i saw the clip. even out of context, it's obvious that he's talking about voting.
To be replaced by whom? Form a one party government; a Liberal party at that?
Actually a 3 to 5 party government might not be a bad idea. They would be FORCED to work together. But, like I said, the cards are stacked. The laws are in place. The loopholes are now grand entrances. The big money interests control the politician and the media controls us. The economics are no longer "trickling down" to Americans and slave labor is cheap across the globe. The fat cats are holding all the strings and we are going down the toilet. Keep voting republican if that idea appeals to you. They have made their blood oath to these people.
To be replaced by whom? Form a one party government; a Liberal party at that?
How many times are you gonna repeat yourself yourself here....yes we know you think it was an edited video we've heard this now for about your last 10 posts. btw are you a video expert or something? :lamoSorry, Fox produced an edited video to distort what really happened. "We Distort, You Decide"
How many times are you gonna repeat yourself yourself here....yes we know you think it was an edited video we've heard this now for about your last 10 posts. btw are you a video expert or something? :lamo
The really pathetic part about all of this is that if any Conservative were to threaten Liberals the way Liberals threaten Conservatives they would all be squealing like a bunch of little girls.
a truly pathetic excuse for a human being.
It's not the Right that has killed millions of jobs.
of course you are. Libbos aren't into independent thought, unless it's Liberal independent thought.
Why don't you post some pics of the slaughter that Anders Breivik left behind in Norway?
And that's the thing. There is no place for violent rhetoric in politics, whichever side it comes from. But as a rule our politically charged acts of violence are committed by right-wing extremists -- not liberals.
Why don't you post some pics of the slaughter that Anders Breivik left behind in Norway?
And that's the thing. There is no place for violent rhetoric in politics, whichever side it comes from. But as a rule our politically charged acts of violence are committed by right-wing extremists -- not liberals.
How's about we talk about the violence wrought by the Weather Underground and the Black Panthers? Probably don't want to go there, do ya?
It's about time a union leader stood up and talked to his members. Maybe now some other union leaders will jump on the Hoffa band wagon to energize thier members to take action at the voting booths"Take These Son Of Bitches Out".
ok two can play this game.....
Actually violence committed by so called individual right wing nuts are few in recent history compared to left wing goverments:
First at the top of the list we have the left winger Stalin who killed perhaps 20 million
Then we have left winger Chairman Mao with nearly that many
The we have the left winger Pol Pot who killed only 2 million
Of course in the US we have rookies compared to these guys with Bill Clinton and Janet Reno directing the killing of a young boy, his dog, his mother with her baby all because of someone supposedly having an illegal gun.
Then we have the torching (under Reno & Clintons command) dozens of men women & children at the Waco compound with a flame throwing tank.
Under Dear Leader Obama we have our own border patrol along with many Mexicans being killed with guns supplied by left winger Holders boys.
Oh & then you dont dare be a conservative democrat president like JFK or you will be gunned down by a commie marxist type like Oswald.
So please please keep throwing more examples out there for me & I will continue to show you how foolish your argument is.............Professor :roll:
What did he say that he should apologize for? Is Fox going to apologize for misrepresenting what he said? :roll:
Tpyical right wing distortion of facts, It's about time that a union leader stands up and energises the voters. Unions have always ansd will always represent the best interest of the poor and middle class
Perhaps we should go as far back as the conservative Confederacy? 625,000 American casualties. Let's not even go into the slaves....
Why does the Confederacy get the blame for a war started by Northern financial interests and their houseboy Lincoln? The Civil War was the Republican Party's Finest Hour, complete with massacres of civilians, burning down entire cities, massive land thefts, embezzlements, the dawn of massive corporate welfare, and the final nail in the coffin they buried Jeffersonian populism in.
Is there some reason that you left out right winger Adolph Hitler? Let's be conseravite and say 18 million.
Perhaps we should go as far back as the conservative Confederacy? 625,000 American casualties. Let's not even go into the slaves....
