View Full Version : Rick Perry... sounds great -- ha ha ha!
Rick Perry, ‘Hawk Internationalist’ Or is that "internationalist hawk"?
by Justin Raimondo (http://original.antiwar.com/author/justin/), August 12, 2011
The idea that the Republican party Establishment (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_YTJBDUN8iSE/SuE9PyjviMI/AAAAAAAACM8/0rwWBwGOio0/s400/simpsons_republicans.jpg) was going to tolerate a takeover of their party by a rag-tag bunch of insurgent "tea partiers" was never very convincing, and Rick Perry’s entrance into the race (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/08/11/120363/texas-perry-is-running-for-president.html) as the "Teastablishment (http://www.frumforum.com/meet-rick-perry-the-teastablishment-candidate)" candidate – to the hosannas (http://www.google.com/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&site=webhp&source=hp&q=rick+perry+site%3Awww.nationalreview.com&btnG=Search) of the neocons — should put that delusion to rest.
For months, the media and the Republican mandarins have been anointing one candidate after another as the chief competitor to Mitt Romney, presumed by many to be the frontrunner. First it was Tim Pawlenty (http://gawker.com/5816261/tim-pawlenty-becomes-rabid-war-hawk-for-lack-of-anything-better-to-do), and after he went nowhere (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/11/us-usa-campaign-pawlenty-idUSTRE77A6QP20110811) fast it was Jon Huntsman (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9EGTR900&show_article=1), who has about as much (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/poll-results-in-one-jon-huntsman-supporter-in-iowa.php) chance as Gary Johnson (http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/04/21/gary-johnson-caveat-emptor/) of winning the race. Now it’s Texas Governor Perry who’s going to unite the various Republican factions around a post-Reaganite, post-Bush conservative consensus. The only problem with that is Perry has aroused the ire of Texas conservatives, who noted the Governor’s Texas Transit Corridor highway project made liberal – if you’ll pardon the expression – use of eminent domain (http://www.corridorwatch.org/ttc/cw-i-propertyrights.htm). The TTC proposal put him on the other side of the barricades from most Texas conservatives – and also put him at odds with Rep. Ron Paul, another fast-rising (http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/ron-paul-and-rick-perry-chasing-after-mitt-romney) GOP presidential contender, who introduced legislation (http://www.dailypaul.com/33133/ron-paul-introduces-legislation-to-stop-the-trans-texas-corridor) to block federal money for the scheme. I’ll leave it to others (http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/01/11/2762062/texas-budget-shortfall-is-as-bad.html) to expose Perry’s RINO credentials on domestic issues (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/06/04/rick_perrys_gardasil_problem_110089.html), and focus instead on his hostility to the Tea Party when it comes to foreign policy.
At its inception, the Tea Party, as an inchoate movement with no real national leaders, and a fervently single-issue focus (http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/examiner-opinion-zone/2010/11/tea-party-urges-truce-social-issues), had no foreign policy agenda. As time went on, however – that is, as the bills continued to stream in (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm) for our wars in the Middle East – that began to change. It changed because no one can address the fiscal crisis at the core of our problems without facing the question of how to cut the misnamed (http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/06/26/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-american-empire/) "defense" budget. It soon became apparent (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/23/politics/main7274710.shtml) to the tea partiers that a military tasked with policing the world – instead of actually defending this country – accounted for a good chunk of change. Under the all-inclusive rubric of "defense" we spend more than a trillion (http://original.antiwar.com/engelhardt/2011/03/01/the-real-us-national-security-budget/) dollars a year, as much as for so-called entitlements. The rest is "discretionary" spending – you know, like running the actual government.
In any case, the tea partiers, confronted with a bloated Leviathan, soon discovered that the military budget is among the holiest (http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/01/20/139915/republican-study-committee-defense/) of the federal budget’s sacred cows, and that this reverence is bipartisan: neither the GOP Establishment nor the Democrats would sign on to any real cuts in this sector. The result: a budget deal (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/reid-agrees-to-major-debt-limit-deal----heres-what-hes-signed-off-on.php?ref=fpa) that relegated possible cuts in the military and overseas budget to the final "tranches" of the budget-reduction process, to go into effect only if the "Super-Congress" fails to reach an agreement.
In short, they’ll yank your grandmother off her life support system, and cut your Social Security – which you’ve been "paying into (http://mises.org/econsense/ch18.asp)" all these years – just as you reach retirement age, long before they’ll touch a penny of the trillions being funneled overseas to our far-flung outposts (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaZVD9-oI5k) of empire.
The tea partiers, most of them, find this galling, to say the least, and the rumbles of discontent with this Americans-come-last policy provoked a response from the Establishment: the tea partiers, the neocons cried, are a modern manifestation of the dreaded "isolationists," (http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/07/03/the-phony-argument-against-isolationism/) and the Obama cultists joined in the hand-wringing, defending the Dear Leader’s Libyan adventure against Republican "isolationists" like Michelle Bachmann (http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/bachmann-copies-qaddafis-talking-points-makes-serious-foreign-policy-blunder), Ron Paul (http://www.google.com/search?q=Ron+Paul+Libya&tbo=p&tbm=vid&source=vgc&hl=en&aq=f), and George Will (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/08/AR2011030803149.html).
Undeterred, tea party activists are pushing ahead with their campaign to cut back Big Government on all levels – including the international level. As The Hill reports (http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/08/10/rick_perry_the_hawk_internationalist), tea partiers are putting pressure on Republicans appointed to the "Super-Committee" to wield the budget knife unsparingly:
"’Nothing should be sacred, and everything needs to be evaluated and cut as much as it can be,’ said Jenny Beth Martin, co-founder of Tea Party Patriots.
"Tea Party activists say defense programs should come under the same knife as any other taxpayer-funded programs, and that massive national security budgets were not exempt from their definition of ‘big government.’
"’The liberty movement is about the fundamental limitation of government, and that doesn’t have departmental boundaries with regards to this principle,’ said Chris Littleton, co-founder of the Ohio Liberty Council."
The tea partiers aren’t "isolationists" – that smear word doesn’t really describe anyone in American politics outside of the labor unions (http://www.aasc.ucla.edu/uschina/ee_aflciochina.shtml) and other advocates of economic protectionism. They’re nationalists, albeit not of the all-too-familiar militaristic variety, in that they want a foreign policy that puts America and American interests first, and last. As opposed to the traditional European conception of nationalism as warlike and expansionist, theirs is a Amazon.com: Ain't My America: The Long, Noble History of Antiwar Conservatism and Middle-American Anti-Imperialism (9780805082449): Bill Kauffman: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51KoTFKgxLL.@@AMEPARAM@@51KoTFKgxLL (http://www.amazon.com/Aint-America-Conservatism-Middle-American-Anti-Imperialism/dp/0805082441/antiwarbookstore) that is inward looking and increasingly anti-imperialist.
