Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Cool site, bro:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/palin_v_obamacare.html -Palin is a mastermind who politically outmaneuvered Obama.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/islams_european_conquest_is_am.html -Muslims are trying to infiltrate Europe through immigration and take it over.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/07/skinned_cats_and_tyrants.html -Confirming Sotomeyer was a political bungle on par with Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of Nazi Germany.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/07/ayn_rand_goddess_of_the_market.html -AHAhahahahahaha

George Spiggott wrote:Could someone please explain what the link between the Nazi's and this healthcare reform is because it isn't clear to the uninitiated.

Nazis are national SOCIALISTS. UHC is socialist. Do you see? Do you see?!? Do you see!!!

Silverthorne wrote:
The woman in this video is a radical democrat, not a republican. A Lyndon democrat, they are called. She is angry because she feels that ANY private health insurance is bad, mkay, and definitely not a republican or a conservative by any definition.

She's a member of the LaRouche Youth; erstwhile followers of Lyndon LaRouche. You could call them Democrats, but it would be stretch. In many ways LaRouche and his following are mirror images of Ross Perot/Ron Paul and their devotees.

Silverthorne wrote:
Also- the ONLY people who have been seen outside town halls with Nazi symbology have been Lyndon or other variants of fringe democrats.

That isn't what it looks like to me. Could you link to some alternative sources?

Its really difficult to claim that these protesters are liberal given their proximity to other protesters with decidedly conservative slogans.

And just to deepen the Godwin's hole. Admittedly, the insignia was poorly conceived.

Silverthorne wrote:
The only evidence of violence was when a liberal woman slapped a conservative who wasn't even talking to her,

To be fair it appears, even from the pictures alone, that there is a good deal more to this than simple violence.

Silverthorne wrote:
and when a mob of black dudes beat the crap out of another black dude for being a republican.

Do you mean this video? Which was associated with this story? Considering how conflicting the stories appear to be (Conservative activist was assaulted, SEIU members were assaulted, the whole thing was a setup, etc.) its difficult to determine what actually happened.

Silverthorne wrote:
And that guy with the AR-15 that CNN keeps running as evidence of white supremacists trying to intimidate the president? You'll notice how carefully shot the video is when you see a wide angle shot: It is a black business man.

I've not seen anything about the rifle being evidence of white supremacist intimidation. Not saying that's not how its being covered somewhere, but that isn't consistent with what I've seen.

Silverthorne wrote:
So, actually looks like you just need to tell your own party how it is. And maybe rely on media outside of MSNBC, CNN, and FOX

You should both stop thinking in terms of partisan affiliation. Its way to easy to fill the air with noise when anything for healthcare is attributed to the Democrats, and anything against is attributed to the Republicans.

Edit: for civility.

Wrexasaur wrote:My party? The one with the beer?

I am not a democrat, I clearly meant elected Democrats to the U.S. government. So far that has been the clearest response to such ludicrous claims.

Totally ridiculous accusation, and the funniest part is that I the part that these wing-nuts were referring to as a "Death Panel" was taken out of the bill... one of the most harmless and every day pieces of the bill, and the anti-health care movement (rep, or dem, it really matters not, these are just people disrupting town hall meetings in order to slow the process, regardless of their intent to do so or not) has not said a thing about that.

Obama is still somehow like Hitler to these cats, regardless of the fact that no one wants to hear that nonsense when such a serious issue is being debated.

George Spiggott wrote:Could someone please explain what the link between the Nazi's and this healthcare reform is because it isn't clear to the uninitiated.

There isn't one... it is simple political misinformation.

OK. My bad, but you can probably see how I confused your stance here, although you didn't directly tie yourself to it.

I agree w/ the Death Panel thing. Everytime Palin opens her mouth I want to bang my head against a wall until it stops. That woman is like a manifestation of everything that has been destroying the conservative movement. The whole pandering to a populist mindset makes me so furious at those in my party. Republicanism isn't supposed to be the freaking party of the people. We should really stop electing this inbred blowhards in an attempt to win over the NASCAR contingent and return to our roots. AAAAAH listening to her and Suckabee make me want to chug gasoline.

EDIT:

Got Ninja'd by Dogma while I was posting

I don't think anyone w/o an ulterior motive would ascribe a conservative label to the Lydon fringe. And I don't think I would really compare them to Ron Paul either, although I can see where you are coming from. It would be like Ron Paul if he ascribed to Equality of Result rather than Equality of Opportunity. Which we can probably agree is a pretty deep step.

