Okay, I liked this... in a weird sort of way

[Consider]

Bush is a recovering alcoholic and coke user. He was "saved" from his evil ways late in life.

As the son of a minister, I have witnessed this late in life conversion many times. Almost ALWAYS these people become fanatical about their newfound life and religion.

Remember the "Jesus Freaks" of the 70's???

Bush admitted before the whole nation that he was "directed" by a Higher Power in his quest to bring freedom and democracy to those who never asked for it!

I'm not saying he wants to convert the Muslims. Just that he believes God has picked him to end this battle between good and evil once and for all!

I haven't had your opportunity to observe conversions. But I can see what you are saying.

I lived in England most of the 70s, so I'm a little unclear on the Jesus Freaks. I would have thought being a Jesus Freak would be good, maybe a little over the top, but enthusiastic.

He may believe God picked him.

But I don't think he went into Iraq for a higher good. I am seriously convinced he went in for profit. Major profit.

There's going to be a program on war profiteering tomorrow night on pbs. On the NOW program. I don't know what time it runs, and I don't know it it's about this war or wars in general.

[Consider]

This is a very interesting thread, I just read all 10 page's. WOW!
I don't understand Liberal's ,there agenga is mind boggaling,It's there
only purpose in life is to hate Bush.
What get's me is they hate him mostly for a suposed lie.

In terms of Bush, I think he's rather cute, as looks go, and I think his speeches are a riot to see on late night talk shows. What I dislike is that he lied about the weopons of mass destruction. And he's hauling out the same old Terrorists, Be afraid of the terrorists! talk now.

Let me give you a update Bush didn't lie about WMD, they know for a fact
they where there, becuase it was the US that sold them to Iraq in first place back when Iran and Iraq was at war, to gain confidence in the region. At that time it was a way for the us start a foot hold in the region,
one favor deseves another sort of thing. Things went south, Sahdam took over and used them on his own people.
We would have got them back if not for the Communist News Network(CNN) and the rest of the Liberal controlled media giving Sahdam a 3 month countdown on the start date of the war. All the WMD some how made it's way to Sireia, and who know's where. I'll give you hint, How do think Iran may have come across some weapons grade plutonium, and be able to to now have,or real close to having a Nuke!!
It's just a coincedence that it is only a couple of years after the war started.
Why would Bush say they were there knowing his "LIe" would be uncovered, making himself the fool. Somehow I don't believe you can become a President of the United States being a idoit. Bush is no Idiot
he may not make popular disions but the man is not a idiot.
The problem I see is that too many people believe the new's media and not the truth. You have to search for truth,not just believe what you hear.

Hi Dragin'

You are probably right about us supplying them with materials to make weapons of mass destruction.

but.. But, the record is pretty clear that they were all destroyed as per... I forget who gave the directive, the UN? I don't know.

But there weren't any left in Iraq. So.... it wasn't true that they had WMD in the present time.

In terms of Iran and enriched ... I just cannot remember the actual words... is it uranium? or plutonium?

Anyway, there have been a slew of programs on how that stuff is really easy to get. Russia for instance hardly has any safeguards on theirs at all, in many situations.

I live near Los Alamos, and you know how often Los Alamos has been in the news for a lack of security.

Iran could have bought some from... I don't know, North Korea... India...

Plus, I think you make it, I think that's the trick, just plain making it.

So I'm not against Bush because of CNN. (I had never heard it called Communist News Network before.)

I'm against him because he puts personal profit before the good of the people of this nation.

[draginzwagon]

Well that's the job description of a US President, doesn't matter what there name is: BUsh,Clinton,or who ever the next President will be it will be more of the same. We as a nation have been sold out. By our Gov. at large, the President is just the first person in a long line of theiving corpurt , Bas#$$%!
We need to clean house and start over,beginning with state gov. and work our way to Washington,DC.

[golfhobo]

Draggin said:

The problem I see is that too many people believe the new's media and not the truth. You have to search for truth,not just believe what you hear.