This is in radical juxtaposition to the views of Señor Perry, who has been characterized by one of his top aides as a "hawk internationalist (http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/08/10/rick_perry_the_hawk_internationalist)." This is a good indication that the much-ballyhooed Perry bandwagon began going off the rails before it ever got started. Do the Perryites really believe they can sell their candidate to crusty conservative Republicans as an "internationalist"? Does Phyllis Schlafly (http://www.eagleforum.org/) know about this?
Just look at who’s been giving him foreign policy advice: according to Josh Rogin (http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/08/10/rick_perry_the_hawk_internationalist), over at Foreignpolicy.com, he’s been in meetings "sometimes for hours" with the likes of former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Doug Feith, former NSC "strategy guru" William Luti, and a host of other neocons from the last administration, many of whom were instrumental in lying us into war in Iraq. Feith and Luti were the nexus (http://www.amconmag.com/article/2003/dec/01/00019/) of a disinformation network (http://motherjones.com/politics/2004/01/lie-factory) which fed false "intelligence" to the Congress, the White House, and the public to justify a disastrous invasion which we are still paying for in lives and treasure.
Oh, and what a surprise: it turns out the Perry-neocon lash-up was brokered (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0711/Rumsfeld_had_role_in_Perry_meeting.html) by disgraced former Defense Secretary Donald "Known Unknowns" Rumsfeld.
Another Rick Perry's Texas A&M Transcript (http://www.scribd.com/doc/61684192/Rick-Perry-s-Texas-A-M-Transcript) Texas Governor surrounded by the same Praetorian Guard of conniving neocons (http://www.antiwar.com/justin/pf/p-j032502.html) who led us down the road to imperial overstretch and fiscal ruin last time around – isn’t that just what the GOP needs right now?
The neocons have anointed their candidate, and it’s clear they have some sense he’s swimming upstream:
"’He will distinguish himself from other Republicans as a hawk internationalist, embracing American exceptionalism and the unique role we must play in confronting the many threats we face,’ one foreign policy advisor with knowledge of Perry’s thinking told The Cable. ‘He has no sympathy for the neo-isolationist impulses emanating from some quarters of the Republican Party.’"
Perry is being sold as the one candidate who can bridge the gap between the tea partiers and the old line "mainstream" Republican Establishment, but those fault-lines are turning into a chasm, as Senator McCain’s anti-Tea Party eruption (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/07/john-mccain-tea-party-hobbits-sharron-angle-/1?csp=hf) the other day confirms. When it comes to cutting "defense" – and, more broadly, redefining America’s proper role in the world – Perry and his neocon advisors are going to have to demonstrate how "American exceptionalism" means we’re an exception to the laws of economics (http://mises.org/Books/humanaction.pdf). [.pdf] Empires are expensive: a foreign policy of perpetual war costs not only cash but lives. Aside from the fiscal aspect, for most Americans the death of Osama bin Laden has drawn the curtain (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/159123-pressure-builds-to-end-the-afghan-war) on the threat from al-Qaeda – especially for those increasing numbers who face the far more immediate threat of financial insolvency. At a time when the homes of so many (http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/08/11/defaults-foreclosures-fall-but-housing-recovery-not-in-sight/) Americans have gone into foreclosure, Perry’s neocon "experts" are going to have a hard time coming up with a convincing pitch for more military spending, more wars, and more "internationalism."
In trying to sell this warmed-over Bush-ism, the Perry camp is setting itself on a collision course with the tea partiers. Having been sold out (http://www.dailypaul.com/172255/gop-house-sells-out-americans-again-passes-boehners-bill) by the Republican congressional leadership and its too-little-too-late budget deal – which authorized over a trillion to feed the maw of the Welfare-Warfare State, and only cut the rate of spending growth (http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2011/08/ron-paul-these-purported-budget-cuts-are-not-real-budget-cuts/) – the libertarian-constitutionalist wing of the GOP is in no mood for compromise. In a primary season in which the Tea Party is widely seen as the kingmaker, Perry the "internationalist" may see his coronation delayed indefinitely.
The Perry trial balloon was inflated with a lot of hot air when it was first floated in the media, but he may well turn out to be another Fred Thompson – remember him? (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22786860/ns/politics-decision_08/t/thompson-drops-out-gop-presidential-race/) – or, more precisely, another Rudy Giuliani (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/01/giulianis_59_mi.html). You’ll recall that Perry endorsed Giuliani (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7SwiT7DkmU) in the last presidential go-round, and I have a sneaking suspicion – or is it a hope? – the Perry campaign is headed for a similar destiny.
The above copy and paste didn't work out that well. Too many vids, etc.
Here is the link to the above piece by Justin Raimondo:
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/08/11/rick-perry-hawk-internationalist/
And the always entertaining (albeit sometimes over the top -- ha ha) paleoconservative Alex Jones. (PS: Notice how heated he gets -- ha ha!)
Rick Perry Is The Bankers Answer To Ron Paul! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkMkJ5s1j0I&feature=feedu)
Paleoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Blue_flag_waving.svg" class="image" title="Blue flag"><img alt="Blue flag" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/17/Blue_flag_waving.svg/70px-Blue_flag_waving.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/1/17/Blue_flag_waving.svg/70px-Blue_flag_waving.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism)
Stavros
08-14-2011, 01:35 PM
Paleoconservatism....and we were struggling with defining the left and the right....
onmyknees
08-14-2011, 05:58 PM
Paleoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism)
Ben....the average American isn't at all interested in your inane posting about Neo Cons and Paleo Cons. It's not that they're not
sophisticated...they neither care, and don't have the time to discern the difference between all those sub categories. Here's what they care about...their families, their jobs and leaving their kids a better country than they were given. If Perry can speak to their anxieties and fears in a rational way.....he'll be successful. If he can't....he wont. It is now, and has always been about the economy stupid. Obama was able to do that in the campaign and the rest is history as they say. But.......Had Obama focused on and perused economic policies that began to put Americans back to work in a gradual, coherent . methodical way, he would have waltzed into a second term and then could have begun to initiate all his social agenda , and probably could have gotten most of it...but Americans aren't all that tolerant of any President's social policies if they ain't working and providing for their families. Witness the 2010 mid terms. All those brilliant strategists surrounding Obama failed to realize that. They went for the gusto....went for broke on Health Care, a liberal dream for decades.. in a tortured 12 month debacle , sleezy deal making, vote buying, reconciliation process, 12,000 page bills, and finally a rammed through vote in the early morning hours. ...and it may cost them their legacy as the Supreme Court may strike down the individual mandate just as the 11th circuit did recently....and all that for what??? . Because they believed if they could control 1/6 of the economy, they could transform the nation. They got it...but it has, and will continue to cost them dearly. Call it impatience, ideology, miscalculations, or flat out political naivety .
