Sunday, February 28, 2010

TEA PARTY - REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT

Pelosi says 'tea party' shares some common ground with Democrats but GOP has hijacked movement.

She alleged that some of the movement is "orchestrated" by the GOP

Boehner lauds Tea Party 'great patriots,' says GOPs must walk among them.

The Tea Party a creation of Fox News, Dick Armory, De Mint, Sarah, Ron Paul and Beck

CORPORATIONS AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH

The owners of corporations, as citizens of this country, enjoy the right of free speech which shall not be abridged. That does not mean these people who control a corporation can use the corporation as a megaphone to amplify their message and to effectively drown out the voices of others. A person's freedom of expression is abridged if the expression of his opinion will effectively not be heard because it is overwhelmed by messages funded by the massive wealth of corporations.

The intellectual elite has been almost completely overwhelmed by a revolution that requires our smartest people to turn off their brains

The original movement was libertarian (Ron Paul is its real leader) but the Necons and Neonuts have hijacked it

The majority of Tea Party supporters are actually opposing the entire political system in America. It is hard to come to terms with whether you oppose a system by joining the system or by attacking it from the outside, therefore this is a brazen falsification of reality. During the Bush administration their leaders were critics of just about all of their policies. Their disastrous and unreasonable foreign policy, the absurd fiscal policies, torture, secrecy, and so on.

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Multi-ethnicity in the Balkans

The USA wants Kosovo to be multi cultural, multi religious

And defends Bosnian and Croatian multi-ethnicity as well

We want multi-ethnic, multicultural and multi-religious societies living in harmony in the Balkans

Vatican : "The Church exists in many and different places, which manifests its catholicity. Being "catholic", it is a living organism, the Body of Christ. Each local Church, when in communion with the other local Churches, is a manifestation of the one and indivisible Church of God. To be "catholic" therefore means to be in communion with the one Church of all times and of all places. That is why the breaking of eucharistic communion means the wounding of one of the essential characteristics of the Church, its catholicity. From the Catholic point of view, the same self-awareness applies: the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church 'subsists in the Catholic Church' (Lumen Gentium, 8); this does not exclude acknowledgement that elements of the true Church are present outside the Catholic communion."

They have good and valid sacraments, it is an authentic ecclesiastical community

In January 1918 Patriarch Tikhon proclaimed anathema to the Bolsheviks (without explicitly naming them),[24] which further antagonized relations. When Tikhon died in 1925, the Soviet authorities forbade patriarchal elections to be held. Patriarchal locum tenens (acting Patriarch) Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky, 1887... See More–1944), going against the opinion of a major part of the church's parishes, in 1927 issued a declaration accepting the Soviet authority over the church as legitimate, pledging the church's cooperation with the government and condemning political dissent within the church. By this he granted himself with the power that Sergius, being a deputy of imprisoned Metropolitan Peter and acting against his will, had no right to assume according to the XXXIV Apostolic canon, which led to a split with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia abroad and the Russian True Orthodox Church (Russian Catacomb Church) within the Soviet Union, as they allegedly remained faithful to the Canons of the Apostles, declaring the part of the church led by Metropolitan Sergius schism, sometimes coined Sergianism. Due to this canonical disagreement it is disputed which church has been the legitimate successor to the Russian Orthodox Church that had existed before 1925.[25][26][27][28]After Nazi Germany's attack on the Soviet Union in 1941, Joseph Stalin revived the Russian Orthodox Church[29] to intensify patriotic support for the war effort. On September 4, 1943, Metropolitans Sergius, Alexy and Nikolay had a meeting with Stalin and received a permission to convene a council on September 8, 1943, which elected Sergius Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia. This is considered by some violation of the XXX Apostolic canon, as no church hierarch could be consecrated by secular authorities.[25] A new patriarch was elected, theological schools were opened, and thousands of churches began to function. The Moscow Theological Academy Seminary, which had been closed since 1918, was re-opened.A new and widespread persecution of the church was subsequently instituted under the leadership of Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev. A second round of repression, harassment and church closures took place between 1959 and 1964 during the rule of Nikita Khrushchev.

Wiki


Principles of the Just War


A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.
A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.
A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient--see point #4). Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.
A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.
The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.
The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.
The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.

Karadzic: Srebrenica massacre is 'a myth' LOL

Le Tribunal pénal international pour l'ex-Yougoslavie confirme que le massacre de Srebrenica constituait un génocide

Le Massacre de Srebrenica désigne le massacre d'environ 8 000 hommes et jeunes hommes Bosniaques

__________________________________________________________________________

English is the country's official language in twenty-eight states.

Hawaiian and English are official languages in Hawaii

New Mexico has laws providing for the use of both English and Spanish, as Louisiana does for English and French

At least a thousand different indigenous languages are spoken in the Americas.

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Obama : I am not socialist

"President Barack Obama launched a vigorous defense of his economic agenda on Wednesday, rejecting critics who say it amounts to "socialism" and insisting his policies would boost U.S. competitiveness.

"Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, I am an ardent believer in the free market," Obama said in prepared remarks to the Business Roundtable, a group of top corporate executives."

The New Deal saved capitalism, and was intended to save capitalism but some consider it like neo-communism.

According to Keynes, deficit spending and monetary stimulus generate growth and reduce unemployment.

Socialism is the public ownership of means of production.

Obamacare is not socialism because doctors, hospitals and insurers' ll remain private

Non-Profit necessarily means low cost

Obama : I applaud the House for passing the Health Insurance Industry Fair Competition Act on a strong bipartisan vote today. This bill will help ensure that insurers abide by common-sense rules that prevent bid-rigging, price fixing, and other practices that drive up health care costs for the American people.

Bush caused the current crisis Economic failure is pretty much a Republican issue

Hamilton started the baioluts, Woodrow Wilson just continued it.

What about the pressure of international investitors ?



1 - Corporation's Interests
2 - GOP losing ground
3 - " The free market solves all problems"
4 - The current financial crisis

Where do you see socialism, you idiot ?

Socialism is the public ownership of all of the means of production. Obmacare is not socialism, because doctors and hospitals will remain private. It means reformed capitalism.

Obamacare is pro-capitalism, it will boost the economy and create jobs... See More

Gop's Dictionary

Public service = socialism
Public option = communism
Reid = Stalin
Pelosi = Fidel Castro
Rockefeller = Mao


In America healthcare is considered a human right too

Strike down Medicare and Medicaid !!


Political correctness means democracy and the rule of law

Political correctness is cultural citizenship, civility, respect, nothing more

1 ) The Gop is against Obamacare because it means statism or socialism (hahaha) 2) But they support RomneyCare

Monday, February 22, 2010

Obamacare Overhaul

FDL News Desk » Hot Potato Game Returns To Washington As Obama Kicks Public Option Back To Reid

"Nobody wants to actually be responsible for the demise of the popular measure, but everyone wants to be on its side. Therefore you get the preposterous claim from Dan Pfeiffer today that the President didn’t include a public option in his proposal, but he supports it."

news.firedoglake.com

Robert Gibbs justified the lack of a public option in the health care reform bill today by laying it at the feet of Harry Reid.

Boehner: President’s Health Care Proposal Jeopardizes Summit, Doubles Down on Failed Approach

republicanleader.house.gov

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement in response to the partisan health care proposal posted online by the White House for discussion at the upcoming bipartisan health care summit

Obama wants to limit premium hikes.

Obama Health Care plan's price tag jumps to $950 Billion

White House: We'll Pass Health Care Without the GOP

(1). Does the proposed Health Care Reform Plan lowers the cost for all Americans?;(2). Does it provide adequate protection against abuses by the insurance industry?;(3). Does it make coverage affordable and available to the millions of working Americans who don't have health insurance right now?;(4). Does it end discrimination against Americans with pre-existing conditions?;and (5). How will this plan help expand Medicaid coverage? (WH)

Millions of employees are stuck in their jobs because they would lose health insurance if they left. By eliminating "job lock," health care reform would make it easier for employees to leave and start their own businesses (RG)

"Change is hard. Health Care Reform has always been hard. Civil Rights was hard.
Getting Women the right to vote, that was hard. Making sure that Social Security was there for our seniors, that was hard. Getting Medicare in place, that was hard. I know there is a tendency during tough times for us to turn on each other ...and get mad and angry. But our history tells us that each and every time we faced a choice between the easy road that leads to slow decline or the hard road that leads to something better and something higher, we take the higher road. We are Americans. We refuse to stand still. Not now (WH)"

"End the Bush tax cuts. Raise the rate back to Clinton levels on estate taxes. Bring in revenue now and pay down debt. End all these wars and corporate boondoggles."

(Theresa Kohlhoff)

Obamacare' ll create millions of jobs and boost the economy.

Health care reform will eliminate jobs in high paying ins executives and highly compensated insurance sales people

The federal government has clear authority to regulate interstate commerce, levy taxes and protect human rights, all part of the proposed healthcare overhaul.

The Supreme Court will strike down local legislation against Obamacare

Mark Begich open to reconciliation for ObamaCARE which now makes officially 50 senators on board for the nuclear option

Obamacare is constitutional and the Supreme Court has already decided on this issue. Obama' ll end Bush's war and so we' ll have money to finance Obamacare. How could the court strike down the current proposals without also striking down Medicare?