And I suppose you believe that Fox News is telling the truth and not just toting the party line? :shock:

And do you really believe that Saddam, at a time when he was NOT really expecting an American invasion, would give his WMD to his ARCH enemy IRAN??

Yeah, I know we gave Saddam the WMD. And I know he was a dictator and committed genocide. But, the WMD weren't there when we invaded, and THAT was Bush's rationale for taking us to war. That and how he was a threat to his neighbors! Which is total BS!

I don't hate him so much because he LIED. I hate him because he is incompetent, dangerous, powerhungry, willing to cheat, steal and manipulate to get powers NOT given to the executive branch, perhaps traitorous to the constitution, and a religious fanatic.

And I would feel the same if I had voted for him!

Liberals hate Bush because he is an elitist, who serves ONLY the rich in America at the expense of the less fortunate. And because he has involved us in a war of attrition that we might not win!

And yes, he IS an idiot! And a shirker of his Guard duties, because he was "Daddy's boy" and felt he could get out of it. Every time he mentions the name of a fallen soldier, he disgraces him because of his own record. He is bought and paid for by big oil interests. He is NO defender of our country OR its constitution.

As Sean Connery's character said in Hunt for Red October: He is a "buckaroo." And he's dangerous!

[Consider]

Well that's the job description of a US President, doesn't matter what there name is: BUsh,Clinton,or who ever the next President will be it will be more of the same. We as a nation have been sold out. By our Gov. at large, the President is just the first person in a long line of theiving corpurt , Bas#$$%!
We need to clean house and start over,beginning with state gov. and work our way to Washington,DC.

OH!

I see, I see. YES!!!!

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MACK]

Maybe Clinton was not afraid to use force but one time he should have he didn't.

[Consider]

Hi,
If anyone is interested in the NOW voting story on pbs, it's going to be rerun tonight.

I'm not sure of the time.

Also, maybe you would be interested in this page of comments on the voting question... if it was a genuine election with the Diebold machines...

anyway, take a look, if you want:
http://www.pbs.org/now/php/quotes.php

[golfhobo]

Maybe Clinton was not afraid to use force but one time he should have he didn't.

I assume you refer to Somalia? If so, I agree. But, I never said he was perfect. What I said was, that Bush has used force at times when it was NOT necessary, and not well executed.

Clinton was a diplomat. There is WAY more to being a President of the U.S. than JUST being Commander in Chief.

He eliminated Reagan's triple digit defecit, and created a surplus. Bush has done the exact opposite.

He could explain the most complicated American policies in a way the common man could understand. Bush can't talk his way out of dinner!

He was one of US. Bush is one of THEM.

It is a common fallacy of NeoCons and other Conservatives to claim that Democrats are weak when it comes to National Defense. Might I remind you that Kennedy stared down the Russian Bear LONG before Reagan asked politiely for his "friend" Gorbachev to tear down the wall? Johnson committed hundreds of thousands of troops (although unadvisedly) to Vietnam to fight Communism, and that it was FDR (re-elected by the majority of Americans 3 times) who commanded the full might of our military AND civilians against an aggressor?

Is it jealousy that makes the Cons cry that the Democratic Intelligencia are weak? Or is it just "selective memory?"

Wasn't it FDR who said, "Speak softly and carry a big stick?" Bush boasts loudly, and deploys an underequipped, understaffed force. So, WHO is the idiot here?

[Fozzy]

Golfhobo, you are making arguments for the historically weak minded, or the selectively ignorant. I wont even address the Clinton VS Bush thing because its just silly for the most part. There is no way that you can compare "conservative vs liberal" in the generational context of the "WW2 and before generations" and the post war and generation X group. The two groups darn near became exact opposites of their former selves during the 60's. Kennedy would NEVER be elected nowadays as he was then. Kennedy was a conservative as they come.

The LBJ and Vietnam thing really irritates me because the rage at the time (and for the last thirty years) was to blame Nixon for the war.

There are just too many topics within the topic to discuss here.

[golfhobo]

AHHH.... but, discuss... we MUST!