They'll be tens of thousands of articles by pundits and observers about who Rick Perry is and how he thinks...and it won't matter a fucking bit because the average guy ain't reading all that. It's about having solutions, and communicating those to average folks, neither of which the current President has mastered.
flabbybody
08-14-2011, 07:24 PM
I watched Perry's speech announcing his candidacy. 5 minutes into it he was sweating like a stuffed pig.. much worse than Nixon, who's upper lip was always dripping wet during TV appearances.
I don't want to sound shallow. There are enough real reasons to hate this prick and his holier than thou brand of fake Christian values bullshit. But watching him svich under the hot lights was extremely amusing. All Perry will accomplish is to split the wacko right wing vote with Michele and make it easier for Romney to lock up the nomination.
onmyknees
08-14-2011, 08:33 PM
I watched Perry's speech announcing his candidacy. 5 minutes into it he was sweating like a stuffed pig.. much worse than Nixon, who's upper lip was always dripping wet during TV appearances.
I don't want to sound shallow. There are enough real reasons to hate this prick and his holier than thou brand of fake Christian values bullshit. But watching him svich under the hot lights was extremely amusing. All Perry will accomplish is to split the wacko right wing vote with Michele and make it easier for Romney to lock up the nomination.
Why is it that anyone you lefties disagree with is "wacko" ?? It's so fucking tiresome and weak. You sound like one of these gurls on here whose panties are always in a knot about something. You fucking hypocrites are the first ones to scream racism when somebody disagrees with Obama, but you throw the pejoratives around pretty freely goin' the other way...You want an intellegent political discourse? Try disagreeing without being an asshole...otherwise bend over and take the return volley like a man. :dancing:
Silcc69
08-14-2011, 08:43 PM
Why is it that anyone you lefties disagree with is "wacko" ?? It's so fucking tiresome and weak. You sound like one of these gurls on here whose panties are always in a knot about something. You fucking hypocrites are the first ones to scream racism when somebody disagrees with Obama, but you throw the pejoratives around pretty freely goin' the other way...You want an intellegent political discourse? Try disagreeing without being an asshole...otherwise bend over and take the return volley like a man. :dancing:
Butthurt eh!? The only republican that has any sense is Ron Paul and he seems to be viewed as a wacko by your party. Oh the irony..............
trish
08-14-2011, 08:49 PM
Why is it that anyone you lefties disagree with is "wacko" ??There you go again making ridiculous generalizations. Liberals have disagreed with each other as well as with conservatives without considering those with whom they disagreed "wackos". The real question is, "Why are there are so many wackos politically conservative and conversely why are so many conservatives these days wacko?" Do the contradictions within the conservative philosophy just drive believers over the edge or what?
Faldur
08-14-2011, 11:00 PM
The only republican that has any sense is Ron Paul and he seems to be viewed as a wacko by your party. Oh the irony..............
Lets keep it real here.. the only (R) running the liberals like is Ron Paul. Not hard, he actually leans more left than right. When the time comes when we need progressive liberals to pick our candidate, you will be the first one we will call.
But for know I think we have a primary to run.
trish
08-14-2011, 11:11 PM
You're wacko if you think any of the Pauls are going to attract liberals. Just because we align on a few issues (the wars, and some_but not enough_social issues doesn't mean liberals are willing to throw away New Deal values on a Randist fantasy candidate.
hippifried
08-14-2011, 11:37 PM
See what I mean about the left/right argument?
It makes no sense at all, because no 2 people can define it the same way. It has no context, & just sounds like kids in a sandbox, fighting over the pail & shovel.
Ben....the average American isn't at all interested in your inane posting about Neo Cons and Paleo Cons. It's not that they're not
sophisticated...they neither care, and don't have the time to discern the difference between all those sub categories. Here's what they care about...their families, their jobs and leaving their kids a better country than they were given. If Perry can speak to their anxieties and fears in a rational way.....he'll be successful. If he can't....he wont. It is now, and has always been about the economy stupid. Obama was able to do that in the campaign and the rest is history as they say. But.......Had Obama focused on and perused economic policies that began to put Americans back to work in a gradual, coherent . methodical way, he would have waltzed into a second term and then could have begun to initiate all his social agenda , and probably could have gotten most of it...but Americans aren't all that tolerant of any President's social policies if they ain't working and providing for their families. Witness the 2010 mid terms. All those brilliant strategists surrounding Obama failed to realize that. They went for the gusto....went for broke on Health Care, a liberal dream for decades.. in a tortured 12 month debacle , sleezy deal making, vote buying, reconciliation process, 12,000 page bills, and finally a rammed through vote in the early morning hours. ...and it may cost them their legacy as the Supreme Court may strike down the individual mandate just as the 11th circuit did recently....and all that for what??? . Because they believed if they could control 1/6 of the economy, they could transform the nation. They got it...but it has, and will continue to cost them dearly. Call it impatience, ideology, miscalculations, or flat out political naivety .
They'll be tens of thousands of articles by pundits and observers about who Rick Perry is and how he thinks...and it won't matter a fucking bit because the average guy ain't reading all that. It's about having solutions, and communicating those to average folks, neither of which the current President has mastered.
The average American wouldn't be on this site -- ha ha ha!
I agree. Americans are concerned about their jobs, their families, etc. etc.
Most Americans are sick and tired of both parties. Hence the Tea Party movement. People are angry and legitimately so.
American politicians won't and can't respond to their wishes. The political system is just way too corrupt. People know this. They understand it. And they're angry.
The economist Paul Craig Roberts has said as long as America continues to offshore jobs, well, there won't be a recovery. Not only do you offshore jobs, well, you offshore your tax base and your economy.
Donald Trump spoke to America's anxieties by saying let's slap a 25 percent tariff on goods coming in from China. To protect American jobs.
The free movement of capital and the free import of goods has had a devastating impact on America. (As Alex Jones rightly pointed out: America was built through tariffs. Through protecting our industries. Protectionism is a very conservative idea.)
Most Americans, too, want to control their own labor. Most Americans are fed up with big corporations controlling our government. Most Americans want taxes on the rich to go up to pay down the deficit and reduce the debt.
OK. This is what Americans want. Will politicians respond to those wishes? No. Will public policy reflect public opinion? No.
Each person has to try and change things. Well, collectively. I mean, even getting a STOP sign on a street corner is a big step. Because one will feel they have some power.
Each tiny step makes a difference.
You're wacko if you think any of the Pauls are going to attract liberals. Just because we align on a few issues (the wars, and some_but not enough_social issues doesn't mean liberals are willing to throw away New Deal values on a Randist fantasy candidate.
Trish is right. Ron Paul, who is good on a whole host of issues, is kinda frightening on some other issues.
OK. Let's get rid of government. Well, who builds the roads, the bridges, the sidewalks, the schools.