Universal health care is implemented in all industrialized countries, with the exception of the United States. It is also provided in many developing countries

Over the past 50 years, free market has failed to provide health care to Americans

We must reform our current system to provide affordable health care to all Americans.

The belief that government and the market can be separate is not feasible.

The reason we don’t allow insurance to cross state lines is because we allow states (right now) to regulate their own insurance markets. Some states have chosen to have strict regulations. We are paying billions for Insurance Industry advertising, exorbitant salaries and billions more for them to lobby against us to increase their profits and remove competition. Pitting profits against patients is economically unsound and unethical

Gibbs: If Senate Bill Passes House It Will Go to the President’s Desk

Free market has failed over the years to provide affordable health care to Americans. The health care market simply doesn't operate like the market for cars. It wont cure HC 's ill We dont have options, we dont have alternatives

Federal Tort Reform is unconstitutional without an amendment

The Democratic head of the Senate Banking Committee will offer his own version of an overhaul of financial regulations without Republican support.

Saturday, February 20, 2010

We need Public Option now

The free market has failed to provide affordable health care to Americans, as you know, Tort Reform and National Competition are not enough.

Universal health care is implemented in all industrialized countries, except in the United States. Public option will bring competition to the health insurance industry and lower costs. We need nonprofit health plans dedicated to improving the performance of the health sector in general. Obamacare means 'reformed capitalism'.

This is not socialism because hospitals and doctors will remain private and the public option will be optional.

The government does not own the means of production. The private property of means of production is not abolished.

Rockefeller said the public plan will combat the rapacious instincts of private insurers

The Supreme Court has been tolerant of the federal welfare state, usually justifying federal ad hoc programs under specious interpretations of the congressional Commerce Power.

The redistribution of income is enshrined in the Constitution as the 16th Amendment. If Congress wants to use income taxes to fund a healthcare system, there is nothing in the Constitution to stop it from doing so.

Obama will end the wars and then we'll have money to finance HC - author NJ

How many jobs will be created with Obamacare ?

Obama said that we will spend 900 Billion dollars on Health Care in10 years, the Bush's war on terrorism will cost 2 trillion in 9 years

"I believe that the only way to have true competition is if that competition comes from across the nation."

National competition and Tort Reform are not enough to improve nation's Health Care tort reform law ruled unconstitutional Amendment National competition and Tort Reform are not enough to improve nation's Health Care. Tort Reform is unconstitutional without an Amendment

Friday, February 19, 2010

America is not an empire

The Roman Empire was an autocracy since the time of Augustus based on slavery. The United States is a democratic republic based on free-market. America is not an empire. The United States might have turned into an imperial power. We fought a bloody Civil War to stop the South from turning Latin America into a vast slave plantation

The United States is the only nation that has military bases in other countries

They requested our presence there in order to promote the rule of law and democracy; the United Nations principles

In 1845 Texas joined the United States as the 28th state, seeking freedom, the annexation caused the Mexican–American War in 1846.

English is the country's official language in twenty-eight states.

Hawaiian and English are official languages in Hawaii

New Mexico has laws providing for the use of both English and Spanish, as Louisiana does for English and French

INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION

Well, we are members of the United Nations, I think it depends on the issue. If it's about the safety and welfare of the US and our allies, yes.

America is a fantastic country as big and complex like a continent.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Democracy or Republic ?

Democracy or Republic ?

A Constitutional Republic is a form of democracy, therefore all constitutional republics are democracies -- representative democracy and majority rule (50% or 2/3)

______________________________________________________________

The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object.

Thomas Jefferson


In that time, people didn't use the term 'democracy' in the sense of 'indirect' or 'representative democracy' , they used the expression 'republic'


*******************************************

DEFINITION OF REPUBLIC : "1 a (1) : a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government c : a usually specified republican government of a political unit "

______________________________________________

A republic is a form of government in which the head of state is not a monarch[1] and the people (or at least a part of its people)[2] have an impact on its government.[3][4] The word "republic" is derived from the Latin phrase res publica, which can be translated as "a public affair".

Both modern and ancient republics vary widely in their ideology and composition. The most common definition of a republic is a state without a monarch.[5] In republics such as the United States and France the executive is legitimated both by a constitution and by popular suffrage. In the United States, James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy as opposed to direct democracy[6], and this usage is still employed by many viewing themselves as "republicans".[7] (Wiki)

____________________________________________________

"Bouvier’s 1856 American Law Dictionary described republic as follows:
“… government in which there exists an organism by which the opinion of the people … passes over into the public will, that is, law, but in which also the supreme power, or the executive power, returns, either periodically or at stated times, to the people….”

The Constitution of the United States, at Article 4, says:
“The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence."

http://duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/R/Republic.aspx

***********************************************************************************

GOP's Dictionary :

Constituitional Republic = Authoritarian Oligarchy
Public Service = Socialism
Public Option = Comunism
Old Right = Liberals
Dem 59 v 41 GOP = We have a majority

And Bush said the spread of democracy is a major foreign policy objective

************************************************************************************

A theocracy is a government based on religion

A theocracy is a government based on religion (or on religious principles or doctrine), therefore the UK is a theocracy

The Monarch is the head of the Church of England

______________________________________________________________

The Founding Fathers realized that direct democracy could not work. They indeed expressed concerns but they didn't reject democracy, instead they created institutions to protect our democracy, our representative democracy

A constitutional republic is a form of democracy, therefore all constititutional republics are democracies. The constitutional delegates were elected by the people In that time, people didn't use the word "indirect democracy", but republic

The elitist republic of the Revolutionary generation was supplanted by the Jacksonian democracy just like every other democracy in the world

Our country was founded as an elitist republic (or a elistit democracy), just like every other democracy in the world, yet has become a near perfect democracy

King Juan Carlos and Queen Elizabeth are really scared

That's why Bush Admnistration intended to export democratic republics

A representative democracy is a kind of republic.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Supreme Court campaign finance ruling -

Supreme Court campaign finance ruling - SCOTUS on Citizens United vs. FEC

WP-ABC News poll: Americans of both parties overwhelmingly oppose Supreme Court campaign finance ruling


1 - They are rich because we buy from them. I buy products because i like them, they make me feel good


I like them not because someone does or doesn't endorse


They fit my utilitarian needs


2 - The corporations are distinguishable from the individuals.


3 - We don't agree with their political ideas


People do not agree with their political beliefs. We do not necessarily agree with them. Their political ideas do not matter

Indeed, corporatism is soft fascism

Organized groups against individuals

Corporate MONEY IS NOT FREE SPEECH !

Only individuals should be able to contribute, not corporations or unions or PACs or law firms,
and individual contributions should be limited

We like their products and not their political ideas. They cannot use our money to promote politicians

WE CAN NOT COMPARE CORPORATIONS TO NON PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS

************************************************************************************

Kerry Announces Plans to Introduce Constitutional Amendment on Campaign Finance System

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) testified before the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration at a hearing examining the Supreme Court's recent ruling to allow unlimited corporate spending in elections - kerry.senate.gov

Do Corporations rule America and the world ?

"But Americans have been duped into thinking that socialism is the enemy"

This statement, by itself, proves that corporations rule America

Undoubtedly they are very powerful and infuential.

I believe in freedom and democracy.

Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, said :

“The Court has invented the idea that corporations have First Amendment rights to influence election outcomes out of whole cloth” “There is surely no originalist interpretation to support this outcome, since the Court created the rights only in recent decades. Nor can the outcome be justified in light of the underlying purpose and spirit of the First Amendment.

Corporations are state-created entities, not real people. They do not have expressive interests like humans; and, unlike humans, they are uniquely motivated by a singular focus on their economic bottom line. Corporate spending on elections defeats rather than advances the democratic thrust of the First Amendment.”

Reps. Conyers and Edwards Introduce Constitutional Amendment

Representatives John Conyers and Donna Edwards today introduced a proposal to amend the Constitution to reverse the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC.

The Supreme Court’s decision does not apply to domestic subsidiaries of foreign corporations, the Congress could pass legislation, making it clear

*************************************************************************************

US Supreme Court : The corporations are persons with the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment

While the republicans do have a lot of ties to corporate America, the democrats do have a lot of ties to unions

The parties represents certain values

But we cannot accept this :

We the Rich People of the United States of America. We the corporations, the wealthy aristocracy

*************************************************************************************

Ruling on campaign financing

"In a 5-4 decision, the court's conservative bloc said corporations have the same First Amendment rights as individuals and, for that reason, the government may not stop corporations from spending freely to influence the outcome of federal elections.
The decision is probably the most sweeping and consequential handed down under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. And the outcome may well have an immediate impact on this year's mid-term elections to Congress.

Until now, corporations and unions have been barred from spending their own treasury funds on broadcast ads or billboards that urge the election or defeat of a federal candidate. This restriction dates back to 1907 when President Theodore Roosevelt called on Congress to forbid corporations, railroads and national banks from using their money in federal election campaigns. After World War II, Congress extended this ban to labor unions." (Chicago Tribune)

Sonia Sotomayor, the president's sole appointee on the court, was among the dissenting votes in today's ruling on campaign financing.

CONGRATULATIONS !