Golfhobo, you are making arguments for the historically weak minded, or the selectively ignorant.

Umm... could you "diagram" the first half of that sentence? Am I making arguments for those who IYHO, have ALWAYS been weak minded? Or am I doing so for those who don't know much about History?? As for my "ignorance" meter.... Y'all keep it pegged WIDE OPEN!


"I won't even address the Clinton VS Bush thing because its just silly for the most part. There is no way that you can compare "conservative vs liberal" in the generational context of the "WW2 and before generations" and the post war and generation X group."

Nor would I TRY to!


The two groups darn near became exact opposites of their former selves during the 60's. Kennedy would NEVER be elected nowadays as he was then. Kennedy was as conservative as they come.

I believe he WOULD be! He was a STRONG leader with a vision AND a PLAN for the future! He was intelligent. He could be "diplomatic" yet strong, He was a rich man, sure.... but he offered his life to the country with military service, and championed the cause of the least of us! And he was NEVER 5 days LATE to a natural disaster! He would win today as a dead "write-in" against any Conservative/Republican candidate you can drum up.... including ELVIS!

The LBJ and Vietnam thing really irritates me because the rage at the time (and for the last thirty years) was to blame Nixon for the war.

Hmm.... must have missed the memo! As a democrat, I've NEVER blamed Nixon for the war. Maybe for being 'hawkish' enough to believe that "carpet bombing" would do the trick, but NEVER for getting us INTO it! I blame him ONLY for being a traitorous, Constitution burning, cheating, lying, powerhungry CROOK! [Hmm.... sounds familiar!]

[draginzwagon]

Draggin said:

The problem I see is that too many people believe the new's media and not the truth. You have to search for truth,not just believe what you hear.

And I suppose you believe that Fox News is telling the truth and not just toting the party line? :shock:

And do you really believe that Saddam, at a time when he was NOT really expecting an American invasion, would give his WMD to his ARCH enemy IRAN??

Yeah, I know we gave Saddam the WMD. And I know he was a dictator and committed genocide. But, the WMD weren't there when we invaded, and THAT was Bush's rationale for taking us to war. That and how he was a threat to his neighbors! Which is total BS!

I don't hate him so much because he LIED. I hate him because he is incompetent, dangerous, powerhungry, willing to cheat, steal and manipulate to get powers NOT given to the executive branch, perhaps traitorous to the constitution, and a religious fanatic.

And I would feel the same if I had voted for him!

Liberals hate Bush because he is an elitist, who serves ONLY the rich in America at the expense of the less fortunate. And because he has involved us in a war of attrition that we might not win!

And yes, he IS an idiot! And a shirker of his Guard duties, because he was "Daddy's boy" and felt he could get out of it. Every time he mentions the name of a fallen soldier, he disgraces him because of his own record. He is bought and paid for by big oil interests. He is NO defender of our country OR its constitution.

As Sean Connery's character said in Hunt for Red October: He is a "buckaroo." And he's dangerous!

I guess you assume I am republican-NOT
I claim no political affliation, and you don't have to explain to me why Liberals hate Bush. I know why your still pissed about that Florida thing.
Get over it. You have been sold out by your Gov. doesn't matter what party you are with.They are out of control,and people battling between parties is just the delusion they want you have.
As far as Fox News goes they tell the same lies every other New's company does. Haven't you noticed that they all have the same exact story.
If you don't think you have been sold out explain why:
They have dismantled our milatary to next to nothing,now reling on Reseve's and the National Guard. Insted of buildng a stong milatary, which
can only keep us more secure as well as strengthen the economy.
They regulated just about every industry out of exsistence.
Like logging,farming,and the fishing industry, just to name a few.
They have elimated millon's of our job's in this country, for the sake of the UN's Global agenda.
and now due to there excellant forien policy we now get to enjoy $3.00 a
gallon gas,
and how about the Trillion's of dollar's in debt your great great granchildren get to pay back, all for amazing bugeting skill's.
and all you want to do is bitch about Bush, what about the rest of those
idiot's that have sold you out in Washington.