Full scale libertarianism &/or free market capitalism hasn't been fully worked out. We must remember that unfettered markets mean: NO minimum wage laws. NO child labor laws. Ya know, the 10 year old can work, well, shove him down a coal mine.
The financial sector closely resembled a free market system and look what happened.
Alan Greenspan: "Shocked Over Credit Tsunami" Oct. 23 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oLHfKjiQew)
Faldur
08-15-2011, 12:35 AM
Mine!
http://www.lifun4kids.com/images/pail.jpg
onmyknees
08-15-2011, 01:12 AM
The average American wouldn't be on this site -- ha ha ha!
I agree. Americans are concerned about their jobs, their families, etc. etc.
Most Americans are sick and tired of both parties. Hence the Tea Party movement. People are angry and legitimately so.
American politicians won't and can't respond to their wishes. The political system is just way too corrupt. People know this. They understand it. And they're angry.
The economist Paul Craig Roberts has said as long as America continues to offshore jobs, well, there won't be a recovery. Not only do you offshore jobs, well, you offshore your tax base and your economy.
Donald Trump spoke to America's anxieties by saying let's slap a 25 percent tariff on goods coming in from China. To protect American jobs.
The free movement of capital and the free import of goods has had a devastating impact on America. (As Alex Jones rightly pointed out: America was built through tariffs. Through protecting our industries. Protectionism is a very conservative idea.)
Most Americans, too, want to control their own labor. Most Americans are fed up with big corporations controlling our government. Most Americans want taxes on the rich to go up to pay down the deficit and reduce the debt.
OK. This is what Americans want. Will politicians respond to those wishes? No. Will public policy reflect public opinion? No.
Each person has to try and change things. Well, collectively. I mean, even getting a STOP sign on a street corner is a big step. Because one will feel they have some power.
Each tiny step makes a difference.
Ben...I think of you as more left leaning than right...not insanely so, but I think I'm correct in my assumptions. You're probably a combination of libertarian/progressive if I may use those categories. But you don't strike me nearly as hateful or condescending as the other house progressives on here. They think if you don't agree entirely with their dogma, you fall into one of three separate categories...racist, terrorist, or rage filled. You were one of the few who doesn't agree with a thing Palin ever said, but didn't see the need to savage her or her family. I respect you for that, and consequently read what you have to say with interest. I may not agree with it, but I read it ! As far as the others on here....I repay them with exactly what it is they deserve, and that they dish out in huge portions...scorn and contempt.
As Obama said to McCain at the Health Care Sumit..."John there was an election .........and we won"
HA Progressives...there was an mid term election, and we won. Deal with it.
Stavros
08-15-2011, 02:43 AM
The economist Paul Craig Roberts has said as long as America continues to offshore jobs, well, there won't be a recovery. Not only do you offshore jobs, well, you offshore your tax base and your economy.
Ben look at it from the point of view of a capitalism, which is the dominant economic system in the world: the jobs went offshore because the costs were irresistible: how can an unskilled American worker compete with an unskilled Chinese worker? Packing, assembly, simple jobs, or even semi-skilled: It is cheaper for a company to ship raw materials to China from Africa or Latin America (say), create products, ship them to the USA and still sell them at a profit. Even with a 25% tariff barrier lots of things would still sell at a profit (eg, iPads, iPhones). How many Americans are going to work for a $ a day?
pantybulge69
08-15-2011, 07:25 AM
I watched Perry's speech announcing his candidacy. 5 minutes into it he was sweating like a stuffed pig.. much worse than Nixon, who's upper lip was always dripping wet during TV appearances.
I don't want to sound shallow. There are enough real reasons to hate this prick and his holier than thou brand of fake Christian values bullshit. But watching him svich under the hot lights was extremely amusing. All Perry will accomplish is to split the wacko right wing vote with Michele and make it easier for Romney to lock up the nomination.
Perry is easily one of the most arrogant, crookiest " mo-fo" you willl
ever come by. Even the more conservative of Texans realize that he has
more " Dubya " Bush in him than we can ever imagine.
Should he be presented the Presidency it's automatic a return to the
Bush dayz. And that doesn't account for all the tollway BS that he has
accounted for. But as everyone clearly knows, the GOP candidate- availability is crying hurting so bad for a valid nominatee because they arent worth a shit. ( Michelle Bachman ? Sarah Palin ? LOL !!!)
So tnow hey are going to try to scramble really hard to find what they think is a valid entry.Dont be surprised to see a Perry completely out-do Mitt Romney (who was clearly out-done by the ridiculous McCain.) No much different than the McCain/Palin era.
Where the fun will start is the moment those so-called GOP presidency candidates start opening their mouths during the run-offs and November elections.
" adios, Mo- Fo !! " ......
The economist Paul Craig Roberts has said as long as America continues to offshore jobs, well, there won't be a recovery. Not only do you offshore jobs, well, you offshore your tax base and your economy.
Ben look at it from the point of view of a capitalism, which is the dominant economic system in the world: the jobs went offshore because the costs were irresistible: how can an unskilled American worker compete with an unskilled Chinese worker? Packing, assembly, simple jobs, or even semi-skilled: It is cheaper for a company to ship raw materials to China from Africa or Latin America (say), create products, ship them to the USA and still sell them at a profit. Even with a 25% tariff barrier lots of things would still sell at a profit (eg, iPads, iPhones). How many Americans are going to work for a $ a day?
I completely agree. Corporations have to, by law, maximize profits. It's the CEO's fiduciary responsibility. Meaning the shareholders have put faith and trust in the CEO to do everything he or she can to maximize profits. Otherwise they can be sued. It's a strict legal requirement. So, the institution itself demands it.
So, the internal corporate system requires and demands the offshoring of capital and jobs in order to increase return on investment. That's understood. (Adam Smith said -- or wrote :) -- that the principal architects of policy, namely the merchants and manufacturers [today: corporations] are going to pursue their own interests regardless of the grievous impact on others.)
So, the CEO having to serve the interests of the shareholders will move capital to China [where, as we know, it's cheaper and a corporation is compelled by legal requirement to MINIMIZE costs] no matter the harm it causes to America and American workers. (CEOs are not bad people perse. They are, well, obeying the strict code of the law, as it were.)
The CEO doesn't have a choice. If she or he doesn't do it, well, she or he is out and someone else is in. (I wouldn't call the system we live in capitalism. Capitalism &/or free markets means: no State intervention. None. We have plenty of State intervention.
The government plays a big role in the economy. A more apt description is: State Capitalism. Where the State does play a role in the economy. Again, pure capitalism means, by definition, no government intervention.
And, too, in order for free markets (or so-called capitalism) to work a few things have to happen. 1) The seller must bear the full cost of what they produce. 2) Investment income must stay in the country. 3) Savings must be spent on real wealth, not phantom wealth.
