 
At 6:51 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

TP

You are 100% correct, Davy in his haste to respond with the latest talking points command central, skims over anything posted counter to his radical progressive views.

For an example of a liberal speaking for themselves I would direct you to the most recent post made by Anonymous. That represents the depth of thinking of the left.

 
At 7:44 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

TP,

Of course, we are a republic and not an empire. Yes, and so was Rome a republic. Funny how “republics” are so belligerent and like to invade other countries.

Our enemy of our republic is not from outside of our border, but rather is from within. Talk about mis-allocation of military assets. Let's build a dozen new aircraft carriers and a million more drones anyway.

American corporations cannot compete on a global level. Thus unions, and everybody else, must compete with dollar a day Asian labor. Global Corporatism at work.

Don’t even dare talk to me about the Koch brothers buying a political party I won’t if you can show me Democratic contenders flocking en mass to court their billionaire owners like Republicans did with the Kochs. Do you seriously see an equivalence there? Show me what it is, please. What is the liberal equivalent of the FOX/Koch Tea Party?

Government never does fix the damned problem. They create them most of the time, Dogma again, but yes, in the case of the Depression government enacted deregulation certainly played a part. I’m surprised liberals don’t get the blame for the Great Depression. I’m sure they’re to blame if we ask the Right people.

I wish the entire matter of global warming was false. Wishful thinking, like political beliefs, have no bearing on the truth, though.

I didn’t bother to research it (global cooling)because I don’t really give a damn. If you had just said so in the first place we could have let the subject go.

Neither East Anglia’s emails nor the former Greenpeace guy, who’s NOT a climate scientist, have disproven effects of pollution on climate. This may be the hottest year on record, but who cares when we have out of context emails, right?

Never mind the international peer review process. Never mind the rising ocean temperatures. Never mind the vanishing coral reefs. Never mind the vanishing glaciers. Never mind the thawing permafrost in the tundra that releases MORE greenhouse gas. We clearly have a global conspiracy of evil climate scientists. Wouldn’t they be paid just as much for dis-proving global warming? I guess that’s what makes them so evil.

For those who DO give a damn there are explanations about the Antarctic sea ice levels.

Since the late 1970s, the Arctic has lost an average of 20,800 square miles (53,900 square kilometers) of ice a year; the Antarctic has gained an average of 7,300 square miles (18,900 sq km)

Net loss.

This is climate skeptics’ top argument about Antarctica — and why it’s wrong

Why do you think they want to grant amnesty to millions of poor illegal immigrants? So they don’t tear families apart, for one reason. It’s also cheaper and more humane to not round them up. Amnesty is not citizenship, and I agree with not letting illegal immigrants vote.

I really can’t see this is the evil plot to have more unemployed takers. You’ll have to show real evidence.

While you see “progressive” leaders, I see corporatist neo-cons doing the damage. Maybe they are the same people.

 
At 8:15 PM, Blogger T. Paine said...

I don't have time to respond to all of your comments tonight, but will do so tomorrow. Suffice it to say for now, that of all of the countries we have invaded in the last 100 years, we did not put them under our rule or subjugate them. We did liberate every last one of them, with the possible exception of Afghanistan. The only land we took was enough to bury our dead in Europe etc. during WWII. I responded to your war of aggression nonsense on my own blog, (savingcommonsense.blogspot.com) by the way. Cheers until tomorrow.

 
At 7:03 AM, Anonymous John said...

>Suffice it to say for now, that of all of the countries we have invaded in the last 100 years, we did not put them under our rule or subjugate them.

You obviously fall for the big ones in lipstick!

 
At 8:54 AM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

Venezuela’s Food Shortages Trigger Long Lines, Hunger and Looting

Too much or too little government control of the economy?

What would Uncle Bernie do if he were in charge of Venezuela, increase or decrease gov rules and regulations?

 
At 10:21 AM, Blogger T. Paine said...

John, please tell me which country we have subjugated then as part of our "empire"?

 
At 10:51 AM, Blogger T. Paine said...

“Funny how ‘republics’ are so belligerent and like to invade other countries.”

You know… I could understand this whole “empire” mentality if we left our own governors in Iraq or Afghanistan. I could understand if we took over their oil fields for America. We have done neither. We tried to ensure that their people could partake in fair and free elections of their own leaders who are obviously not under U.S. control. Sad that you seem to think otherwise…

“Thus unions, and everybody else, must compete with dollar a day Asian labor. Global Corporatism at work.”

So what is your solution Dave? Protectionist policies? How about we give American tax pay dollars to the Chinese to raise their pay and standard of living? Oh wait, we have already done that in essence with all of our bonds that the Chinese have bought.

“I won’t if you can show me Democratic contenders flocking en mass to court their billionaire owners like Republicans did with the Kochs. Do you seriously see an equivalence there? Show me what it is, please. What is the liberal equivalent of the FOX/Koch Tea Party?”