[Consider]

I know why your still pissed about that Florida thing.
Get over it. You have been sold out by your Gov. doesn't matter what party you are with.They are out of control,and people battling between parties is just the delusion they want you have.
As far as Fox News goes they tell the same lies every other New's company does. Haven't you noticed that they all have the same exact story.
If you don't think you have been sold out explain why:
They have dismantled our milatary to next to nothing,now reling on Reseve's and the National Guard. Insted of buildng a stong milatary, which
can only keep us more secure as well as strengthen the economy.
They regulated just about every industry out of exsistence.
Like logging,farming,and the fishing industry, just to name a few.
They have elimated millon's of our job's in this country, for the sake of the UN's Global agenda.
and now due to there excellant forien policy we now get to enjoy $3.00 a
gallon gas,
and how about the Trillion's of dollar's in debt your great great granchildren get to pay back, all for amazing bugeting skill's.
and all you want to do is bitch about Bush, what about the rest of those
idiot's that have sold you out in Washington.

I started watching BBC World News because CBS was beyond the pale...
but, you know what, though BBC carries many world stories that I wouldn't otherwise see, when I watch NBC in the very next half hour, they have EXACTLY the same photo stories on certain things, the things that Americans would be more likely to be interested in. There must be reporters in certain areas who sell their stories to everyone, or anyone.

Okay, but if this is the way you feel, and you clearly do, then what can we do?

Is there anything to get our Constitutional rights back?

I am, by the way, really sorry about saying that voting program was on tonight, it wasn't on here where I am.

Which I mention because the page that pbs has about what we can all do...
it's total ... hog wash ... I mean what difference does it make if we watch debates between candidates? or write to senators and representatives...

????????

[Fozzy]

Golfhobo, you are making arguments for the historically weak minded, or the selectively ignorant.

Umm... could you "diagram" the first half of that sentence? Am I making arguments for those who IYHO, have ALWAYS been weak minded? Or am I doing so for those who don't know much about History?? As for my "ignorance" meter.... Y'all keep it pegged WIDE OPEN!

OK, what I meant by this and by viewing some of your posts is that you are above these types of argument that you made in that one post. I get REALLY put off by the extremes and shreiks from the right and the left. If all the knee jerk crap can be filtered out and the REAL points that can be discussed it makes things less fatiguing. Just as I do not agree with Bush on everything, I do not see him as an evil genius nor a chimp as those on the left seem to want to assert. When these things get thrown into the discussion. its pointless to get into the discussion because there seems to be no sense in even trying. I disliked Clinton the first time I heard him speak because of his whole demeanor. To me the man was a complete cardboard cutout or a ventriloquist dummy. Very seldom did the man appear to act on any real emotion and when he did due to an open mike or errant camera, it was usually pretty bad. I supported Clinton when he did things right even though these things were (to me) few and far between.

The two groups darn near became exact opposites of their former selves during the 60's. Kennedy would NEVER be elected nowadays as he was then. Kennedy was as conservative as they come.

I believe he WOULD be! He was a STRONG leader with a vision AND a PLAN for the future! He was intelligent. He could be "diplomatic" yet strong, He was a rich man, sure.... but he offered his life to the country with military service, and championed the cause of the least of us! And he was NEVER 5 days LATE to a natural disaster! He would win today as a dead "write-in" against any Conservative/Republican candidate you can drum up.... including ELVIS! Laughing

He was a strong leader, he also supported McCarthy and Cutting taxes for the "rich". His brother ran FBI wire taps on numerous Americans. He would be seen as the "new left" as bad or even worse than Lieberman. Dean would be "YEEEEEAAAAARRRHHHHHHing" all over the place about how evil JFK is.

The LBJ and Vietnam thing really irritates me because the rage at the time (and for the last thirty years) was to blame Nixon for the war.

Hmm.... must have missed the memo! As a democrat, I've NEVER blamed Nixon for the war. Maybe for being 'hawkish' enough to believe that "carpet bombing" would do the trick, but NEVER for getting us INTO it! I blame him ONLY for being a traitorous, Constitution burning, cheating, lying, powerhungry CROOK! [Hmm.... sounds familiar!]