And, also, one needs perfect information in a market system. So he or she can make rational choices. Again, informed consumers making rational choices. That's what you need in order for markets to work.
And it must be noted: corporations work to undercut markets. If we lived a market system, well, when you watched a commercial they'd tell you about, say, the car. Instead they have a model with big boobs zooming down a road.
I mean, Britney Spears bopping up and down with a Pepsi can doesn't tell you anything about the drink. Again, corporations are intentionally undercutting markets. So, how can one make rational choices when seeing big-boobed Britney bouncing up and down and, well, not getting information about the actual drink.
Adam Smith actually gave an argument for markets. (First off, well, the real Adam Smith was anti-capitalist. He called for equality. And felt that people shouldn't be subjected to wage labor because it's destructive of their humanity. He also said that the division of labor would make people stupid and ignorant and in any civilized society the government must intervene to prevent this.) He supported markets only on the basis that under conditions of perfect liberty you get perfect equality. That's the argument he gave for free markets.
And Adam Smith's term invisible hand appears once in Wealth of Nations. And it was an argument AGAINST what is now called globalization. And it's an argument AGAINST the free movement of capital. Because free capital movement will harm England. He was concerned about England. And it continues to harm England -- and, of course, America.
Ben...I think of you as more left leaning than right...not insanely so, but I think I'm correct in my assumptions. You're probably a combination of libertarian/progressive if I may use those categories. But you don't strike me nearly as hateful or condescending as the other house progressives on here. They think if you don't agree entirely with their dogma, you fall into one of three separate categories...racist, terrorist, or rage filled. You were one of the few who doesn't agree with a thing Palin ever said, but didn't see the need to savage her or her family. I respect you for that, and consequently read what you have to say with interest. I may not agree with it, but I read it ! As far as the others on here....I repay them with exactly what it is they deserve, and that they dish out in huge portions...scorn and contempt.
As Obama said to McCain at the Health Care Sumit..."John there was an election .........and we won"
HA Progressives...there was an mid term election, and we won. Deal with it.
onmyknees, I like the term Libertarian-Progressive -- ha ha ha! It's a pretty apt description.
I think Palin is probably a nice person. (I mean, I've never met her -- ha ha ha! :))
I deeply respect her position on abortion. But I respectfully disagree with her.
And I like this YouTube clip of Sarah Palin. Because she is absolutely right:
Sarah Palin: "How's That Hopey-Changey Stuff Working Out For Ya?" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y02iZcTjHo)
Rick Perry Scariest 2012 Presidential Candidate: Nuts, But Could Win - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLsAlM7v5ns)
trish
08-17-2011, 11:03 PM
Didn't Rick Perry recently propose that Texas secede from the nation? So now he wants to be the president and he calling other people teasonous??!
Stavros
08-17-2011, 11:35 PM
The government plays a big role in the economy. A more apt description is: State Capitalism.
No Ben, No. State capitalism is where government replaces private enterprise; a mixed economy is where private enterprise flourishes while government or the state finances those parts of the economy that the private sector will not -or is not allowed to touch. For example, in the UK when the state owned the railways, coal mining, broadcasting, steel and so on, the economy was mixed -hence the term 'privatisation' to explain 'returning formerly state-owned enterprises to the 'free market'. North Korea is State Capitalist today, to give one example.
When citing Adam Smith, as you so often do, try to remember that he was a revolutionary thinker in his own times; his description of the early years of industrial capitalism is of course unrivalled, but remember that in his day free markets did not exist as a national phenomenon in the UK. The Crown continued through the govt to rake in receipts from taxes on agricultural produce; only a certain number of 'market towns' had been given a licence to trade freely -one example would be Stratford-upon-Avon, given its status as market town by Henry the Eighth, which is why by the time Will Shakespeare was born there it was a prosperous middle class town with excellent schools. Free trade was at one time a radical concept, as indeed was the United States of America around the same time...
Your enthusiasm knows no limits, but sometimes you veer all over the place. I can't always keep up.
Stavros
08-17-2011, 11:41 PM
Mr Perry also thinks that the Commander-in-Chief should have at one time in his life have worn 'the uniform'...makes a change from having a President who studied Law I suppose....whatever next? A President who used to drive a truck for a living? (The House of Commons seems these days to be bursting at the seams with lawyers, one wonders why normal people dont get elected these days).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/8705158/Barack-Obama-is-greatest-threat-to-US-says-Rick-Perry.html
Faldur
08-17-2011, 11:57 PM
"We're dismayed at the injustice that nearly half of all Americans don't even pay any income tax."
-Texas Gov. Rick Perry, presidential announcement speech, Aug. 13, 2011.
My kind of guy!
trish
08-18-2011, 12:12 AM
See, he's for raising taxes too. Perry belongs to the crowd th[at] calls it a "tax hike" when a tax cut bill is allowed to expire. He calls it a "tax hike" when loop holes are excised from the tax law or when various tax advantages the wealthy enjoy are threatened. So to be consistent we have say that Governor Perry is calling for a Tax Hike.
Erika1487
08-18-2011, 12:20 AM
As most of you know in the Republican primary's most canidates lean waaayyy futher right to garner votes and when the general election comes around they move closer to the center. "It's called playing up your base"
Dino Velvet
08-18-2011, 02:47 AM
As most of you know in the Republican primary's most canidates lean waaayyy futher right to garner votes and when the general election comes around they move closer to the center. "It's called playing up your base"
I hope they don't run so far to the right that this conservative but more moderate Independent still remembers and stays home on Election Day. Tell us about jobs and leave The Bible at home. Ron Paul won't win but I hope many of his ideas bleed into the actual candidate. I want Obama gone too but people like Bachmann are not an upgrade.
Erika1487
08-18-2011, 03:01 AM
I hope they don't run so far to the right that this conservative but more moderate Independent still remembers and stays home on Election Day. Tell us about jobs and leave The Bible at home. Ron Paul won't win but I hope many of his ideas bleed into the actual candidate. I want Obama gone too but people like Bachmann are not an upgrade.
Bachmann & Perry may very well spilt the far right vote and let Romney gain some traction, but Romney has many folks at the GOP nervous because he is more McCain than Bush. I think when the smoke clears in the primaries Bachmann, or Perry will win. Just my :2cent
Dino Velvet
08-18-2011, 03:35 AM
Bachmann & Perry may very well spilt the far right vote and let Romney gain some traction, but Romney has many folks at the GOP nervous because he is more McCain than Bush. I think when the smoke clears in the primaries Bachmann, or Perry will win. Just my :2cent
Romney is the only guy I'll consider voting for. As an Independent, I don't vote in primaries. The loudmouth Texas bullshit doesn't impress me.
If your predictions are correct with Bachmann or Perry, count me out. I might be an Independent but I'm still a fairly consistent Conservative. The GOP should want my vote too.