We have had this conversation before too. With the exception of Fox, all of the other TV news outlets and nearly all of the printed media are solidly progressive and quite supportive of that agenda and the politicians that espouse them. And you are naïve as hell if you think that Democrats haven’t gone to George Soros and all of the leftwing billionaires for money and to kiss their rings. Look at the progressive Trump who has admitted to buying politicians, including Hillary. Yeah, it is quite pervasive and equivalent.

Next, I DO blame liberals for extending the Great Depression. If they would have followed Harding’s example, they could have mitigated the severity and duration of the Great Depression remarkably. Instead, FDR with truly good intentions only extended it. You champion 17% unemployment like that is a wonderful thing because it is below 24%. 17% is NOT acceptable, Dave.

As for global warming, it may actually be an issue, but anthropogenic global warming is nothing but politics, it would seem. And more importantly, regardless of whether this is a naturally occurring phenomenon or is man-caused, there are not any viable solutions to correct it that will have any but the most negligible of effects. And that would only serve to decimate the world’s economy and impoverish billions in doing so. Now, before you go off half-cocked, that doesn’t mean that we should not absolutely strive to be good stewards of the environment and severely punish those that do pollute, but despite your and Al Gore’s claims to the contrary, anthropogenic global warming is anything but settled science, my friend.

“Why do you think they want to grant amnesty to millions of poor illegal immigrants? So they don’t tear families apart, for one reason. It’s also cheaper and more humane to not round them up. Amnesty is not citizenship, and I agree with not letting illegal immigrants vote.”

Dave! We found some more common ground then! I agree with you on this, sir. There is indeed more hope.

 
At 11:47 AM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

TP

How long after granting amnesty will it be before democrats start demanding those granted amnesty be given the right to vote?

6 months?
A year?
In time for the national elections of 2016?

Correct me if I'm wrong TP but haven't some local governments already granted illegals the right to vote and to be appointed to positions in their government?

Simply stated, I do not trust liberals/progressives. They operate under a different value system, they consider getting the nose of the camel under the tent a victory.
They have no problem with two steps forward, on step back.

I am not a Trump supporter. But I ask myself this question, what is the definition of the word amnesty?

"a general pardon for offenses, especially political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.

a general pardon, esp for offences against a government

a period during which a law is suspended to allow offenders to admit their crime without fear of prosecution"

Note that amnesty doe NOT mean a law has not been broken, or a crime has not been committed..If that were so then there would be no need for amnesty. This can only mean one thing, illegals are criminals who have broken our Nation's immigration laws. Attempting to make them out as victims of the USA is total hypocrisy.

Amnesty is given only to criminals/law breakers. In this case breakers of a Federal law. Can felons vote who have broken a Federal law?

 
At 12:12 PM, Blogger T. Paine said...

Chuck, you do indeed make a good point. If amnesty were granted on the condition of not being allowed to vote, it is likely that many Democrats would then try to change the conditions of the deal on down the road so they could vote. That is why my hypothetical scenario would be to deny them full legal citizenship so that they could never vote. They would simply be granted legal status. It doesn't matter, because this whole scenario would never happen anyway.

And yes, I do recall reading where some idiots in the peoples republic of California did have some illegal alien working for some city there as appointees.

California is a good example of what happens when progressive policies are put into full force. Their economy is broken and people are leaving in droves. Unfortunately, we get a lot of the idiots fleeing the state and coming here to where I live in Utah. They then complain about how we aren't doing things here like they did back in California. I ask them if things were so wonderful there, then why the hell did they leave. I have very little patience with such fools.

And yes, illegal aliens are breakers of federal immigration law by definition. Euphemisms like "undocumented workers" is just more political correct bovine excrement from the progressives. I am sick of it frankly.

 
At 3:32 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

California is a good example of what happens when progressive policies are put into full force. Their economy is broken and people are leaving in droves

Ah, the power of belief again.

Hate to pop your bubble again, but:

How California Bested Texas

http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/california-bested-texas


 
At 3:47 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Minimum Wage Hike Killing Jobs In Seattle! declares FOX (R)

Now the FOX lie meets the Bubble Popping reality:

Between June and July, the Seattle MSA added 3,700 jobs in the restaurant sector. The total number of restaurant jobs rose from 133.4k to 137.1k, the highest number of jobs ever recorded in the food service industry sector.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Clinging to un-examined beliefs is the hallmark of a cult.

 
At 7:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bureau of Labor Statistics
Are they the same people who report the unemployment rate has dropped but then two weeks later they release corrected figures showing it didn't drop as much or in fact it went up?

 
At 8:42 PM, Anonymous Tyrone Witherspoons said...

Obama and the progressives so love the poor that they have created millions more of them to be dependent and suck their progressive leader's teats. And the progressive leaders make sure they stuff their own pockets with mammon. Just look how much wealth Nancy Pelosi and her husband acquired with that lying old hag in the senate.

That's the progressive transformation of America in a nutshell.