It was weak of me to say that ALL nazi related crap was liberally motivated, but my research has shown that to be the case. I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, but you only have to look at rallies circa 2006 to understand the left is much, much more partial about equating their political enemies w/ nazis then the right is. Probably because the Nazis were, you know, right wing. Which is why you don't see to many lefties labeling people as commies- it is the favored whitewash of the right, again because Nazis= right wing whackjobs, Commies= left wing whackjobs.

So really, I don't have a problem w/ the left using it. It is intellectually weak, but you can't expect to much from anybody, really. What I do have a problem with is the use of left wing supporters, bearing really offensive imagery and slogans, mixing in w/ right wing protesters to make them into walking straw men. It is really really unclass, in much the same way that according to the House and Senate Majority leaders, dissent went from being our patriotic responsiblity, to being an indication that you are unAmerican and probably mentally unsound as soon as the topic being dissented changed. Pelosi and Reid should at least give people enough credit to know that we will see the massive hypocrisy in that.

As for the video= the first one isn't really a big deal. Crazy lady slaps a dude. Whatever, but the second one IS. Especially in light of the whole Black Panther case being dropped quietly by Justice- when black union members (big scary dudes) beat the crap out of a smaller dude, I don't think anyone is going to claim the smaller, outnumbered guy started the fight. It is pretty clear what happened, especially from the audio, where they tell him he should be ashamed, especially because he is black. I thought I was getting the shaft by being white under a new, awesomely racist Justice Department, but know I realize black people have it much worse, since they can be discriminated against by members of their own race too, just for not acting a certain way. The liberal, democratic way. That's gotta suck.

Partisan affiliation is all we really have in a bicameral legislature though. 24 hour media saturation pretty much ensures that sub par people will get elected, and they will have to band together in huge voting blocks because none of them are strong enough individually for there to be collectively a consensus run government. So you don't really have much choice put to ally w/ a certain block and go with that. It sucks, but until the government becomes LESS transparent again, it is going to be the way of things.

avantgarde wrote:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/07/ayn_rand_goddess_of_the_market.html -AHAhahahahahaha

KILL IT!!! KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!

No worries. Funny thing is that I am not particularly Republican nor am I Democrat for that matter. Man... no, not an anarchist...

Usually I would be considered Liberal... but I sure as heck do not live like one . Political affiliations do not help me see what is going on, they are just brands in the media being thrown around to get ratings. It has been like that for going on two decades now, mainly shifting into the cable medium for maximum delivery of the madness and the pudding with the sprinkles...

Lol. I actually AM an anarchist. And a Naval Officer. Sweet sexy irony. I guess technically a radical transhumanist libertarian, but I hate self identifying as that because it makes me sound like a tool.

I like some of the conservative plans for health care though. State to state shopping, you can't be denied coverage due to preexisting conditions, you can set up a ROTH type account to save for medical expenses tax free, stronger protection of US patents on drugs overseas, etc. I feel like the dems are necessary to light a fire under the Republicans butt every once in a while, because the dems are incapable of making good legislation, while the cons just choose not too.

Silverthorne wrote:Whatever, but the second one IS. Especially in light of the whole Black Panther case being dropped quietly by Justice- when black union members (big scary dudes) beat the crap out of a smaller dude, I don't think anyone is going to claim the smaller, outnumbered guy started the fight. It is pretty clear what happened, especially from the audio, where they tell him he should be ashamed, especially because he is black. I thought I was getting the shaft by being white under a new, awesomely racist Justice Department, but know I realize black people have it much worse, since they can be discriminated against by members of their own race too, just for not acting a certain way. The liberal, democratic way. That's gotta suck.

That's the thing though, since the cases haven't be resolved there isn't a whole lot of info coming out on the matter. 6 people were arrested, but only 4 of them were charged, and one of those charges was for resisting arrest. Just going by the video it looks like a two on one altercation, where the second guy (the dude with the mustache) came upon a scuffle and pulled someone else off his SEIU buddy (who was on the ground at the beginning of the video). I'm not saying that the conservative guys story isn't true, it may well be, but facts are often distorted in the aftermath of a violent event, and not necessarily through intention. Personally, I prefer to think of the video as a reminder of how volatile the issue really is, rather than a direct indictment of one side or the other.

Silverthorne wrote:
Partisan affiliation is all we really have in a bicameral legislature though. 24 hour media saturation pretty much ensures that sub par people will get elected, and they will have to band together in huge voting blocks because none of them are strong enough individually for there to be collectively a consensus run government. So you don't really have much choice put to ally w/ a certain block and go with that. It sucks, but until the government becomes LESS transparent again, it is going to be the way of things.

I should clarify. Partisan discussion is perfectly fine when its confined to elected officials and their staff, but using the same framework to classify op-ed columnists and protesters is simply a smokescreen.

