|
|||||||
| Register | Forum Rules | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Bookmark & Share  |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
11-02-2010
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Rather than writing about some week correlation between the voter intimidation story and the Acorn scandal in an attempt to downplay both why doesn't he report these facts: * After winning a case of voter intimidation against The New Black Panther Party, the Obama Department of Justice inexplicably dropped the charges. * The direct ties between the NAACP and The New Black Panther Party. * J. Christian Adams, a legitimate government whistle-blower who has testified that he was told by his fellow DOJ staffers to all but ignore cases where the defendant is a minority and the plaintiff white. Quote:
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body 
|
|
#2
11-03-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
In the meanwhile, since subversion of elections is on your mind, why don't you tell us where you stand on the the Supreme Court's "Citizens United" ruling. Did you enjoy all the advertisements on TV paid for by undisclosed donors? Do you think that is "subversion of elections"? Last edited by smc; 11-03-2010 at 10:40 AM. Reason: Fixed typo.
|
|
#5
11-04-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Now I've posed some clear, direct questions to you. You've been back to the thread since those questions were posted, but have skipped over them. Perhaps you'd like to retract the implication of your "cricket" comment? Last edited by smc; 11-04-2010 at 09:41 AM.
|
|
#6
11-05-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Annoying Citizens United videos doesn't hold a candle to "New" Black Panthers brandishing clubs and intimidating voters, or to ACORN's attempt at the highest levels to register voters multiple times plus register non-existent voters and dead voters, or to attempts by liberals to allow illegal aliens to vote, or to the fracking president trying to grab control of the US Census office! And if those videos are so bad, what about the plethora of left-wing media outlets that spew biased news? Everyone complains about Fox News, but what about CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, New York Times, and on and on? And don't forget Hollywood with their vocal left wing actors and movies riddled with liberal politics. But hey... it's free speech.
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body
|
|
#8
11-05-2010
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#9
11-06-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 I've got my fingers crossed big time for the next election.
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body
|
|
#10
11-05-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I have three sets of questions for you. 1. As I wrote in an earlier post, "I don't support the Democrats or Republicans." I believe that the Democratic Party is guilty of electoral fraud and manipulation in many instances throughout history, and I have no problem believing that Democrats (who, after all, serve the interests of a wing of the very same people served by the Republicans) do things to ensure votes go their way. Tracy, do you accept that the Republicans do things like this, too? You wrote earlier: "The DOJ sent 400 people to Arizona, not to ensure that illegals do not vote, but to watchdog Arizona officials who are trying to ensure that illegals do not vote." Whether that's true or not, do you accept that during the Bush administration government officials, acting for partisan interests, did anything like that. 2. Do you think one's ability to exercise "freedom of speech" should be dictated by one's level of wealth? Let's accept your premise about Citizens United. In the interest of ensuring the greatest amount of freedom of speech, do you support public financing of elections or some other way to ensure that everyone's voice can be heard so that those with the most millions to spend cannot drown out everyone else simply by virtue of having those millions? This is not a left-right issue. 3. In the context of "freedom of speech," do you support full disclosure of who funds political ads, whether on the left or right? It seems to me that the greatest freedom of speech is that which allows us a real discourse, together, as Americans -- something sorely lacking in our body politic today. Absent disclosure, it is difficult to know whether the voices we hear are genuine, and genuinely FOR what they purport to be for, or whether there is manipulation at play. For instance, if a corporation or corporate group that publicly supports tax credits for businesses that send jobs overseas funds a political ad (without disclosure) that accuses a politician of such support, that would be worth knowing, don't you think. Similarly, if a union stands to benefit from a certain outcome in the legislature in, say, one state and (without disclosure) funds an ad attacking a candidate in another state who has not voted as the union wishes, wouldn't it be good to know -- in the interest of encouraging a genuine public discourse in the context of freedom of speech? These are not partisan questions. I hope you can step back from the vitriol expressed in your last post and consider these thoughtfully, in the interest of genuine dialogue. Otherwise, there's no point in continuing. You can have the thread and vent, and I'll stick to pictures of gorgeous girl cocks.