 
At 9:52 PM, Anonymous John said...

>John, please tell me which country we have subjugated then as part of our "empire"?

Well obviously 'we' have not done any - as none of these actions have been done for or condoned by 'me'. However, every engagement has someone behind it that seeks to benefit. Natural resources are wrestled out of all parts of the world on behalf of multinational corporations.

Military engagements, coup d'etat, covert actions, blackmail, regime change, support of non-domestic political parties, financial manipulation... All of these leave constitutional requirements, world bank commitments, long term contracts, trade agreements such as NAFTA, TTIP, TPP. So the 'empire', as you put it, seeks to subjugate everybody...

I assume you are an American, and if so, your own government has already fallen to the same players. The forces that subjugate you are probably not the people posting on this site - we are all under the same boot.

One little example is in the foods we eat. So many products that we pay for contain a variety of questionable GMO ingredients - and we are not even allowed to have labeling so we can make informed choices.

You might also consider the NSA surveillance. This can be utilized to manipulate almost anybody. This can be used in a number of ways to control our 'democratically' elected politicians. Do you think this isn't done?

 
At 1:42 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

"However, EVERY engagement has someone behind it that seeks to benefit."


Would you agree then that FDR knew of the attack on Pearl Harbor in advance and decided to do nothing in order to bring the USA out of the depression? That's a benefit.
Was GM behind our country's entering WWII so they could benefit?
What was President Wilson's reason for entering WWI? Who did he want to benefit?

Who benefited when Truman got involved in the Korean Civil war?
Who benefited when LBJ did the dame with Vietnam?

Would you name those who seek to benefit from our engagements?

 
At 2:12 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Cough, cough, Halliburton/KBR, cough.

Trump didn’t like being questioned by Univision reporter Jorge Ramos.

“You were pretty rude,” the racist conservative white Trump supporter told Ramos. “It’s not about you. Get out of my country. Get out!”

“This is my country. I’m a U.S. citizen, too,” Ramos responded.

He has been working as a journalist in the United States since 1983 and became a U.S. citizen in 2008.

But the Trump supporter didn’t listen and continued yelling at him to his face and pointing at him.

“Whatever. No. Univision? No. It’s not about you,” yelled the racist white Trump supporter.
Ramos fired back, “It’s not about you, it’s about the United States.”

Racist white guys are entitled to the entire country apparently.This is what feeds fascism, friends.

Their Party says there’s no racism, except for liberals and blacks, of course. Otherwise how could Obama be elected, amirite?


 
At 3:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

During a speech in Cleveland Thursday, Hillary Clinton compared her Republican challengers’ views on women to those of terrorist groups.

“Marco Rubio brags about wanting to deny victims of rape and incest access to health care, to abortion. Jeb Bush says Planned Parenthood shouldn’t get a penny. Your governor right here in Ohio banned state funding for some rape crisis centers because they sometimes refer women to other health facilities that do provide abortions,” Clinton said.

“I would like these Republican candidates to look a mom in the eye who caught her breast cancer early because she was able to get a screening for cancer. Or the teenager who didn’t get pregnant because she had access to contraception. Or anyone who’s ever been protected by an HIV test.

“Now, extreme views about women, we expect that from some of the terrorist groups, we expect that from people who don’t want to live in the modern world, but it’s a little hard to take from Republicans who want to be the president of the United States, yet they espouse out of date, out of touch policies. They are dead wrong for 21st century America. We are going forward, we are not going back.”

 
At 4:16 PM, Blogger T. Paine said...

Hillary's next press conference should be from her prison cell. It is damned apparent she doesn't give a damn about anyone's life, whether it is an unborn child or an ambassador to Libya, as long as it doesn't mess up her chances to consolidate more power.

 
At 4:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

T. Paine, you really are an asshole, aren't you.

 
At 4:36 PM, Blogger Chuck Morre said...

TP

See what happens when you speak the truth to a liberal?

Err FDR cough cough

 
At 4:43 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck, keep enjoying those social security checks.

If you had to work for a living you wouldn't have enough time to troll this blog under your various names.

(tyrone witherspoons, harry, vanessa, sore loser, etc.)

 
At 5:09 PM, Blogger Dave Dubya said...

Poor Chuckie.

He's totally unable to discern the difference between opinion and fact.

That's what makes him so "Right", so far, far Right.

 
At 6:08 PM, Blogger T. Paine said...

Chuck, that is typically how you know you have won an argument with a liberal... they resort to name calling since that is all they have left in their arsenal. I find it amusing that "anonymous" is chastising you for supposedly using other names, when he/she doesn't have the courage to assign a name to his/herself. It is also interesting that I am cursed at for standing up for innocent life lost due to actions on behalf of the leading Democratic nominee for president. It is truly sad what the left finds worthy of defending these days.

 
At 2:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"T. Paine" has the courage to assign the name "T. Paine" to himself.

 
At 1:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

💩

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home