******************************************************************************

The Supreme Court recognizes Corporations as "Persons" bearing even more rights than human beings

This nation has been much closer to an Oligarchy

Imagine what Exxon, Monsanto, Mercx, Morgan Stanley, Blackwater, Lockheed, Halliburton, etc., will do?

Teddy Roosevelt is rolling in his grave.

**************************************************************

1 U.S.C. section 1:

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise . . . the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals.

Corporations are composed of individuals bearing rights

Our legal system recognizes many types of "legal persons", including corporations but the notion that a legal person that is not a natural person (i.e. not a human being) should enjoy political rights, such as free speech is insane

Corporations, though composed of individuals bearing rights

_____________________________________________________________________________


Only individuals should be able to contribute, because corporations are composed of people who have free speech rights and they are designed to allow entrepeneurs and investors to raise enough capital to help grow and sustain businesses.

*******************************************************************************
February 17, 2010 11:38 AM EST by John Stossel

Washington Post Still Doesn't Understand Supreme Court Ruling

(((((((

It would be fine if the court had actually allowed that. Spending on political campaigns is a form a speech and the First Amendment does say, "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech." But in fact, the court didn’t allow that. Corporations and unions still face bans on direct contributions to candidates--they are explicitly not free to spend as much as they want on political campaigns. Invariably, the media describes this specific ruling in the broadest terms, as if the Supreme Court unleashed some wild beast upon our defenseless democracy. After reading such relentlessly false descriptions of what the court actually said, it comes as no surprise that the public apparently opposes the "ruling"


***************************************************************************

Well :

1a H - Corporations do not have free speech rights because they are not human beings

2a H - OK. They have, but free speech right doesn't mean that any restriction should not be questioned.

Free speech protects your right to say what you want. But it doesn't mean you can haul in large enough amplifiers to drown out everybody's speech

Having freedom of speech doesn't give anyone the right to drown out opposing voices.

If money is speech then those with the most money have the most speech.

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Speechwriter

Reagan wrote his own speeches

Barry Obama and Al Gore write their own speeches

Pat Buchanan, Ben Stein and William Safire wrote for President Richard Nixon.

Chris Matthews wrote for President Jimmy Carter.

Michael Waldman wrote for President Bill Clinton.

Michael Gerson, Marc Thiessen and William McGurn for Bush

Monday, February 15, 2010

Obama is getting the economy back on track

Obama pulls US economy back from the verge of collapse

Obama admnistration is getting the economy back on track

Without bailouts and stimulus, unemployment could have reached 25%

Bush administation caused the worst financial crisis since the great depression

Bush almost destroyed America

*************************************************************

Romer: Historians will praise stimulus

By Walter Alarkon

Senior White House economist Christina Romer said that historians will judge President Barack Obama's stimulus more favorably than is a public still struggling through an economic downturn.

"I think when we're through this, when scholars actually sit and look at this, they will say, 'My goodness, look at all of the trajectory, look at where we were going, my goodness, it would have been dramatically worse [without the stimulus],' " Romer said Friday (The Hill)

****************************************************************

White House: Of that $27 billion, $11 billion has been in the form of tax relief and $16 billion in spending.

****************************************************************


THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY OF STIMULUS

Obama hails stimulus bill's effect - The president said the bill held off depression as he admitted there's more work still ahead.

The stimulus plan rescued the economy and saved 2 million jobs


*****************************************************************

Obama : We want our money back

Nine banks repaid $66 billion in TARP funds. The Treasury has given $247 billion to more than 700 banks. Of that, $162 billion has been repaid and banks have paid an additional $11 billion in interest and dividends.

The banks should pay a new tax to recoup the cost of bailing out foundering firms at the height of the financial crisis. "We want our money back," Obama said.

************************************************************************

Economic History

Clinton substantially cut the White House staff in his efforts to trim spending
It took 4 years of Clinton to get to the budget surplus.

There were some compromises with the Republican Congress that helped balance the budget in 1994

Reagan doubled the debt to $3 trillion. Bush Sr added another $1.5 trillion making the debt $4.5 trillion

Bush II doubled the debt to almost $ 6 trillion

Bush Administration caused the worst financial crisis since the Great depression !

Clinton balanced the budget in the 90s and Bush subsequently ruined it

**************************************************************

Job Creation

In a rare bipartisan breakthrough, the Senate pushed a $15 billion measure intended to spur job creation over a crucial preliminary obstacle Monday night after five Senate Republicans broke ranks to back consideration of the Democratic leadership initiative (NYT)
____________________________________________________

Dont blame Greenspan
The bubble of artificially low interest rates, excessive money. Really ?

Chairman Greenspan did a great job keeping inflation at bay

Mr. Bernanke is absolutely right that low interests were not the cause of the housing bubble and of the current crisis

What about the pressure of international investitors ?

Low interests are not enough to cause a crisis of this magnitude but deregulation, lack of supervision, lack of state oversight of financial institutions, lack of enforcement of current regulation yes

BUSH DOUBLED OUR DEBT FROM 5.7 TRILLION TO 10.6 TRILLION before the election
__________________________________________

US President Barack Obama is planning "dramatic reductions" in the country's nuclear arsenal, a senior US administration official has said - BBC

Miranda Rights - Military or Civil Trial (War on Terror)

Without due legal process (the rule of law) peace, justice and democracy are impossible

Where sufficient evidence exists that a detainee has committed a war crime, court-martial proceedings should begin immediately. Those charged under this system and ultimately convicted can be detained in military jails inside the United States. The military commission system has failed miserably and should be scrapped.


The Supreme Court has held that we may detain unlawful enemy combatants captured in battlefield circumstances under the law of war until hostilities have ended. The court’s most recent ruling, however, gives detainees the right to challenge their status as unlawful combatants in federal court.


The third category of detainees presents the most difficult challenge –those the government believes are dangerous, but against whom there is insufficient admissible evidence to bring a prosecution. The Supreme Court has held that we may detain unlawful enemy combatants captured in battlefield circumstances under the law of war until hostilities have ended. The court’s most recent ruling, however, gives detainees the right to challenge their status as unlawful combatants in federal court.

*****************************************************************************

"Terrorists Captured on Battlefield Have Constitutional Rights". Is it just a semantic issue: "ANYONE Captured on Battlefield Have" (MILITARY TRIAL)

Civil trial >>>> anywherelse

Under Obama, more targeted killings than captures (Washington Post)

Secret operation by Pakistani intelligence force and CIA operatives nets Military chief in Karachi

Pakistan today is clearly part of the solution to the threat of terrorism

Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar has information on Osama's whereabouts

Is the Afghan War closer to ending now that we have the Taliban's second-in-command ?

Neocons say skipping the Fifth Amendment is crucial in such cases because the government needs to get “actionable intelligence” from terror suspects."

******************************************************************************

The argument is : kids shouldn't be asked or forced to recite the Pledge because the Supreme Court considers it illegal

Taxation is constitutional and necessary

"Taxation is slavery. The New Deal is slavery "

Taxation is constitutional and necessary including progressive taxation

There is no amendment more clear than the 16th. Income taxation is constitutional.

"Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any other federal court has ruled that an income tax imposed under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is unconstitutional."

"The adoption of the 16th Amendment, specifically arguments that it was never properly ratified by the states, have been a source of tax protester Sixteenth Amendment arguments. However, every argument has been repeatedly rejected by the courts, to the point that filing a case with said arguments has been ruled to be a frivolous lawsuit, subjecting the filer to criminal and civil penalties."...
"For example, in the case of Lovell v. United States the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit stated:

Plaintiffs argue first that they are exempt from federal taxation because they are "natural individuals" who have not "requested, obtained or exercised any, privilege from an agency of government." This is not a basis for an ... See Moreexemption from federal income tax. [citation omitted] All individuals, natural or unnatural, must pay federal income tax on their wages, regardless of whether they received any "privileges" from the government. Plaintiffs also contend that the Constitution prohibits imposition of a direct tax without apportionment. They are wrong; it does not. U. S. Const. amend. XVI [. . . .][27]
—Lovell v. United States" (WIKI)

*********************************************************
U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 8
________________________________________
Article 1 - The Legislative Branch
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes
______________________________________________

"End the Bush tax cuts. Raise the rate back to Clinton levels on estate taxes. Bring in revenue now and pay down debt. End all these wars and corporate boondoggles." (Theresa K.)

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Are super-majorities in the legislature unconstitutional?

They may well be, but don't expect a gun-shy state supreme court to deal with the explosive question.

The state and federal constitutions both require majority votes to pass legislation, and super-majorities to accomplish some specific things: Congress needs two-thirds to remove a judge or a president, for example, and the state legislature needs two-thirds to alter or suspend an initiative within the first two years after it passes. Neither document says anything about a super-majority to raise taxes, or a filibuster that can only be averted by a cloture vote of 60 percent.

Thomas Geoghan argued recently in The New York Times that the modern filibuster is unconstitutional. Geoghan suggested that recent Republican use of the filibuster has made 60 percent necessary to pass virtually any legislation, and he quoted that old populist Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 75: "All provisions which require more than a majority of any body to its resolutions have a direct tendency to embarrass the operations of the government and an indirect one to subject the sense of the majority to that of the minority."

http://crosscut.com/2010/02/08/law-justice/19563/

**************************************************************

The recent Republican use of the filibuster is clearly unconstitutional

**************************************************************

Majority rules in constitutional democracies (or constitutional republics)

"The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. None of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by constitutional convention. The Congress proposes an amendment in the form of a joint resolution."