|
|
#11
11-06-2010
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
The question was asked here: http://forum.transladyboy.com/showpo...1&postcount=32 It says "One week ago". Kind of vague... And I'm hearing crickets here: http://forum.transladyboy.com/showpo...3&postcount=43 It says "5 days ago". Yesterday it said one week vs 4 days, that's at least a 3 day difference so I called it 'several'. Happy? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body
|
|
#12
11-06-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
On the "crickets" issue, how about dropping the insults ("whining"). If necessary, I can go to the moderator console and show you the exact time and date of the posts in question. My point in mentioning it was to bring up a broader point about civility in the discussion, which I have mentioned more explicitly in other posts.
|
|
#13
11-06-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#14
11-06-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Reagan insider: 'GOP destroyed U.S. economy' Commentary: How: Gold. Tax cuts. Debts. Wars. Fat Cats. Class gap. No fiscal discipline By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- "How my G.O.P. destroyed the U.S. economy." Yes, that is exactly what David Stockman, President Ronald Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget, wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed piece, "Four Deformations of the Apocalypse." Get it? Not "destroying." The GOP has already "destroyed" the U.S. economy, setting up an "American Apocalypse." Jobs recovery could take years In the wake of Friday's disappointing jobs report, Neal Lipschutz and Phil Izzo discuss new predictions that it could be many years before the nation's unemployment rate reaches pre-recession levels. Yes, Stockman is equally damning of the Democrats' Keynesian policies. But what this indictment by a party insider -- someone so close to the development of the Reaganomics ideology -- says about America, helps all of us better understand how America's toxic partisan-politics "holy war" is destroying not just the economy and capitalism, but the America dream. And unless this war stops soon, both parties will succeed in their collective death wish. But why focus on Stockman's message? It's already lost in the 24/7 news cycle. Why? We need some introspection. Ask yourself: How did the great nation of America lose its moral compass and drift so far off course, to where our very survival is threatened? We've arrived at a historic turning point as a nation that no longer needs outside enemies to destroy us, we are committing suicide. Democracy. Capitalism. The American dream. All dying. Why? Because of the economic decisions of the GOP the past 40 years, says this leading Reagan Republican. Please listen with an open mind, no matter your party affiliation: This makes for a powerful history lesson, because it exposes how both parties are responsible for destroying the U.S. economy. Listen closely: Reagan Republican: the GOP should file for bankruptcy Stockman rushes into the ring swinging like a boxer: "If there were such a thing as Chapter 11 for politicians, the Republican push to extend the unaffordable Bush tax cuts would amount to a bankruptcy filing. The nation's public debt ... will soon reach $18 trillion." It screams "out for austerity and sacrifice." But instead, the GOP insists "that the nation's wealthiest taxpayers be spared even a three-percentage-point rate increase." In the past 40 years Republican ideology has gone from solid principles to hype and slogans. Stockman says: "Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts -- in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses too." No more. Today there's a "new catechism" that's "little more than money printing and deficit finance, vulgar Keynesianism robed in the ideological vestments of the prosperous classes" making a mockery of GOP ideals. Worse, it has resulted in "serial financial bubbles and Wall Street depredations that have crippled our economy." Yes, GOP ideals backfired, crippling our economy. Stockman's indictment warns that the Republican party's "new policy doctrines have caused four great deformations of the national economy, and modern Republicans have turned a blind eye to each one:" I believe party affiliation is irrelevant here. This is a crucial subject that must be explored because it further exposes a dangerous historical trend where politics is so partisan it's having huge negative consequences. Yes, the GOP does have a welfare-warfare state: Stockman says "the neocons were pushing the military budget skyward. And the Republicans on Capitol Hill who were supposed to cut spending, exempted from the knife most of the domestic budget -- entitlements, farm subsidies, education, water projects. But in the end it was a new cadre of ideological tax-cutters who killed the