How do you feel about the legalization, regulation, and taxation of marijuana, prostitution, and gambling?
Erika1487
08-18-2011, 03:46 AM
Romney is the only guy I'll consider voting for. As an Independent, I don't vote in primaries. The loudmouth Texas bullshit doesn't impress me.
If your predictions are correct with Bachmann or Perry, count me out. I might be an Independent but I'm still a fairly consistent Conservative. The GOP should want my vote too.
How do you feel about the legalization, regulation, and taxation of marijuana, prostitution, and gambling?
We want your vote Dino we need your vote out there in Cali.
Marijuana is still illegal in many states including my own, pesonally I perfer it stay that way, but many enjoy marijuana where it is legal and thats fine too.
You don't have to even ask about the prostitution thing I am a part time escort on the side so I am 100% for legalization there, or at least regulation and taxation.
Gambling is a not a big deal for me either no harm no foul.
The government plays a big role in the economy. A more apt description is: State Capitalism.
No Ben, No. State capitalism is where government replaces private enterprise; a mixed economy is where private enterprise flourishes while government or the state finances those parts of the economy that the private sector will not -or is not allowed to touch. For example, in the UK when the state owned the railways, coal mining, broadcasting, steel and so on, the economy was mixed -hence the term 'privatisation' to explain 'returning formerly state-owned enterprises to the 'free market'. North Korea is State Capitalist today, to give one example.
When citing Adam Smith, as you so often do, try to remember that he was a revolutionary thinker in his own times; his description of the early years of industrial capitalism is of course unrivalled, but remember that in his day free markets did not exist as a national phenomenon in the UK. The Crown continued through the govt to rake in receipts from taxes on agricultural produce; only a certain number of 'market towns' had been given a licence to trade freely -one example would be Stratford-upon-Avon, given its status as market town by Henry the Eighth, which is why by the time Will Shakespeare was born there it was a prosperous middle class town with excellent schools. Free trade was at one time a radical concept, as indeed was the United States of America around the same time...
Your enthusiasm knows no limits, but sometimes you veer all over the place. I can't always keep up.
Stavros, you write and I quote: "... but sometimes you veer all over the place. I can't always keep up." Sorry about that.
But it's good and healthy to have ideas and opinions bandied about. You learn... and, too, rethink your positions on various issues -- :)
Life is a learning experience -- :)
Dino Velvet
08-18-2011, 06:14 AM
We want your vote Dino we need your vote out there in Cali.
Marijuana is still illegal in many states including my own, pesonally I perfer it stay that way, but many enjoy marijuana where it is legal and thats fine too.
You don't have to even ask about the prostitution thing I am a part time escort on the side so I am 100% for legalization there, or at least regulation and taxation.
Gambling is a not a big deal for me either no harm no foul.
You need more than my vote in California. Even if I vote GOP in 2012, I'm just exercising my right knowing how outnumbered I am too.
Seems like on marijuana, prostitution, and gambling, you might be OK with letting the states decide. That's fine by me.
For it's own sake, I hope the GOP evolves with the rest of the country. There are good things they stand for but they chase so many lost causes that cost elections and credibility. I think your involvement is a plus and you can change people's minds. Good luck.:cheers:
Faldur
08-18-2011, 02:51 PM
See, he's for raising taxes too. Governor Perry is calling for a Tax Hike.
You are spot on Trish, Governor Perry is going to raise taxes. He FULLY supports a tax hike, immediately upon entering office. He wants to raise taxes on 1/2 of all Americans!! Can you guess which half will see the tax increase?
Shared sacrifice, you gotta love it... skin in the game baby!
trish
08-18-2011, 10:55 PM
Of course I can guess. And 75% of those tea baggers are going be surprised when their taxes go up and their benefits go down.
trish
08-20-2011, 12:47 AM
Oops! Grover Norquist's no-tax-pledge isn't going to allow you to do anything about that 50% that worries you so. Perhaps you can give them a tax break instead since they do pay payroll taxes toward SS and Medicare. Too bad you can't give GE a tax break, 'cause it's already paying absolutely nothing...nada...zip...zero.
Rick Perry Global Warming, Oil $ & Corporate Tax Holiday - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNnLUBcLgc8)
Perry and Romney: Rivals in Love With Plutocracy
Tuesday
Aug 16, 2011
By Roger Bybee (http://www.inthesetimes.com/community/profile/6566)
Texas Gov. Rick Perry has entered the GOP presidential nomination race with both guns blazing, playing simultaneously to an extreme (http://www.myvidster.com/channel/101434/The_Rachel_Maddow_Show) wing of the Christian Right while also pandering to the Corporate Right.
Boasting that Texas has accounted for 40 percent of job growth in the United States since 2009—a claim that major media have incessantly reported without examining the quality of the jobs—Perry thunders, "I have been a pro-business governor and I will be a pro-business president!”
But Mitt Romney will not be easily out-done in this duel of plutocrats who advocate more profits, power, and privileges for corporations. At the Iowa State Fair, Romney was recently faced with a heckler who insisted that big corporations ought to pay more in taxes. Romney memorably retorted: (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/14/opinion/sunday/Dowd-power-to-the-corporation.html?scp=2&sq=Maureen%20Dowd) “Corporations are people, my friend.” (This despite the fact that the notion of corporate “personhood” is rejected by 80% (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/17/AR2010021701151_2.html?sid=ST2010021702073) of Americans.)
Almost as if directly answering Romney, the populist William Jennings Bryant argued in 1912 that corporations, unlike humans, have no conscience to inhibit their conduct as they strive ceaselessly drive for maximum profit:
Man acts under the restraints of conscience and is influenced also by a belief in a future life. A corporation has no soul and cares nothing about the hereafter…
That pretty much describes the way Romney's venture capital firm Bain Capital (http://www.baincapital.com/) has operated (http://www.bloomberg.com/.../romney-as-job-creator-clashes-with-bain-r), buying up firms, shedding large numbers of workers, closing plants and walking away with profits. (Romney co-founded the firm in 1984 and left it in 1999.)
Similarly, Rick Perry’s Texas is a laboratory for plutocracy—rule by the rich—where corporations are free to act without “the restraints of conscience.” With “right-to-work” laws crippling the growth of labor unions (management can easily choose to hire anti-union employees who will refuse to join and eventually vote out the union) and lacking a progressive income tax, Texas has become a paradise for corporations and the rich, while huge numbers of Texans remain stuck in minimum-wage jobs with no health insurance and little hope that their children will receive a quality education to escape poverty.
Public funds have been massively diverted from public education to corporate tax breaks and incentives, often for distinctly non-needy corporations including GE. The outcome has not been a new burst of shared prosperity for Texas, but a continuing growth of jobs that keep workers impoverished.