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution/

National competition and Tort Reform are not enough

Tort Reform™ is an Attack on Constitutional Rights

I wrote yesterday on damage compensation caps, marketed under the trade name Tort Reform™ by the GOP, and the damage it does to those harmed by medical and other negligence. But the ideas behind Tort Reform™ also raise serious and fundamental challenges to the role of the jury in the administration of justice and protecting American freedoms

I m not alone in this opinion. James Madison said that trial by jury “is as essential to secure the liberty of the people as any one of the pre-eminent rights of nature.” Yet the right to have the facts of a civil dispute, including compensation, decided by a lay jury, is so offensive to corporate interests that they would have you believe that our best and brightest are unable to design safe products, deliver quality medical care, or perform a host of other activities unless we gut one particular of our Bill of Rights – the Amendment VII, which reads:
”In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved…”

The right of access to jury to determine the facts is a basic human right that goes back to the Magna Carta in our own culture’s immediate history, and back to the Greeks and the Romans during some of the earliest civilized periods of human history.

http://arizona.typepad.com/blog/2006/05/tort_reform_is_.html

***************************************************************************

TORT REFORM - MYTH and REALITY

Well it depends on your classification of frivolous litigation

A couple of legal terms and restrictions are constitutional, and beneficial to the country

But today Tort Reform is ilegal

Tort reform is unconstitutional at the federal level

Tort reform is unconstitutional without a constitutional amendment

Let health insurance cross state lines, some say but national competition is not enough

***************************************************************************

Socialism is the public ownership of the means of production. Obamacare is not socialism because hospitals, doctors and insures will remain private.

****************************************************************************

Obama will end Bush's wars and so we will have money

Where were Tea Baggers when Bush embraced "Socialized Medicine?"

In 1983 he and the REPUBLCIAN Congress passed a 600 BILLION dollar prescription drug program for seniors. They offered NO WAY to pay for it. They just tacked it on to the deficit.

*******************************************************************

UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE AND SINGLE PAYER

Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom are examples of single-payer universal health care systems. This kind of health insurance is extended to all citizens and legal residents, in wealthy nations

41 million people without Health Insurance is a humanitarian tragedy, something that people are ashamed

*******************************************

SOCIAL SECURITY

Obama Says Raising Taxes Will Fix Social Security - President Barack Obama says Social Security is slowly running out of money but that it can exist well into the future with a slight fix.The system is funded with a tax on earnings, up to $109,000 a year - CNN

"E pluribus unum" "One, from many"

There is a positive and a negative interpretation or perspective of multiculturalism. I believe "E pluribus unum" "One, from many"

There are so many people from different backgrounds, blacks, indians, europeans from different countries There are many americas, many traditions. You cannot deny our history

Political correctness means democracy and the rule of law

*****************************************************************************
Pluralism and traditional values -
The Real Leo Strauss


A Neocon or a traditional conservative ?

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/07/opinion/the-real-leo-strauss.html?pagewanted=1

Saturday, February 13, 2010

The Supreme Court and Gun Control

The Constitution confers an individual right to gun ownership beyond providing for "a well regulated Militia," as the amendment states. The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home" Justice Antonin Scalia, the court's arch-conservative, wrote in the majority opinion. "It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose," Scalia wrote. Scalia said the Court's decision "should not be taken to cast doubt" on many existing restrictions against gun possession, including handgun possession by felons and the mentally ill, possession in schools and government buildings and rules governing commercial arms sale." Scalia's point is that there's nothing to suggest [that arming state] militias exhausts the scope of the clause (Time Magazine)

The Constitution does not permit the absolute prohibition of handguns but some prohibitions are necessary and permissible

*******************************************************************

"So Obama has proposed nothing in the way of new federal restrictions on firearms. Even the "assault weapons" ban signed by President Bill Clinton — and allowed to expire in 2004 — has no visible place on Obama's agenda" - USA TODAY

Friday, February 12, 2010

Obama and ordoliberalism

Ordoliberalism is a school of liberalism that emphasises the need for the state to ensure that the free market produces results close to its theoretical potential (see allocative efficiency). The theory was developed by German economists and legal scholars such as Walter Eucken, Franz Böhm, Hans Grossmann-Doerth and Leonhard Miksch from about 1930-1950. Alexander Rüstow and Wilhelm Röpke (who spent the Nazi period in exile in Turkey) and Friedrich Hayek are associated with this theory. Ordoliberal ideals (with modifications) drove the creation of the post-World War II German social market economy and its attendant Wirtschaftswunder - Wiki

Obama is not a socialist because he doesn't believe that industries should be controlled by the government, he doesn't want the public ownership of all means of production or the taken over by the workers

The free market does not work fully in Health Care.

Galbraith and Keynes advocate institutional solutions for economic problems because human beings are not commodities like beans, they cannot be measured in pecuniary terms. And Keynes said: "In the long run, we're all dead.

He is not a communist but a social democrat

Bush started bailouts, Obama extended bailouts. H. Hoover started bailouts, FDR extended bailouts !

Obama will end Bush's wars and so we ll have money

"The libertarian error consists in a demand for freedom without limit, even though trying to achieve such unlimited freedom results in an irreducible inequality of conditions that is unjust and involves serious deprivations for a majority of the population"

The Mortimer J. Adler Archive

The Patriot Act

Peace and democracy without the rule of law ?

The possibility of terror attacks is not a reason to abandon due process (the rule of law)

Politicians must be careful not to mislead people about where the danger comes from

Without due legal process (the rule of law), peace, justice and democracy are impossible

Terrorists captured on battlefield have constitutional rights. Is it just a semantic issue 'anyone captured on battlefield have'

Patriot Act means the "complete invasion of your privacey act".

Unless there are particular and very strong reasons for exceptions, the same environmental standards should apply for peacetime.

Ron Paul is a libertarian and against PA, Sarah supports PA

Sarah Palin is a neocon, the teabaggers are libertarians or minarchists.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

The Fox Juggernaut: Why It's No.

"The Fox Juggernaut: Why It's No. 1Most of us who live in the blessedly enlightened Washington-New York-Boston corridor like to brush off Fox News as the home of the intellectually challenged. We mock its slogan, "First, Fair and Balanced," and laugh off its rabble-rousing commentators as neanderthal, bigoted, biased right-wingers.

Fox's millions of viewers -- those little people in nowhere towns and backwater cities who don't read books or watch "Mad Men" -- are ridiculed and caricatured as dumb and dumber. They are the hollering, red-faced crowds in the rowdy protests at town hall meetings last August. They are the social and political throwbacks of the Tea Party movement. They are the unfashionable, middle-America, small-town folks who queue up for hours to get a glimpse of their action hero, Sarah Palin.

So why is Fox News No. 1?

Stack its lineup of stars -- Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity -- against the liberal MSNBC's lineup of Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow, and you've got a pretty good picture of why Fox comes out on top."

Luisita Lopez Torregrosa (Politics Daily)

America as a country and America as a continent

America' and 'American' are correct because the country's official name is the United States of America.

'America' as a country and 'America' as a continent'.

American to refer to inhabitants of the Americas or to the citizens of the U.S

UNITED STATES IN THE WORLD WAR II

The liberation of Paris was a coup de grace for the Allies. Paris did not suffer the fate of Berlin or Stalingrad The liberation of Paris was a historic and very significant event. It was a victory for an entire people, the victory of France overcoming its divisions A victory for humanity A victory of civilization

The United States won the Second World War and the Cold war

Japan attacked Pearl Harbor killing 2400 people without a formal declaration of war

Roosevelt was right, nazism was a threat to humanity

The cowardly attack on Pearl Harbor killed 2400 people

The Treaty of Versailles was indeed draconian but it was not sufficient to explain the WWII

The Treaty was undermined by subsequent events starting as early as 1932.

1941: Germany and Italy declare war on US -

Germany and Italy have announced they are at war with the United States. America immediately responded by declaring war on the two Axis powers (BBC)The Axis attacked America, that was the biggest mistake they ever did

The Axis attacked America, the biggest mistake they ever did

Modern historians disagree on that. The idea that Versailles contributed to Hitler's rise to power or to the rise of World War II is false.

OBAMA NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

Obama : I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds such as when civilians are slaughtered

I face the world as it is and cannot stay idle in the face of threats to the American people

For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms.

****************************

Obama will keep troops in Afghanistan until the government there is prepared to secure the country against terrorists.

Israelis and Palestinians support two-state solution

The United States supports two-states, one Israel and one Palestine

Many/most Israelis and Palestinians support two-state solution

The UN resolution 181 recommended the division of the British Mandate of Palestine into two provisional states, one Jewish and one Arab

Camp David was signed in 1978 and 1979
Hezbollah was founded in 1982
Hamas was founded in 1987

Yasser Arafat rejected Ehud Barak's proposals at Camp David, the so called generous offer

***************************

EU foreign ministers in Brussels have "strongly condemned" the use of forged European passports in the assassination of Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh (BBC)

***************************

ISLAM

Suicide is forbidden in Islam

The Koran does not allow anyone to kill innocent people

Islam forbids forced conversion, as surah 2:256 says "Let there be no compulsion in religion"

Did Liberals Cause the Sub-Prime Crisis?