Republicans' fiscal religion." When Fed chief Paul Volcker "crushed inflation" in the '80s we got a "solid economic rebound." But then "the new tax-cutters not only claimed victory for their supply-side strategy but hooked Republicans for good on the delusion that the economy will outgrow the deficit if plied with enough tax cuts." By 2009, they "reduced federal revenues to 15% of gross domestic product," lowest since the 1940s. Still today they're irrationally demanding an extension of those "unaffordable Bush tax cuts [that] would amount to a bankruptcy filing." Recently Bush made matters far worse by "rarely vetoing a budget bill and engaging in two unfinanced foreign military adventures." Bush also gave in "on domestic spending cuts, signing into law $420 billion in nondefense appropriations, a 65% percent gain from the $260 billion he had inherited eight years earlier. Republicans thus joined the Democrats in a shameless embrace of a free-lunch fiscal policy." Takes two to tango. Stage 3. Wall Street's deadly 'vast, unproductive expansion' Stockman continues pounding away: "The third ominous change in the American economy has been the vast, unproductive expansion of our financial sector." He warns that "Republicans have been oblivious to the grave danger of flooding financial markets with freely printed money and, at the same time, removing traditional restrictions on leverage and speculation." Wrong, not oblivious. Self-interested Republican loyalists like Paulson, Bernanke and Geithner knew exactly what they were doing. They wanted the economy, markets and the government to be under the absolute control of Wall Street's too-greedy-to-fail banks. They conned Congress and the Fed into bailing out an estimated $23.7 trillion debt. Worse, they have since destroyed meaningful financial reforms. So Wall Street is now back to business as usual blowing another bigger bubble/bust cycle that will culminate in the coming "American Apocalypse." Stockman refers to Wall Street's surviving banks as "wards of the state." Wrong, the opposite is true. Wall Street now controls Washington, and its "unproductive" trading is "extracting billions from the economy with a lot of pointless speculation in stocks, bonds, commodities and derivatives." Wall Street banks like Goldman were virtually bankrupt, would have never survived without government-guaranteed deposits and "virtually free money from the Fed's discount window to cover their bad bets." Stage 4. New American Revolution class-warfare coming soon Finally, thanks to Republican policies that let us "live beyond our means for decades by borrowing heavily from abroad, we have steadily sent jobs and production offshore," while at home "high-value jobs in goods production ... trade, transportation, information technology and the professions shrunk by 12% to 68 million from 77 million." As the apocalypse draws near, Stockman sees a class-rebellion, a new revolution, a war against greed and the wealthy. Soon. The trigger will be the growing gap between economic classes: No wonder "that during the last bubble (from 2002 to 2006) the top 1% of Americans -- paid mainly from the Wall Street casino -- received two-thirds of the gain in national income, while the bottom 90% -- mainly dependent on Main Street's shrinking economy -- got only 12%. This growing wealth gap is not the market's fault. It's the decaying fruit of bad economic policy." Get it? The decaying fruit of the GOP's bad economic policies is destroying our economy. Warning: this black swan won't be pretty, will shock, soon His bottom line: "The day of national reckoning has arrived. We will not have a conventional business recovery now, but rather a long hangover of debt liquidation and downsizing ... it's a pity that the modern Republican party offers the American people an irrelevant platform of recycled Keynesianism when the old approach -- balanced budgets, sound money and financial discipline -- is needed more than ever." Wrong: There are far bigger things to "pity." First, that most Americans, 300 million, are helpless, will do nothing, sit in the bleachers passively watching this deadly partisan game like it's just another TV reality show. Second, that, unfortunately, politicians are so deep-in-the-pockets of the Wall Street conspiracy that controls Washington they are helpless and blind. And third, there's a depressing sense that Stockman will be dismissed as a traitor, his message lost in the 24/7 news cycle ... until the final apocalyptic event, an unpredictable black swan triggers another, bigger global meltdown, followed by a long Great Depression II and a historic class war. So be prepared, it will hit soon, when you least expect. I had to leave part 1 of this article out in order to get it to fit. I thought Tracy might be interested in this. We will have to wait and see won't we? That's right Tracy, keep your fingers crossed.