“Of the 211,000 jobs added last year, 37 percent (or more than 76,000) paid at or below minimum wage, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics,” reports David Mann of the Texas Observer. According to Paul Krugman of the New York Times, "one in four Texans lacks (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/the-texas-unmiracle.html?ref=todayspaper)health insurance, the highest proportion in the nation."
But inside the mind of Rick Perry, it is corporations who are being ruthlessly victimized by an evil federal government hostile to Texas-style economic growth. Perry has declared (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/rick-perry-announces-bid-for-president/%20that) he intends to take back the country “from the grips of central planners who would control our healthcare, spend our treasure and micromanage our businesses.”
The governor's mentality was revealed when journalist Ruben Navarrette Jr. had the temerity to mention the case of one Texas corporation supposedly hounded and harassed by the U.S. government while interviewing Perry a few years ago. The firm, a foundry, had atrocious safety practices—which produced a number of deaths—that were exposed by the New York Times. As Navarrette explained at nytimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/07/17/the-texas-jobs-juggernaut/perrys-texas-or-the-third-world) last month,
Concerned about government regulators, the company would only do business in two places: developing countries and Texas. I asked the governor if he was bothered by this fact. He wasn’t, to put it mildly.
“Well,” Mr. Perry said in his trademark drawl. “I don’t take direction from The New York Times.” Then he changed the subject and proceeded to make the case for why many other companies had moved to Texas.
The foundry's CEO could surely have made the case even more powerfully than the governor: Perry’s economic strategy has resulted in Third World-like wages and working conditions into Texas.
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 02:05 AM
Overzealous Republican haters, priests, etc always have secret, often predatory, sexual lives. It's just basic human psychology for them to point fingers. It's nothing new at all. "M'thinks the lady doth protest too much".
Tom Brokaw reports on White House "Call Boy" [Child Prostitution Ring]1989 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b0auTDcJHI)
Bachman married a gay guy (trust me, he's gay), and Perry is definitely going to get outed as either being gay (which I totally thought he was, even before the rumors last year) or at least banging hookers (perhaps a sad attempt to sexually self-medicate).
Just look at who the most rabid Republicans on this very forum are, and it's obvious how easily they'll flirt hypocritical danger.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/abraham/detail?entry_id=95718
Deliver Us From Evil - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scW90Q6Z_OM)
child sex slaves in the whitehouse-The Franklin Scandal - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDGOJl6hvh8)
This shit is going come back to bite them all in the ass. Just watch.
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 02:16 AM
J.Edgar Hoover "A Compromised Homosexual" PT1 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hbny_6wacA)
Overzealous Republican haters, priests, etc always have secret, often predatory, sexual lives. It's just basic human psychology for them to point fingers. It's nothing new at all. "M'thinks the lady doth protest too much".
Tom Brokaw reports on White House "Call Boy" [Child Prostitution Ring]1989 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b0auTDcJHI)
Bachman married a gay guy (trust me, he's gay), and Perry is definitely going to get outed as either being gay (which I totally thought he was, even before the rumors last year) or at least banging hookers (perhaps a sad attempt to sexually self-medicate).
Marcus Bachmann can't be gay -- ha ha ha! What I find exceedingly strange is why Michele Bachmann would be married to a man -- who is clearly gay -- for over 30 years. I don't get it. Very strange. Yes! He does seem to be gay.... And her rampant homophobia should be challenged. And she should be asked about her husband's sexual orientation. It matters.
I'd never heard of the Perry gay rumors until now. And we should add: they are just speculation. And, too, how could a manly man like Perry be gay. I mean, the late film star Rock Hudson was so ultra manly and so -- ha ha ha! :)
So, um, gay men are at the forefront of the Republican Party -- ha ha! Um, what about Mitt Romney? Any rumors &/or innuendos regarding his sexual orientation?
IS GOVERNOR RICK PERRY GAY? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eFfY0Iu2i4)
Marcus And Michele Bachmann Explain Marriage - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-w7QAEWudQ)
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 03:38 AM
Marcus Bachmann can't be gay -- ha ha ha! What I find exceedingly strange is why Michele Bachmann would be married to a man -- who is clearly gay -- for over 30 years. I don't get it. Very strange. Yes! He does seem to be gay.... And her rampant homophobia should be challenged. And she should be asked about her husband's sexual orientation. It matters.
I'd never heard of the Perry gay rumors until now. And we should add: they are just speculation. And, too, how could a manly man like Perry be gay. I mean, the late film star Rock Hudson was so ultra manly and so -- ha ha ha! :)
So, um, gay men are at the forefront of the Republican Party -- ha ha! Um, what about Mitt Romney? Any rumors &/or innuendos regarding his sexual orientation?
IS GOVERNOR RICK PERRY GAY? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eFfY0Iu2i4)
"Mitt", as in "catcher", as in "balls" being thrown. You do the math, Ben. ;-) lol
"Mitt", as in "catcher", as in "balls" being thrown. You do the math, Ben. ;-) lol
Ha ha ha! Too funny Nicole....
And, too, I wonder if we'll ever have a gay couple in the White House? I think we will. It'll take awhile -- and a lot of growing up by Americans. Hopefully Americans will become enlightened and educated and sympathetic and, well, is that asking for too much -- ha ha ha!
But hopefully the first [openly] gay Prez has the bod of Mario Lopez and the face of Brad Pitt. (There have always been persistent rumors that George Washington was gay. And the 14th. Prez Franklin Pierce was also gay. And, of course, Abraham Lincoln.)
What about a transgender President? Or a lesbian President. This'll come in time. When? Well, not entirely sure.
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 04:10 AM
What about a transgender President?
Obama did put a TS in his cabinet. Can you imagine one of these bible thumping Tea Party hypocrites even thinking about doing such a thing? NEVER.
GRITtv: Will Amanda Simpson's Appointment Change Anything? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmTbBVVulUo)
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 04:12 AM
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/attachment.php?attachmentid=414849&stc=1&d=1313891735
OMG, he is just soooooooooooooooo effing HAWT! :)
Obama did put a TS in his cabinet. Can you imagine one of these bible thumping Tea Party hypocrites even thinking about doing such a thing? NEVER.
GRITtv: Will Amanda Simpson's Appointment Change Anything? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmTbBVVulUo)
What Obama did was fantastic. A true achievement.
And look at the current GOP candidate for President Rick Santorum and his homophobia:
Rick Santorum Defends His Anti-Gay Comments On Glenn Beck Radio Show - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmEhL6qljLI)
Rick Santorum Against "Privileges" for Gays - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duQCsbtYi5M)
Silcc69
08-21-2011, 04:28 AM
We are missing the primary kraxy konservative on here.
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 05:01 AM
Maybe he should get a clue on when life has ended before he takes on topics like when it begins. The man's an emotionally disturbed ghoul.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61804-2005Apr17.html
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 05:07 AM
Everyone keeps dead babies in jars on a shelf in their home... Don't they?