Conservatives blame the housing crisis on a 1977 law that helps-low income people get mortgages. It's a useful story for them, but it isn't true.


Robert Gordon | April 7, 2008 | web only

The idea started on the outer precincts of the right. Thomas DiLorenzo, an economist who calls Ron Paul "the Jefferson of our time," wrote in September that the housing crisis is "the direct result of thirty years of government policy that has forced banks to make bad loans to un-creditworthy borrowers." The policy DiLorenzo decries is the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act, which requires banks to lend throughout the communities they serve.

The Blame-CRA theme bounced around the right-wing Freerepublic.com. In January it figured in a Washington Times column. In February, a Cato Institute affiliate named Stan Liebowitz picked up the critique in a New York Post op-ed headlined "The Real Scandal: How the Feds Invented the Mortgage Mess." On The National Review's blog, The Corner, John Derbyshire channeled Liebowitz: "The folk losing their homes? are victims not of 'predatory lenders,' but of government-sponsored -- in fact government-mandated -- political correctness."

Last week, a more careful expression of the idea hit The Washington Post, in an article on former Sen. Phil Gramm's influence over John McCain. While two progressive economists were quoted criticizing Gramm's insistent opposition to government regulation, the Brookings Institution's Robert Litan offered an opposing perspective. Litan suggested that the 1990s enhancement of CRA, which was achieved over Gramm's fierce opposition, may have contributed to the current crisis. "If the CRA had not been so aggressively pushed," Litan said, "it is conceivable things would not be quite as bad. People have to be honest about that."

This is classic rhetoric of conservative reaction. (For fans of welfare policy, it is Charles Murray meets the mortgage mess.) Most analysts see the sub-prime crisis as a market failure. Believing the bubble would never pop, lenders approved risky adjustable-rate mortgages, often without considering whether borrowers could afford them; families took on those loans; investors bought them in securitized form; and, all the while, regulators sat on their hands.

The revisionists say the problem wasn't too little regulation; but too much, via CRA. The law was enacted in response to both intentional redlining and structural barriers to credit for low-income communities. CRA applies only to banks and thrifts that are federally insured; it's conceived as a quid pro quo for that privilege, among others. This means the law doesn't apply to independent mortgage companies (or payday lenders, check-cashers, etc.)

The law imposes on the covered depositories an affirmative duty to lend throughout the areas from which they take deposits, including poor neighborhoods. The law has teeth because regulators' ratings of banks' CRA performance become public and inform important decisions, notably merger approvals. Studies by the Federal Reserve and Harvard's Joint Center for Housing Studies, among others, have shown that CRA increased lending and homeownership in poor communities without undermining banks' profitability.

But CRA has always had critics, and they now suggest that the law went too far in encouraging banks to lend in struggling communities. Rhetoric aside, the argument turns on a simple question: In the current mortgage meltdown, did lenders approve bad loans to comply with CRA, or to make money?

The evidence strongly suggests the latter. First, consider timing. CRA was enacted in 1977. The sub-prime lending at the heart of the current crisis exploded a full quarter century later. In the mid-1990s, new CRA regulations and a wave of mergers led to a flurry of CRA activity, but, as noted by the New America Foundation's Ellen Seidman (and by Harvard's Joint Center), that activity "largely came to an end by 2001." In late 2004, the Bush administration announced plans to sharply weaken CRA regulations, pulling small and mid-sized banks out from under the law's toughest standards. Yet sub-prime lending continued, and even intensified -- at the very time when activity under CRA had slowed and the law had weakened.
Second, it is hard to blame CRA for the mortgage meltdown when CRA doesn't even apply to most of the loans that are behind it. As the University of Michigan's Michael Barr points out, half of sub-prime loans came from those mortgage companies beyond the reach of CRA. A further 25 to 30 percent came from bank subsidiaries and affiliates, which come under CRA to varying degrees but not as fully as banks themselves. (With affiliates, banks can choose whether to count the loans.) Perhaps one in four sub-prime loans were made by the institutions fully governed by CRA.

Most important, the lenders subject to CRA have engaged in less, not more, of the most dangerous lending. Janet Yellen, president of the San Francisco Federal Reserve, offers the killer statistic: Independent mortgage companies, which are not covered by CRA, made high-priced loans at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts. With this in mind, Yellen specifically rejects the "tendency to conflate the current problems in the sub-prime market with CRA-motivated lending.? CRA, Yellen says, "has increased the volume of responsible lending to low- and moderate-income households."

Yellen is hardly alone in concluding that the real problems came from the institutions beyond the reach of CRA. One of the only regulators who long ago saw the current crisis coming was the late Ned Gramlich, a former Fed governor. While Alan Greenspan was cheering the sub-prime boom, Gramlich warned of its risks and unsuccessfully pushed for greater supervision of bank affiliates. But Gramlich praised CRA, saying last year, "banks have made many low- and moderate-income mortgages to fulfill their CRA obligations, they have found default rates pleasantly low, and they generally charge low mortgages rates. Thirty years later, CRA has become very good business."

It's telling that, amid all the recent recriminations, even lenders have not fingered CRA. That's because CRA didn't bring about the reckless lending at the heart of the crisis. Just as sub-prime lending was exploding, CRA was losing force and relevance. And the worst offenders, the independent mortgage companies, were never subject to CRA -- or any federal regulator. Law didn't make them lend. The profit motive did.

And that is not political correctness. It is correctness.

***************************************************************************

James Moore

(...)

That's pretty easy to answer, too. His name is Phil Gramm. A few days after the Supreme Court made George W. Bush president in 2000, Gramm stuck something called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act into the budget bill. Nobody knew that the Texas senator was slipping America a 262 page poison pill. The Gramm Guts America Act was designed to keep regulators from controlling new financial tools described as credit "swaps." These are instruments like sub-prime mortgages bundled up and sold as securities. Under the Gramm law, neither the SEC nor the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) were able to examine financial institutions like hedge funds or investment banks to guarantee they had the assets necessary to cover losses they were guaranteeing.

This isn't small beer we are talking about here. The market for these fancy financial instruments they don't expect us little people to understand is estimated at $60 trillion annually, which amounts to almost four times the entire US stock market.

And Senator Phil Gramm wanted it completely unregulated. So did Alan Greenspan, who supported the legislation and is now running around to the talk shows jabbering about the horror of it all. Before the highly paid lobbyists were done slinging their gold card guts about the halls of congress, every one from hedge funds to banks were playing with fire for fun and profit.
(...)


************************************************************************

Senior White House economist Christina Romer said that historians will judge President Barack Obama's stimulus more favorably than is a public still struggling through an economic downturn.

"I think when we're through this, when scholars actually sit and look at this, they will say, 'My goodness, look at all of the trajectory, look at where we were going, my goodness, it would have been dramatically worse [without the stimulus],' " Romer said Friday (The Hill)

We didn't get out of the depression by cutting spending. Keynesian economics work in times of financial instability. Keynes and Hamilton rule

Without stimulus, unemployment would reach 15 % or greater

***********************************************************************

Bush Administration caused the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. He almost destroyed America. Clinton balanced the budget in the 90 s and Bush quickly ruined it. You can't blame Obama for the debt because we had a 1.3 trillion dollar debt before he ever took the oath of office and he wasn't the one that passed the T.A.R.P. either.

Low interests are not enough to cause a crisis of this magnitude

Bush deregulation caused the present crisis

OBAMACARE IS CONSTITUTONAL

THE UNITEDSTATES CONSTITUTION. Article I. Section 8. "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States." The Congress can determine what constitutes the general welfare. If health care is not welfare of the United States I don't know what is. The Supreme Court hasn't struck down "unconstitutional" programs such as Medicaid and Medicare. Why not ? Article I, section 8 of the U. S. Constitution grants Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debtsand provide for the common defense and general Welfare of the UnitedStates." Health care is a constitutional right in this country, the SC has already decided on this issue

The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the United States.

The Commerce Clause was designed to eliminate an intense rivalry between states and there are other constitutional issues of common interest

The Supreme Court has been tolerant of the federal welfare state, usually justifying federal ad hoc programs under specious interpretations of the congressional Commerce Power.

The redistribution of income is enshrined in the Constitution as the 16th Amendment. If Congress wants to use income taxes to fund a healthcare system, there is nothing in the Constitution to stop it from doing so.

Obama will end the wars and then we'll have money

Discretionary Federal Budget

50 % defense
5 % education
5 % medicare medicaid
25 % social secutity

NATIONAL COMPETITION

http://www.property-casualty.com/News/2010/2/Pages/House-Okays-Repeal-Of-Health-Insurers-Antitrust-Exemption.aspx

The United States of America is a true democracy

The United States of America is a true democracy, a democratic republic, the rule of the people, by the people, for the people, is based on the people. America is a powerful democracy. Representative democracy is a wonderful and powerful institution

The Founding Fathers loved democracy very much (Washington, Adams, Madison, Paine, Jefferson).

In a democracy, the people have the right and responsibility to control their lives and their government. In a democratic society the government is the people.