__________________
"Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary." R.N.
|
|
#15
11-07-2010
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
A lesbian trapped in a man's body Last edited by TracyCoxx; 11-07-2010 at 01:36 AM.
|
|
#16
11-06-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
That said, let me clarify about voter suppression. It seems as if you thought I was being specific about the Bush administration doing something in Arizona. I was not I only used your example to pose my question. I will give you one non-Arizona example of Republican voter suppression during the Bush administration. In 2002, Republican officials in New Hampshire attempted to reduce the number of Democratic voters by jamming phones. Professional telemarketers from a company based in northern Virgina, "GOP Marketplace," were hired to make repeated hang-up calls to to the telephone numbers that the Democratic state committee and the state firefighter's union were using for voters to call and get rides to the polls. By keeping these lines busy, the intent was to suppress the number of voters who could ask the Democratic Party for such rides. This voter suppression effort was undertaken in the interest of getting John E. Sununu, the son of George H.W. Bush's first White House chief of staff, elected to the U.S. Senate. Sununu won a narrow victory. Four men were convicted of federal crimes and sentenced to prison for their involvement. There was a guilty plea by Allen Raymond to several felony charges in federal court in Concord, New Hampshire on June 30, 2004, which really brought the case to the public's attention. The prosecutor in Ramond's case indicated to the court that Raymond had been contacted about the phone jamming by "a former colleague who was then an official in a national political organization." Not long after, the Manchester Union-Leader, one of the most right-wing daily newspapers in the country, reported that the unnamed individual had a significant role in the Bush-Cheney presidential campaign." He was later identified as James Tobin, then serving as the New England regional director for the Bush campaign. He resigned in October from that post and in December was indicted and arraigned on two criminal counts each of conspiring to make harassing telephone calls and aiding and abetting telephone harassment. Later, Allen Raymond was sentenced to five months in federal prison. His accomplice, Charles McGee, received seven months. Tobin refused to cooperate, and during his trial questions came up about who was paying for his defense. Ultimately, it was revealed that the Republican National Committe was paying for his lawyer. Later in this case, after being convicted, Tobin was freed on appeal -- but on legal technicalities, not the merits of the actual case of voter suppression. Raymond Allen wrote a book that sold quite well, How to Rig an Election. This is but one example of how both parties seek to undermine voting rights, Tracy. I can provide many more. One of the more common things Republicans do is to send letters to minority voters (yes, U.S. citizens who happen to be black and live in poverty-stricken election districts) disguised as "official" in some capacity telling people that if they show up at the polls they run the risk of arrest for any outstanding parket tickets, or must pass a reading test, or may be subject to imprisonment if they have moved, etc. Democrats pulled the same kind of stuff in the South before the Voting Rights Act. It's despicable, but voter suppression efforts are certainly not the purview of one party or one administration.
|
|
#17
11-06-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
The "additional disclosure requirements" would enhance "disclaimers," thus requiring that those who provide the funds for ads take responsibility for them; enhance disclosures, requiring that the money be traceable to its source(s); require that corporations and organizations (including unions) disclose to shareholders and members how and where money was spent on political ads; and tighten the coordination rules that are meant to keep non-party entities from coordinating their work with official campaigns as a way around limits on spending. In brief, as law the bill would require disclosure by donors supporting campaign advertising, and require sponsors to approve TV ads personally, as candidates are required to do. So, for example, a corporation, wealthy businessman, union ... no one ... could set up a group with a name like Americans for Sound Policy and then run an ad attacking a candidate without the funders being identified in the ad. This bill passed the House of Representatives in June. A similar bill was blocked twice in the Senate by Republicans, who voted against invoking cloture to keep it from coming before the full body. The last such block, in late September, fell short by a vote of 59 to 39 (60 votes are required for cloture). All Democrats voted for cloture; two Republicans did not vote; all other Republicans voted to block the bill. The Republican leadership argued that the Democrats were trying to "rig the system" to their advantage. How can there be an advantage for any one side in mandating full disclosure in a democracy, unless someone wants to keep something a secret? Last edited by smc; 11-06-2010 at 04:58 PM. Reason: Fixed spelling error.
|
|
#18
11-06-2010
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
"Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary." R.N.
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Giselly (Giselle) Lins -- another angel meets a violent end. | seanchai | In Memoriam | 10 | 08-19-2012 05:51 PM |
| The Second Coming of Keliana | ila | Freebies | 9 | 12-24-2011 11:39 AM |
| Absolutely gorgeous hottie asian with cumshot at end | schiff | ID help needed | 2 | 06-07-2010 12:20 PM |
| Coming out | guest | Chat About Shemales | 3 | 03-15-2009 03:22 PM |
| Coming out | Kendra | Chat About Shemales | 1 | 03-02-2009 05:10 PM |
Hybrid Mode