Not neccessarily the democrats at large as they too where mostly "pre-Xers" in their generation and attitude. The press and the masses where blaming Nixon for everything under the sun.. THAT sounds familiar to me. The then young rablerousers (gen Xers) are now the media bosses and the politicians of today. The issue of carpet bombing is quite odd because it is that and the refusal to make deals with the North Vietnamese government that got them to the Paris Peace talks... Nixon doesn't get any credit for getting out of the Vietnam conflict.

[draginzwagon]

Okay, but if this is the way you feel, and you clearly do, then what can we do?

Is there anything to get our Constitutional rights back?

Actually, I'm not sure. The first suggestion would be to try to elect
people to office that won't sell us out, but I imagine the problem with that is they are out numbered,end up not being effective and eventually give in to the BS that is going on,Kinda have to play ball there way.
The best way I could think of to get there attention is not to pay taxes,
but of course this won't happen, because enough people won't do'it for fear of the Gov.
I heard a great quote on the movie "V For Vendetta" it's about striking
back against a Unitarion Gov. A little deferrent but an ok movie, anyway
the quote was;
"People should not fear there Goverment,but the Government should fear it's people" I've heard this before but can't remember who origanally
said it.
Of course this is what the Founding Father's had in mind, Hence the Second Amendment.
the problem we have is people in this country fear the government.
Remember Waco,Tx. When the government murdered 85 women and childern and we just watched it on CNN, instead of getting a couple hundred thousand armed people together and actually stopping them.
Most people believed the the lies about the Branch Davidian's and didn't
relize the only laws they had broken were a couple of mister meaner gun laws. and they surely didn't invovle the children.
If we as a people had actually stopped them at Waco,Tx. the Gov. would afraid of us. as it should be. and wouldn't pull the sh## they do, and get away with it.
I am not sugesting we start anything violent but we should protect one anther from tyrant's.

[Fozzy]

Yum yum! Waco Waffles! put em on the back burner and they cook themselves...

[Consider]

Okay, but if this is the way you feel, and you clearly do, then what can we do?

Is there anything to get our Constitutional rights back?

Actually, I'm not sure. The first suggestion would be to try to elect
people to office that won't sell us out, but I imagine the problem with that is they are out numbered,end up not being effective and eventually give in to the BS that is going on,Kinda have to play ball there way.
The best way I could think of to get there attention is not to pay taxes,
but of course this won't happen, because enough people won't do'it for fear of the Gov.
I heard a great quote on the movie "V For Vendetta" it's about striking
back against a Unitarion Gov. A little deferrent but an ok movie, anyway
the quote was;
"People should not fear there Goverment,but the Government should fear it's people" I've heard this before but can't remember who origanally
said it.
Of course this is what the Founding Father's had in mind, Hence the Second Amendment.
the problem we have is people in this country fear the government.
Remember Waco,Tx. When the government murdered 85 women and childern and we just watched it on CNN, instead of getting a couple hundred thousand armed people together and actually stopping them.
Most people believed the the lies about the Branch Davidian's and didn't
relize the only laws they had broken were a couple of mister meaner gun laws. and they surely didn't invovle the children.
If we as a people had actually stopped them at Waco,Tx. the Gov. would afraid of us. as it should be. and wouldn't pull the sh## they do, and get away with it.
I am not sugesting we start anything violent but we should protect one anther from tyrant's.

Yes, as an aside on Able2Know another forum I go to, but not as much, V for Vendetta was on a lot of people's Best Movie list. It sounded too aggressive for me... but maybe not.

the number of people who stopped paying taxes is huge. Didn't you ever to to that fellow in Penn.'s site, www.taxableincome.net ?