A Constitutional Republic is a form of democracy, therefore all Constitutional Republics are democracies

A Constitutional Republic = majority rule

The British Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy, for example, is a democracy

Even a Constitutional Monarchy is a democracy

A Constitutional Republic is
a form of democracy, because the constitutional delegates are elected by the
people The
Founding Fathers realized that direct democracy could not work They indeed
expressed concerns but they didn't reject democracy, instead they created
institutions to protect our representative democracy

The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object

(Thomas Jefferson)

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference.

(Thomas Jefferson)

A constitutional republic is a form of liberal democracy, even a constitutional monarchy is a liberal democracy

The alternative to democracy is dictatorship or autocracy

This is the essence of a democratic republic, the will of the people

A Constitutional Republic is essiantially the rule of the majority (simple and supermajorty)

Unanimity is not required,
unanimity is a powerful tool of totalitarianism

Conservatives insist on unanimity and direct democracy. They love Rousseau

Direct democracy would be impossible.

Direct democracy is not only impossible but also bad.

We vote beacuse we want A B or C canditates (House and Senate) We vote because we want change, we vote because we want to participate in the democratic process

Constitutional Republic = Representative Republic = Constitutional Democracy = Representative Democracy

Majority rules in constitutional democracies or constitutional republics.

************************************************************************

Clinton and Vice President Al Gore won 379 of the 538 electoral votes

Obama was elected by the electoral college and by the popular vote

************************************************************************

Roosevelt Era

F. D. Roosevelt won the second world war and saved America from communism and fascism in the 30's, preserving democracy. His administration faced the worst financial crisis in human history. You should consider the historical context to make fair judgment on this issue. Actually the New Deal was created by Hoover a conservative republican

Ronald Reagan Era

Reaganomics (a portmanteau of Reagan and economics attributed to Paul Harvey[1]) refers to the economic policies promoted by the U.S. President Ronald Reagan during the 1980s. The four pillars of Reagan's economic policy were to:[2]
Deduct government spending,
Reduce income and capital gains marginal tax rates,
Reduce government regulation of the economy,
Control the money supply to reduce inflation. WIKI

@ Reagan triple US debt but won the Cold War

@ Reagan's role in support of the Afghan Mujahideen fighting the communist Afghan government and the Soviets.

Reagan supported Afghan Mujahideen but Carter and Reagan didn't have a Crystal Ball

(WIKI)

Russian Military Budget

In 1988 military spending was a single line item in the Soviet state budget, totaling 21 billion rubles, or about US$33 billion. Given the size of the military establishment, however, the actual figure was at least ten times higher. Western experts concluded that the 21 billion ruble figure reflected only operations and maintenance costs. The amount spent on Soviet weapons research and development was an especially well-guarded state secret, and other military spending, including training, military construction, and arms production, was concealed within the budgets of all-union ministries and state committees. Apart from considerations of state secrecy, this allocation of military spending to ministries other than the Ministry of Defense reflected the Soviet approach to managing resource allocation. Weapons produced by agencies such as the Ministry of General Machinebuilding [missiles] or the Ministry of Shipbuilding Industry [ships] were essentially provided as "free goods" to the Ministry of Defense. By the mid-1980s, the Soviet Union devoted between 15 and 17 percent of its annual gross national product to military spending, according to United States government sources. Until the early 1980s, Soviet defense expenditures rose between 4 and 7 percent per year. Subsequently, they slowed as the yearly growth in Soviet GNP slipped to about 3 percent. In 1987 Gorbachev and other party officials discussed the extension of glasnost' to military affairs through the publication of a detailed Soviet defense budget. In early 1989, Gorbachev announced a military budget of 77.3 billion rubles, but Western authorities estimated the budget to be about twice that.
With the end of the Cold War, the combined military expenditure of Russia and other successor states of the USSR fell dramatically. The consolidated budget currently earmarks 2.5% of GDP, or 8% of total spending, for national defense programs. A return to the Soviet era means that 12-13% of GDP, or almost one half of the budget, will go on war.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/index.html

USA - DIPLOMACY AND WAR

Obama : My goal is to get U.S. troops home as quickly as possible without leaving a situation that allows for potential terrorist attacks against the United States. Afghanistan is not a U.S. mission, it's a NATO mission I don't - I don't make these decisions based on polls or popularity. I make the decisions based on what I think is best. This is consistent with what I said during the campaign. The strategy in Afghanistan is based on transferring control to local forces.

***********************************************************************


Drones are U.S. weapons of choice in fighting Qaeda - The Air Force is sufficient to support future expeditionary combat and non-combat missions, as well as domestic and training mission demands

Obama : There will be an ongoing commitment of American resources to train and equip the Afghan army and police.

The US Supreme Court ruled that the Government does not have the authority to try terrorism suspects by military tribunal. Only war prisoners

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that military tribunals used to try civilians where the civil courts were functioning were unconstitutional A military court is designed to try members of enemy forces during wartimeYes, we are at war but terrorists captured on the battlefield and terrorists captured elsewhere deserve different status

Nato-led troops in Afghanistan have launched the biggest offensive since the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001 (Feb. 2010)


Is the Afghan War closer to ending now that we have the Taliban's second-in-command and the support of Pakistan's spy service ?


"I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration." -- Joe Biden


***********************************************************************

HISTORY

1 - The american civil war was against slavery

2 - The Spanish American wars of independence were the numerous wars against Spanish rule

3- 1836 War of Independence of Texas from Mexico

4 - We defated nazism

Capitalism is more efficient in terms of its access to and allocation of resources. which is why it has defated communism

America offered aid to promote European recovery and reconstruction !
François

The United States reconstructed Europe (Marshall Plan) and democratized Germany and Japan after World War II.

The United States supported authoritarian regimes throughout Central and South America, Africa and Asia during the Cold War because USSR was ready to attack democracies in conjuction with China. And so many humanitarian efforts :

Cuba
Haiti
Mexico
Somalia
Philippines(Marcus)
Indonesia (Suharto)

***************************************************************************

FAILURE IN VIETNAM ?

We stopped the spread of communism in southern Asia, Indonesia and Philippines and China changed its military strategy and abandoned plans to export revolution

Mao Tse-tung invited Nixon and Kissinger to visit China for a summit

In Indonesia, General Suharto ousted and replaced President Sukarno, in 1966.

Sukarno, the founder of modern Indonesia, had adapted Marxism-Leninism to Indonesian conditions

The United States supported Suharto in Indonesia for 33 years

China became concerned, scared even. With its Soviet ties deteriorating, in the early 1960s, and the Vietnam War escalating, Beijing became concerned of a possible nuclear attack

Now, America wants to spread democracy, freedom and human rights

*******************************************************************

WWII

The Japanese butchered Chinese and Koreans.

Theay attacked Pearl Harbor and killed 2400 people, without formal war declaration

They butchered Chinese civilians with bayonets and China was not America's ally; the Americans killed Japanese with non-nuclear weapons

*******************************************************************

MEXICAN-USA WAR

The Republic of Texas. The present-day outlines of the U.S. states are superimposed on the boundaries of 1836–1845.

American immigrants in Texas declared independence from Mexico in 1836, and in the following years, Texas consolidated its status as an independent republic by establishing diplomatic ties with Britain, France, and the United States. Most Texans were in favor of annexation by the United States, but U.S. President Martin Van Buren rejected it; then the pro-independence Mirabeau Lamar was president of Texas 1838-41; then the U.S. Senate rejected an annexation treaty in 1844.
Under U.S. President John Tyler, Texas was offered admission to the Union as a state via, controversially, a joint resolution of Congress rather than a treaty.[5] The bill was signed into law on March 1, 1845. It was ratified by Texas on July 4. Texas became the 28th state on December 29, a law signed by President James K. Polk.
(WIKI)

***************************************************

Key Afghan Taliban leader arrested in northwestern Pakistan -
Reporting from Karachi, Pakistan - A key Afghan Taliban leader has been arrested in northwestern Pakistan, that nation's intelligence sources said Monday, the fourth top Taliban figure to be seized in Pakistan in the last month.Mullah Abdul Kabir was arrested last week, the sources said (NYT)

***************************************************

UK will stay until 2015 in Afghanistan

The Air Force is sufficient to support future expeditionary combat and non-combat

***************************************************

Mistakes

Yassin was released by Israel in exchange for two Mossad agents who had been arrested by Jordanian authorities following the failed assassination attempt of Khaled Mashal

***************************************************

The Senate didn't ratify the Treaty of Versailles, after WWI

_______________________________________________

KOREA AND VIETNAM

The Vietnam War was abandoned by the United States, due to internal opposition (liberal media and Democratic Party)

This war was very important because China changed its policies in S Asia and invited Nixon to talks

USSR didnt have media and internal oposition

China was really scared of a nuclear war with the US

"The United States and the United Nations intervened on the side of the South Korean Government. After early defeats at the hands of the North Korean military, a rapid UN counter-offensive repelled the North Koreans past the 38th Parallel and almost to the Yalu River, the People's Republic of China (PRC) came to the aid of the North.With the PRC's entry into the conflict, the fighting eventually ceased with an armistice that restored the original border between the Koreas at the 38th Parallel and created the Korean Demilitarized Zone, a 2.5 mile wide buffer zone between the two Koreas." (Wiki)

"Dolchstosslegende"

No, we are a democratic society, an open society, and our foreign policy reflects this

A democratic society is inherently uncertain.