Frank and his boyfriend, Gobie

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/07/20/us/formal-reprimand-of-rep-frank-is-urged-by-house-s-ethics-panel.html

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/09/13/us/panel-announces-inquiry-on-frank.html

Frank and Herb Moses

http://forums.timesdaily.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6501027316/m/2551029448

JEB_Stuart wrote:@Sebster:
I saw that interview between Frank and Stewart and I found it to be very gratifying. Stewart stuck it too him, but Frank-being a wily old politician-finagled his way out of it. That being said, I find Barney Frank to be a complete idiot who is just slippery enough to wriggle free of any problems. The man had a much bigger role in the Fannie Mae/Freddy Mac meltdown than I think many of you are willing to admit, but I will concede that he was/is not completely responsible for the mess as many right-wingers claim.

I don't think he wiggled out of it. I think it was clear to most people watching that Frank was being disingenuous in his part in Freddie Mae and Fannie Mac's loans.

But that said, you'd be hardpressed to find many politicians who wouldn't have followed the exact same policies. The growing housing market was the gift that kept on giving, and no-one wanted to look and see what was really happening. You can look at ten, twenty or thirty years of steady deregulation supported by the Democrats and Republicans, and also by the major parties of every nation across the globe. This was a multi-generational, international mistake.

Oh, and my personal feelings on Barney Frank aside, I found this video to be very entertaining. Mr. Frank's responses are just classic!

Yeah, his value as a headkicker is priceless. And every party needs a couple of guys who are good to rile up the opposition, give quick responses and gain some momentum for your side.

This man seriously makes me want to puke every time I see him.

Any guy that runs a homosexual prostitution ring out of his office can't be all bad, eh? Guess he might make up all the money he helped lose with Fanny May.

Maybe I didn't look closely enough but all I saw were unverified accusations of this... and you double posted.

Anyway... sebster is right, both sides needs guys like this to take serious anti-debaters aside and land a few verbal nutshots every once in a while... just get it on camera .

Relapse wrote:This man seriously makes me want to puke every time I see him.

Vomitosity ratin' high... precipitation low, and a chance of rain tomorrow.

Relapse wrote:We're talking about the Barney Frank who had a gay prostitution ring being run out of his offices here, among other gems.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/who_is_barney_frank.html

I hope that is just a troll comment...because it's fething ridiculous. The American Thinker is a way right leaning craptastic pile of rhetorical mush. Thanks for introducing that rubbish.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
My most favorite quote I believe escaped the lips of Oscar Wilde, "Republicans campaign on the premise that government doesn't work and when they get elected they prove it."

I will also be one to say that neither party has the interests of the people in mind 99 percent of them are bought and sold on a daily basis by one business interest or another. But there are some...

I still think 80% of my fellow countrymen are complete idiots and help mankind follow the dodo.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I am in full favor of a coup de tat.

Sarpedon_702 wrote:My most favorite quote I believe escaped the lips of Oscar Wilde, "Republicans campaign on the premise that government doesn't work and when they get elected they prove it."

I dunno... can you? You seem to think that... OMG...

Oh, and on the 'Frank ran a prostitution ring out of his apartment' thing... does anyone need evidence that that was rubbish?

Because the claim was made by a guy Frank had been sleeping with. After Frank came out, the guy came out with the prostitution stories. The House Ethics committee investigated it, and it's finding was that Frank shouldn't have let the accuser use his parking spot for personal business. That's it, the Ethics committee specifically said the prostitution accusations were absolute bunk.

Did anyone really believe that someone at that level of office had been found to run a criminal operation and continue in office, with no media blow up? Really?

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

What, does he just think that's his parking space, for doing whatever he feels like? I don't think so, pal.

IF... I am not mistaken... the guy in the place that is Washington... yes the important place... yes with the pudding and the sprinkles.

YES!!! This man smoked crack... and not but once, but twice and continued to be the guy that I am talking about now... YES!!! this is relevant because... erm... that is why, so you cannot even d-bate (liek a rebate for your chappie socialist self) my points with that stuff... yeah that stuff you were going to say.

Orkeosaurus wrote:Whoa, whoa, whoa.

What, does he just think that's his parking space, for doing whatever he feels like? I don't think so, pal.

ORKEO HAS A FREAKING POINT HERE... and stuff... because you won't take yur fries without ketchup goddamit... eat the freaking happy meal already.

nm...
Hmmm.... It is Heavy Metal, you make the call Mods.