Oops, the site doesn't come up. He had put a challenge out to the government. Maybe he got shut down. It was a briliant site. I cannot remember his name... Rose. Part of his name was Rose, I think. Does anyone here know what happened? His name is Larken Rose.
Here is a link with a picture of him:
http://larkenrose.blogspot.com/2003_...e_archive.html

I don't know if you ever ran into Fred Smart, he was right there when blogs were first starting. I think he started them... well, that may be too much. But anyway, here is a link for his sight which appears to have quite a lot of news in it: http://smartbandwidth.blogspot.com/

Wow, Larken was apparently sent to prison, and so too his wife. Sounds like China during the Revolution, to me. Did you ever watch the movie, The Blue Kite? I cannot believe how much I fell out of the loop. In any case, this link is "good" -- http://chapmanextendedentries.blogsp...kens-wife.html

It was because so many people were not paying taxes that they changed the bankruptcy rules so that you have to have tax returns now. That was a back door way of shafting people who otherwise were using the laws to not pay.

Back at the time of Wacco a lot of people were militia minded and I used to really worry about them. I thought they would be annihilated if they ever tried to physically stop the government in a situation like Wacco.

But now, watching Iraq, I can see that people can stand up against our military, only it is so costly in their lives. Overall, I think people here are still living pleasant enough lives not to want to give it up, the lives.

I think that if people had not been lied to about the weapons of mass destruction on Iraq, that they would not have wanted to go there, but they got sort of scared into how the American Homeland needed protecting. They didn't know that Cheney was going to make such a huge huge profit from the war.

Did you watch Syriana? I didn't get it when I first watched it, but someone from Able2Know directed me to another forum where there was an excellent explanation of it.

I think if we voted out a lot of incumbents, just because they were incumbents, it would shock Congress, a lot. That's why I posted that link to the veterans who are suggesting that. I don't know if you visited their site.

[Consider]

I wonder why Larken Rose lost in court, and Banister won.

I thought you guys might like to see this...

June 23, 2005

Former IRS CID Special Agent Joseph Banister Acquitted of Tax Fraud And Conspiracy

Government Unable To Prove U.S. Law
Requires Income Tax Withholding or Filing
Sacramento California -- On Thursday June 23, a federal jury found former IRS Criminal Investigative Division (CID) Special Agent and CPA Joseph Banister not guilty of all counts alleging criminal tax fraud and conspiracy related to actions he took on behalf of a California business owner who had openly defied the IRS over several years by stopping withholding of all income and employment taxes from the paychecks of his workers.

During the trial the Department of Justice was unable to put forth any evidence that Banister had either engaged in a conspiracy or had acted unlawfully when he shared legal research with business owner Al Thompson concluding that he had no legal obligation to withhold taxes from his workers or when he (Banister) prepared corrected tax returns for Thompson claiming his taxable income was, under U.S. law, zero.

During the trial, Banister's former supervisor at IRS?s San Jose CID office, Robert Gorini (who testified via video recording) when pointedly asked, was unable to cite any U.S. law that required Banister to pay income taxes.

Banister, who was forced to resign in 1999 after questioning IRS officials about their legal authority, gave Thompson?s worker?s a presentation in 2000 which reviewed his detailed investigative research of U.S. tax law which concluded that not only did the IRS lack any authority to impose income taxes on the workers, but there was no legal requirement for the business to withhold any taxes from the worker's paychecks.

Banister is part of a nationwide effort seeking to force the U.S. Government to respond to a series of detailed legal Petitions for Redress of Grievances directly challenging the authority of the IRS. Last summer, the We The People Foundation initiated a landmark lawsuit with 2000 plaintiffs against the government because it has refused to answer the Petitions.

The Right-To-Petition lawsuit, of which Banister is a plaintiff, is the first time in history that U.S. courts have been asked to define the meaning of the final ten words of the First Amendment.

Court documents for the RTP lawsuit and scholarly research regarding the Right to Petition can be downloaded from the Lawsuit Information Center on www.GiveMeLiberty.org.

Following the verdict, Banister was greeted by a throng of WTP supporters and members of his family.

Tomorrow, WTP will publish additional details of this important news and stream video of post-verdict interviews of Banister & several of the jurors.