Libertarians and traditional conservatives are minarchists and isolationits but the necons are statists

I am a neocon on foreign policy.
_________________________________________

KARL ROVER :

Iraqi leaders decided they would destroy WMD stockpiles prior to the conflict, but where are the satellite photos proving that ?
______________________________________________________

Because the communist North Vietnam was supported by its communist allies
Vietnam was a French colony from 1887 until World War II. The Japanese occupation left the French hold on Vietnam weaker than before WWII. France was losing the war for Indochina. The defeat of France in 1954 brought an end to French colonial efforts in Indochina Vietnam was divided but the North disrespect the agreement
And China was behind them once again.
______________________________________________________

We dont have options, we dont have alternatives. In the early 1990s, the Euro-Atlantic states and their multilateral organisations effectively sanctioned the partition of Yugoslavia It is the unique way to achieve peace

The present political divisions of Bosnia and Herzegovina and its structure of government were agreed upon as part the constitution that makes up Annex 4 of the General Framework Agreement concluded at Dayton. A key component of this was the delineation of the Inter-Entity Boundary Line, to which many of the tasks list...


On 13 October 1997, the Croatian 1861 Law Party and the Bosnia-Herzegovina 1861 Law Party requested the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina to annul several decisions and to confirm one decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and, more importantly, to review the constitutionality of the General Framework


"In the end, on 18 March 1999, the Albanian, American and British delegation signed what became known as the Rambouillet Accords while the Serbian and Russian delegations refused. The accords called for NATO administration of Kosovo as an autonomous province within Yugoslavia; a force of 30,000 NATO troops to maintain order in Kosovo; an unhindered...

WIKI

America was found on Christian values

Under God, in God we trust

America was found on Christian values but without official religion

The Founding Fathers were Christian belivers (Anglican-Unitarian)

(Washington (episcopalian), Madison (episcopalian), Hamilton (episcopalian), Jefferson (Unitarian), Adams (Unitarian) and Jay (episcopalian))

America was found on Christan values but the Founding Fathers rejected official religion and adopted a religious pluralism, in Christian terms

ONLY BEN FRANKLIN AND THOMAS PAINE WERE DEISTS

America was found on Christian values but we don't have an official religion
The Founding Father (Washington, Madison, Hamilton and Adams) were Christian belivers (Episcopalian and Unitarian) only Ben Franklin and Paine (maybe Jefferson) were Deists

They didn't deny their faith in Jesus

The Religious Affiliation of Third U.S. President

Thomas Jefferson (Episcopalian, Unitarian or Deist)

http://www.adherents.com/people/pj/Thomas_Jefferson.html

How Christian Were the Founders? (NYT - Russell Shorto)

"A third expert, Daniel L. Dreisbach, a professor of justice, law and society at American University who has written extensively on First Amendment issues, stressed, in his recommendations to the guideline writers about how to frame the revolutionary period for students, that the founders were overwhelmingly Christian; that the deistic tendencies of a few — like Jefferson — were an anomaly; and that most Americans in the era were not just Christians but that “98 percent or more of Americans of European descent identified with Protestantism.”
Barton : That is to say, the founders were all Christians who conceived of a nation of Christians, and the purpose of the First Amendment was merely to ensure that no single Christian denomination be elevated to the role of state church.
David Barton specifically advised the writers of the Texas guidelines that textbooks “should stipulate (but currently do not) that the Declaration of Independence is symbiotic with the Constitution rather than a separate unrelated document.”"

***************************************************************************

Christianity (Catholics and Protestants) advocates republic too (Aquinas, Althusius, Suarez)

***************************************************************************

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Presidents

Religion, Presidents who were Adherents

Episcopalian George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
William Henry Harrison
John Tyler
Zachary Taylor
Franklin Pierce
Chester A. Arthur
Theodore Roosevelt *
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Gerald Ford
George H. W. Bush
Presbyterian Andrew Jackson
James Knox Polk *
Ulysses S Grant *
Rutherford B. Hayes *
James Buchanan
Grover Cleveland
Benjamin Harrison
Woodrow Wilson
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Ronald Reagan
Methodist James Knox Polk *
Ulysses S Grant *
Rutherford B. Hayes *
William McKinley
George W. Bush
Baptist Warren G. Harding
Harry S. Truman
Jimmy Carter
William Jefferson Clinton
Unitarian John Adams
John Quincy Adams
Millard Fillmore
William Howard Taft
Disciples of Christ James A. Garfield
Lyndon B. Johnson
Ronald Reagan
no specific denomination Thomas Jefferson
Abraham Lincoln
Andrew Johnson
Dutch Reformed Martin Van Buren
Theodore Roosevelt *
Quaker Herbert Hoover
Richard M. Nixon
Congregationalist John Adams *
Calvin Coolidge
Catholic John F. Kennedy
Jehovah's Witnesses Dwight D. Eisenhower *
River Brethren Dwight D. Eisenhower *

The Jefferson Bible, or The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth - 'Thomas Jefferson believed that the ethical system of Jesus was the finest the world has ever seen'

I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know.-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Ezra Stiles Ely (June 25, 1819)

Say nothing of my religion. It is known to my god and myself alone. -- Thomas Jefferson

Pluralism and Freedom
Separation Church from State

A Constitutional Republic is a form of democracy

America is a true democracy

A Constitutional Republic is a form of democracy, because the constitutional delegates are elected by the people, therefore all Constitutional Republics are democracies.

The Founding Fathers realized that direct democracy could not work. They indeed expressed concerns but they didn't reject democracy, instead they created institutions to protect our democracy

Thomas Jefferson : "The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen" In other words, the will of people (democracy) or the notion that every member of society is endowed with certain inalienable rights.

In other words, the will of people (democracy) or the notion that every member of society is endowed with certain inalienable rights.

A Constitutional Republic is essiantially the rule of the majority (simple and supermajorty)

Unanimity is not required,
unanimity is a powerful tool of totalitarianism

Conservatives insist on unanimity and direct democracy. They love Rousseau

Direct democracy would be impossible.

Direct democracy is not only impossible but also bad.

The 55 delegates who drafted the Constitution represent the democratic ideals of our nation

***********************************************************************

"A republic is a form of government in which the head of state is not a monarch and the people (or at least a part of its people) have an impact on its government. The word "republic" is derived from the Latin phrase res publica, which can be translated as "a public affair". Both modern and ancient republics vary widel...y in their ideology and composition. The most common definition of a republic is a state without a monarch. In republics such as the United States and France the executive is legitimated both by a constitution and by popular suffrage. In the United States, James Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy as opposed to direct democracy, and this usage is still employed by many viewing themselves as "republicans"" (Wiki)

LIBERALS/CONSERVATIVES/LIBERTARIANS

Left and Right are terms for where the radicals and conservatives sat in the French National Assembly (the French Congress) after the French Revolution.

Some liberals are socialists, but most liberals in the United States do not consider themselves "Socialist"

American radicals and socialists began calling themselves "liberals", they didn't reject formal democracy

The Democrats are socially liberal (ie abortion rights, gay rights, ecological concerns, and drug rights) and more anti-free market, pro-regulation, ect.

They support the governmental action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all, it is the duty of the State (to alleviate social ills) and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights.

The Republicans are socially conservative, but economically ultra-liberal or libertarian.

The conservative Europeans are only midly conservative by American standards because American culture is much more conservative and religious

True liberals - both economically and socially - are reformists toward more freedom

Republican : small government, limited government

Only theoretically !

As you know, after Reagan-Bush era, Bill Clinton balanced the budget, but Bush II quickly ruined it again.

The worst president in modern times is George WC Bush, his administration caused the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression

GOP strategists should shut the hell up and go away. Bush was a champion of deregulation, his Administration caused this situation.

_________________________________________________________________

Libertarian and Neoconservative

With the Tea Party, Palin supporters, Ron Paul revolutionaries, Law and Order, evangelicals, libertarians, Country Club, Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty, how do you classify the conservative movement today ? How does Ron Paul relate to Sarah Palin ? Palin to the Tea Partiers ? (The Atlantic)
_________________________________________________________________

Edmund Burke is considered the father of conservatism in the English-speaking world.

Burke advocates gradual changes when necessary, evolutionary change

Conservantism rejects radical changes and not necessary changes, gradual changes or cautious changes

Conservantism is activism as well

''Conservatism proper is a legitimate, probably necessary, and certainly widespread attitude of opposition to drastic change. It has, since the French Revolution, for a century and a half played an important role in European politics. Until the rise of socialism its opposite was liberalism. There is nothing corresponding to this conflict in the ... See Morehistory of the United States, because what in Europe was called "liberalism" was here the common tradition on which the American polity had been built: thus the defender of the American tradition was a liberal in the European sense.[2] This already existing confusion was made worse by the recent attempt to transplant to America the European type of conservatism, which, being alien to the American tradition, has acquired a somewhat odd character. And some time before this, American radicals and socialists began calling themselves "liberals." I will nevertheless continue for the moment to describe as liberal the position which I hold and which I believe differs as much from true conservatism as from socialism.'' -- Hayek - What I am not a conservative

All conservatism is based upon the idea that if you leave things alone you leave them as they are. But you do not. If you leave a thing alone you leave it to a torrent of change.