But of course we're talking about the present, so it's all a bit of a diversion, isn't it. :roll:
No I want to talk about Hoffa and his call to get union members to the voting booth to It's about time a union leader stood up and talked to his members. Maybe now some other union leaders will jump on the Hoffa band wagon to energize thier members to take action at the voting booths
Is there some reason that you left out right winger Adolph Hitler? Let's be conseravite and say 18 million.
Perhaps we should go as far back as the conservative Confederacy? 625,000 American casualties. Let's not even go into the slaves....
But of course we're talking about the present, so it's all a bit of a diversion, isn't it. :roll:
Somehow I knew this was coming....
I think its obvious to most here that you are not a professor of history
First of all I'm not going to get into the whole Hitler thing but I think its pretty obvious that he had almost nothing in common with todays conservative movement. He wasnt religious, he wasnt an ardent supporter of free market capitolism, his ecomomic policies modeled niether the left or the right but a mixture of both.
But he did believe in top heavy big federal goverment that dictates just about everything (which party does this remind you of today?) In his early years he also hung around a character by the named of Ernst Rohn a socialist.
So despite all the left wing rhetoric that Hitler was a so called right winger I think that there is no real evidence to support this. As far as how many he killed the number I see is 11 million, not nearly as much as the left wing commie marxist types I mentioned earlier.
Then to even bring the Civil war into this argument is beyond stupid
As far as diversions go, I think you and your president are trying to divert us from the crummy job he is doing and the failed big goverment Liberal policies that we are now experiencing.
Anyone familiar with history will tell you that Hitler was a far right extremist. He was a raging nationalist who believed in German exceptionalism and racial purity. He was a friend to wealth industrialists and an enemy to labor (for example, he abolished unions, collective bargaining, and the right to strike).
As Hitler himself wrote:
"The main plank in the Nationalist Socialist program is to abolish the liberalistic concept of the individual and the Marxist concept of humanity and to substitute for them the folk community, rooted in the soil and bound together by the bond of its common blood." (4)
"The state is a means to an end. Its end lies in the preservation and advancement of a community of physically and psychically homogenous creatures. This preservation itself comprises first of all existence as a race… Thus, the highest purpose of a folkish state is concern for the preservation of those original racial elements which bestow culture and create the beauty and dignity of a higher mankind. We, as Aryans, can conceive of the state only as the living organism of a nationality which… assures the preservation of this nationality…" (5)
"The German Reich as a state must embrace all Germans and has the task, not only of assembling and preserving the most valuable stocks of basic racial elements in this people, but slowly and surely of raising them to a dominant position."
This sound familiar? "It must never be forgotten that nothing that is really great in this world has ever been achieved by coalitions, but that it has always been the success of a single victor. Coalition successes bear by the very nature of their origin the germ of future crumbling, in fact of the loss of what has already been achieved. Great, truly world-shaking revolutions of a spiritual nature are not even conceivable and realizable except as the titanic struggles of individual formations, never as enterprises of coalitions."
"In the years 1913 and 1914, I… expressed the conviction that the question of the future of the German nation was the question of destroying Marxism."
"The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle of Nature and replaces the eternal privilege of power and strength by the mass of numbers and their dead weight."
"1935 will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." - Adolf Hitler
"The folkish state must not adjust its entire educational work primarily to the inoculation of mere knowledge, but to the breeding of absolutely healthy bodies. The training of mental abilities is only secondary. And here again, first place must be taken by the development of character, especially the promotion of will-power and determination, combined with the training of joy in responsibility, and only in last place comes scientific schooling."
"The great masses of people do not consist of philosophers; precisely for the masses, [religious] faith is often the sole foundation of a moral attitude… For the political man, the value of a religion must be estimated less by its deficiencies than by the virtue of a visibly better substitute. As long as this appears to be lacking, what is present can be demolished only by fools or criminals."
"For the political leader the religious doctrines and institutions of his people must always remain inviolable; or else he has no right to be in politics…"
You know that Hitler was a socialist, right?
You need to stop trying to define history by modern standards. It will be a loser for you.
Just like your 625,000 figure about the Civil War.
Hitler was not a socialist. Good lord. Read a history book.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?