Uh, regardless of whether the claim that Barney Frank ran a prostitution ring is true or not, (and it is most undoubtedly false) I really don't want to think of Barney Frank as the gay, Jewish, overweight-man-with-a-lisp, pimp. I mean that just disturbs me on so many levels, and I am sure it disturbs all of you too....well maybe not Wrexasaur...

JEB... the man has not smoked crack as the mayor of Washington, D.C. his infamy is only limited by his rhetoric.

Marion (ooh... his name even sounds like a drug) Barry... man can it get more incriminating than having a name like that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry

Wrexasaur wrote:JEB... the man has not smoked crack as the mayor of Washington, D.C. his infamy is only limited by his rhetoric.

Marion (ooh... his name even sounds like a drug) Barry... man can it get more incriminating than having a name like that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry

I don't even know what you are responding to Wrex...

That aside, yeah I know who Marion Barry is, and yes he is a major douche bag. I was simply stating my disgust with the thought of Barney Frank as the above described pimp...sorry if the joke offended you...

dogma wrote:

Silverthorne wrote:
The woman in this video is a radical democrat, not a republican. A Lyndon democrat, they are called. She is angry because she feels that ANY private health insurance is bad, mkay, and definitely not a republican or a conservative by any definition.

She's a member of the LaRouche Youth; erstwhile followers of Lyndon LaRouche. You could call them Democrats, but it would be stretch. In many ways LaRouche and his following are mirror images of Ross Perot/Ron Paul and their devotees.

Please do not equate Perotistas with Lyndon Larouche. Your extreme ignorance in this area is showing.
Larouche is a racist nutjob.
Perot (although a personal nut but fun guy) was about prudent fiscal management of the budget and investment in the US. In either party he would have been conssidered your standard issue moderately conservative member who didn't like NAFTA. Thats pretty much the Obama position until he got called out on it.

Barney Frank is the Devil... he is Satan incarnate.

The reason I call Barney the Lord of Flies, Balzebub, Lucifer etc. is that he is a career politician. Career politicians are at the very heart and core of what is wrong with the US Political system. Rather than being concerned with fixing the issues besetting their country (many of which are their own doing) they rather focus on how to keep their Party, and by extension themselves, in power.

Anyone who thinks the current focus on "Healthcare" or "Green" is anything other than a Left Wing power grab is willfully ignorant. The Democrats want nothing more than to entrench themselves so deeply in the fabric of US domestic policy that they can never be unseated.

Barney and those like him are the Devil. Term Limits for Congressional seats are the only answer. Until we let these blood suckers on both sides of the political spectrum know they will need to go get a real job and stop sucking off the public teat nothing will change.

Totally in favor of term limits. We need to rid ourselves of the US aristocracy.

I remember when the prostitution accusations and all the other things that went with it first came out. There was a lot more going on than what the Ethics committee ruled on. Barney admitted at the time something was happening in his offices but claimed to know nothing about it. Pretty suspicious for someone like that to not know what's going on with his boyfriend.
He got away with even more with his other boyfriend, Herb Moses.
But hey, if another country can be invaded on false pretenses and nothing be done about it, a little thing like using influence to help a boyfiend out is nothing to politicians.

Sarpedon_702 wrote:Totally in favor of term limits. We need to rid ourselves of the US aristocracy.

The kennedys are already dying out you silly person.

The guy pulled a comedian move and heckled a heckler, I'd much rather have the mayor of milwaukee. Even though he probably has some skeletons in his closet.

Relapse wrote:Frank and Herb Moses

http://forums.timesdaily.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/6501027316/m/2551029448

This part right here....I'm sorry but the guy should be run out of office for conflict of interest alone.

Wakeup all you Frankophiles.......I say wake up!!

GG

It's all a lie! The GOP and FOX news said that it's true so it must be false!

Frazzled wrote:
Please do not equate Perotistas with Lyndon Larouche. Your extreme ignorance in this area is showing.
Larouche is a racist nutjob.
Perot (although a personal nut but fun guy) was about prudent fiscal management of the budget and investment in the US. In either party he would have been conssidered your standard issue moderately conservative member who didn't like NAFTA. Thats pretty much the Obama position until he got called out on it.

LaRouche is antisemitic. That's not the same thing as racism.

Either way, the comparison was directed towards their respective cult followings. Not their political positions.

Also, when did 'in many ways' result in equivocation?

dogma wrote:
LaRouche is antisemitic. That's not the same thing as racism.

Really? Let's examine this issue, shall we?

Antisemitism is prejudice against Jews. Jews are quasi-ethnic religious group defined primarily by the highly insular nature of their faith, and the resultant blood ties.

Racism is the belief that race determines one's ability to function in society, where race is define by heritable characteristics (like skin color).

If you really think these are the same thing, you need to learn to read.