Gilbert K. Chesterton

Constitutional Amendment on Campaign Finance System

Kerry Announces Plans to Introduce Constitutional Amendment on Campaign Finance System

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) testified before the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration at a hearing examining the Supreme Court's recent ruling to allow unlimited corporate spending in elections - kerry.senate.gov

Do Corporations rule America and the world ?

"But Americans have been duped into thinking that socialism is the enemy"

This statement, by itself, proves that corporations rule America

Undoubtedly they are very powerful and infuential.

I believe in freedom and democracy.

Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, said :

“The Court has invented the idea that corporations have First Amendment rights to influence election outcomes out of whole cloth” “There is surely no originalist interpretation to support this outcome, since the Court created the rights only in recent decades. Nor can the outcome be justified in light of the underlying purpose and spirit of the First Amendment.

Corporations are state-created entities, not real people. They do not have expressive interests like humans; and, unlike humans, they are uniquely motivated by a singular focus on their economic bottom line. Corporate spending on elections defeats rather than advances the democratic thrust of the First Amendment.”

Reps. Conyers and Edwards Introduce Constitutional Amendment

Representatives John Conyers and Donna Edwards today introduced a proposal to amend the Constitution to reverse the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC.

The Supreme Court’s decision does not apply to domestic subsidiaries of foreign corporations, the Congress could pass legislation, making it clear

*************************************************************************************

US Supreme Court : The corporations are persons with the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment

While the republicans do have a lot of ties to corporate America, the democrats do have a lot of ties to unions

The parties represents certain values

But we cannot accept this :

We the Rich People of the United States of America. We the corporations, the wealthy aristocracy

*************************************************************************************

Ruling on campaign financing

"In a 5-4 decision, the court's conservative bloc said corporations have the same First Amendment rights as individuals and, for that reason, the government may not stop corporations from spending freely to influence the outcome of federal elections.
The decision is probably the most sweeping and consequential handed down under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. And the outcome may well have an immediate impact on this year's mid-term elections to Congress.

Until now, corporations and unions have been barred from spending their own treasury funds on broadcast ads or billboards that urge the election or defeat of a federal candidate. This restriction dates back to 1907 when President Theodore Roosevelt called on Congress to forbid corporations, railroads and national banks from using their money in federal election campaigns. After World War II, Congress extended this ban to labor unions." (Chicago Tribune)

Sonia Sotomayor, the president's sole appointee on the court, was among the dissenting votes in today's ruling on campaign financing.

CONGRATULATIONS !

This nation has been much closer to an Oligarchy

Imagine what Exxon, Monsanto, Mercx, Morgan Stanley, Blackwater, Lockheed, Halliburton, etc., will do?

Teddy Roosevelt is rolling in his grave.

The Supreme Court recognizes Corporations as "Persons" bearing even more rights than human beings

The Supreme Court recognizes corporations as people with first amendment rights (with all the rights of individual human beings)

The Supreme Court says corporations and unions may contribute to political campaigns. This is simply the latest chapter of bad jurisprudence. Only individuals could give money to campaigns; not lobbyists, corporations, unions, etc.


*******************************************************************

John Kerry calls for an amendment in Politico op-ed - We need a constitutional amendment to make it clear, once and for all, that corporations do not have the same free-speech rights as individuals do (Politico)


It is absolutely necessary in order to restore the spirit of the law, the spirit of the founders


Can you compare corporations to a non-profit organization ?


The stronger concept of corporate personhood, in which (for example) First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights have been asserted by corporations, is absurd !!

*******************************************************************

Where are our modern day leadership statesmen ?

Well, I dont know but most people prefer mediocrity

Rush Limbaugh, Hannity and Sarah Palin !
________________________________________________________

The majority justices adhered to a constitutional interpretation so strict, they drowned out real free speech from real, live individuals.

Ron Paul - Tea Party and Neocon

Ron Paul warns that the movement founded nearly three years ago has been infiltrated and overtaken by neo-cons

Ron Paul under attack by Tea Party Republicans in his own race

Tea Party republicans are attacking Congressman Ron Paul on his stance on torture the foreign wars and a bunch of other ideological positions. The Tea Party seems to be thorn between the old conservative ideals and the libertarian ones (Ron Paul Fan Page)

Tea baggers are a bunch of silly people who have nothing better to do. They are apoplectic over the fact that the Bush party is over

A bunch of losers, baby whiners, and extremists

Tea bagger = demagogic populism, anti-intellectualism, lunatism, third world behavior, bad nationalism, conspiracy theories, religious fanaticism, far-right, and reactionist

1 - Neocons favor a strong active state in world affairs, an active international policy (interventionist and unilateralism)
Isolacionism is the shortest way to hell. Anti-communism

2 - They believe that democracy should be installed by the United States around the world. They have a more ambitious approach to the use of power

3 - They are less worried about reducing the size of government, more social welfare spending

4 - Strong moral values (familiar, religious)

Sarah Palin is a neocon, the teabaggers are minarchists.

I figure what people call "liberal" is really Old Right, and what they call "conservative" is what we used to call the lunatic fringe

******************************************************************

REAGAN and BUSH THE ELDER WERE NOT NEOCONSERVATIVES

CONDOLEZZA AND COLLIN POWEL ARE NOT NECONSERVATIVES

Minarchism (Classic Liberalism) is their ideal and not anarchism (some libertarians)

Some libertarians now disagree with Ron Paul's stances on immigration, abortion, Nafta, United Nations and same sex marriage

*****************************************************************

Conservative activists who once protested the political establishment (Tea Party) are now flooding the lowest level of the Republican Party apparatus hoping to take over the party they once scorned -- one precinct at a time

"The party is over for the old guard."

(LA TIMES)

Tea Party is becoming nothing more than a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party

*****************************************************************

The teabaggers don't need to merge with the GOP

There are two types of tea baggers. 1) Ron Paul fans libertarians that want to eliminate most of the federal government. These are the original tea party people

2) Sarah Palin and neocons

Or different approaches to different issues

*****************************************************************

GOP's Dictionary :

Public Service (social security, medicare, K 12) = Socialism
Publica Option = Communism
Rockefeller = Fidel Castro
Constitutional Democracy =/= Constitucional Republic

*****************************************************************

Far lef and the New Right

Liberals should speak out against the noise from the far lef and against the New Right

*******************************************************************

Against Ron Paul and P. Buchanan in favor of regional trading blocs

Protectionism can decline the world output due to the multiplier effect. It causes higher prices for consumers because domestic producers are not exposed to foreign competition, and can therefore keep prices high. In other words, protectionism causes economic inefficiencies, instability, a net loss of markets at home and abroad, depressions, resentment among nations, and poverty, because the price exceeds the marginal cost of production.

*******************************************************************

Written by Tom Clougherty
(...)
A more pragmatic US approach to foreign policy would be welcome, but Paul's isolationism is a step too far. His opposition to multilateral trade liberalization and immigration also worry me, since both are vital to the promotion of free trade and international development. As for a return to the gold standard, it's just not feasible – especially with a major economic downturn on the horizon (...) (The Rise of Ron Paul)

*******************************************************************

Tea Party

Conservatives are apopletic. There's a lot of populist discontent-the teabaggers proved it--and all they need is a leader. This subculture are anti-intellectual and easy to manipulate by appealing to emotional issues

********************************************************************

Neoconservatives don't support the withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations, NATO, NAFTA, and the WTO

*******************************************************

Romney and Pawlenty have no chance whatsover to share the sensibility of the Tea Partiers and the Paulites, certainly not in their current incarnations. They don't speak the same language

Evangelicals still think Romney is a Mormon of the suspect kind

Romney is unlikely to embrace libertarianism (gambling, marijuana, civil unions)

(The Atlantic)

I think Jim DeMint is the REAL leader of the Tea Party

The official program of the Boston Tea Party National Convention (Paul's doctrine) means nothing. Because the necons are controlling the movement now

Paul told Maddow: "I don't think you can talk about the tea party as a party. It's made up of a lot of different people. And I don't even see them as being Republicans." (Huffignton Post)

Neocons : Ron Paul is a liberal

Ron Paul will probably run as a third party candidate Almost two thirds of independents are moderates.

The Right wing is divided and weak.

They don't have a unity candidate

Many people like Paul and Palin but many people hate them

Perot gave Clinton a hand and Nader gave Bush a hand

*********************************************************

Points against Ron Paul :

1 - Withdrawal from the United Nations

2 - Withdrawal from Nato

3 - The CIA has in effect carried out a "coup" against the US government

*********************************************************

The original Tea Bagger movement was libertarian (minarchist and isolationist) under the leadership of Ron Paul in opposition to the neocons, but now they (the necons) are hijacking the Tea Party The neocons're not progressive, they're conservative but against isolationism and minarchism

Romney is a minarchist, isolationist libertarian with a penchant for social liberalism and fiscal conservatism


RON PAUL

He is a libertarian.

Ron Paul supports a secular society on a number of levels.

Ron Paul's consistent anti-war position has made him popular

Ron Paul is a Christian politician with distinctly libertarian views.

He believes in Christian religion as a way to guide his life but he does not push his Christianity on others. RP is a strict constitutionalist