GHOULS!!!
Barbara Bush Fetus in a Jar - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXVmgjAY8Lg)
Stick that big beak up their assholes a little deeper, Lar. *smfh
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 05:10 AM
George W. Bush reminisces with Matt Lauer about a fetus in a jar... - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wx89Vh9qHdg)
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 06:12 AM
Upon their son's death, Rick and Karen Santorum opted not to bring his body to a funeral home. Instead, they bundled him in a blanket and drove him to Karen's parents' home in Pittsburgh. There, they spent several hours kissing and cuddling Gabriel with his three siblings, ages 6, 4 and 1 1/2. They took photos, sang lullabies in his ear and held a private Mass.
Un-fucking-real.
Mr perry looks like a halfbreed if they trace his roots bet his dad is either indian or mexican.But of course with the white going to be the minority in America by 2030 you have to be mixed or multiracial in the new America.
Bobby Domino
08-21-2011, 08:06 AM
That was an awesome video. I can just imagine Edgar Hoover in lingerie & lipstick acting sissy for the boys. What a treat!!!
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 08:07 AM
That was an awesome video. I can just imagine Edgar Hoover in lingerie & lipstick acting sissy for the boys. What a treat!!!
After what I've seen on this forum, I think anything's possible. lol
Bobby Domino
08-21-2011, 08:20 AM
The videos you posted are outrageous. I'm going through them now. I might as well have a cigarette... Just have to make sure I don't burn my house down. I took an Ambien a little ways back.
After what I've seen on this forum, I think anything's possible. lol
Bobby Domino
08-21-2011, 08:30 AM
George, Jr. animates quite a large jar when talking about Barbara's fetus. Was it a whale fetus? Lord have mercy, LOL!!!
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 08:45 AM
George, Jr. animates quite a large jar when talking about Barbara's fetus. Was it a whale fetus? Lord have mercy, LOL!!!
You never know. Maybe it simply got mislabeled when it was first stored in the ol' Bush fetus pantry. ;-) lol
Everyone keeps dead babies in jars on a shelf in their home... Don't they?
GHOULS!!!
Stick that big beak up their assholes a little deeper, Lar. *smfh
A book about the Bush family [and praised by literary icon Gore Vidal] that I've been meaning to read.
Book TV: Russ Baker "Family of Secrets" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ybp7uOg3fY)
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 04:48 PM
Here you go, Ben. Lots of audio archives of interviews where he discusses that book.
http://spitfirelist.com/for-the-record/ftr-714-interview-4-with-russ-baker-author-of-family-of-secrets/
Dave Emory's audio archives on wfmu.org. http://www.wfmu.org/playlists/DX
Nicole Dupre
08-21-2011, 04:55 PM
http://whowhatwhy.com/
Here you go, Ben. Lots of audio archives of interviews where he discusses that book.
http://spitfirelist.com/for-the-record/ftr-714-interview-4-with-russ-baker-author-of-family-of-secrets/
Dave Emory's audio archives on wfmu.org. http://www.wfmu.org/playlists/DX
Thanks Nicole... :)
Rick Perry Loves Bank Of America, Hates Social Security - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhE_16zM7MA)
Rick Perry disfunctional Sex Ed response - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbNlR6UHGvU)
Helvis2012
08-29-2011, 04:14 AM
Chicken Hawk is more like it.
Faldur
08-29-2011, 04:51 AM
Chicken Hawk is more like it.
Thats President elect chicken hawk..
Helvis2012
08-29-2011, 05:39 AM
Thats President elect chicken hawk..
Whatever you say....LOL.
http://images.salon.com/img/branded_features/glenn_greenwald.png (http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html)
Thursday, Sep 8, 2011 10:09 ET Cheering for state-imposed death (http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/09/08/death/index.html)
By Glenn Greenwald (http://www.salon.com/author/glenn_greenwald/index.html)
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/09/08/death/md_horiz.jpg AP
(updated below)
At last night's GOP debate, Texas Gov. Rick Perry was asked by Brian Williams about the 234 executions of death row inmates over which Perry has presided -- "more than any Governor in modern times"-- and the mere mention by Williams of this morose record triggered an outburst of cheering and applause from the audience:
This episode is creepy and disgusting, though as both Ta-Nehisi Coates (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/09/death-row-applause/244737/) and Dahlia Lithwick (http://twitter.com/#%21/Dahlialithwick/status/111783080104165376) point out, it's hardly surprising for a country which long considered public hangings a form of entertainment and in which support for the death penalty is mandated orthodoxy for national politicians in both parties. Still, even for those who believe in the death penalty, it should be a very somber and sober affair for the state, with regimented premeditation, to end the life of a human being no matter the crimes committed. Wildly cheering the execution of human beings as though one's favorite football team just scored a touchdown is primitive, twisted and base.
All of that would be true even if the death penalty were perfectly applied and only clearly guilty people were killed. But in the U.S., the exact opposite is true; see here to read about (and act to stop) a horrific though typical example (http://emilylhauserinmyhead.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/troy-davis-given-execution-date/) of a very likely innocent person about to be executed by the State of Georgia. That Perry in particular likely enabled the execution of an innocent man (http://edition.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/09/07/texas.execution.probe/) -- as well as numerous other highly disturbing killings, of the young and mentally infirm (http://www.texastribune.org/texas-people/rick-perry/under-perry-executions-raise-questions/) -- makes the cheering all the more repellent. That the death penalty in America has long been plagued by a serious racial bias (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/race-research-experts-say-racial-bias-still-exists-death-penalty) makes it worse still. That this death-cheering comes from a party that relentlessly touts itself as "pro-life" and derides the other as The Party of Death (http://%22http//www.amazon.com/Party-Death-Democrats-Courts-Disregard/dp/1596980044) -- and loves to condemn Islam (in contrast to its war-loving self) as a death-glorifying cult (http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/18/opinion/oe-harris18) -- only adds a layer of dark irony.
This happened at a GOP debate, involving the current GOP front-runner, and progressives are thus rushing forth to condemn it (condemnations with which I largely agree). The Philadelphia Daily News' Will Bunch called it (http://articles.latimes.com/2006/sep/18/opinion/oe-harris18) "utterly sickening" and "a pathetic new low in American politics." Bunch added: "What you heard echoing in the Reagan Library last night was not reason. It was bloodlust, pure and simple, and it was repulsive." That's because "the cheering of executions is the hallmark of a sick society -- one that's incapable of tackling its real demons and looking for vengeance on whomever happens to be available."
I agree with all of that, and that's why this morning's orgy of progressive condemnation made me think of very similar death-celebrations that erupted (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/2/osama-bin-ladens-death-sparks-celebration-dc/) at the news that the U.S. military had pumped bullets into Osama bin Laden's skull and then dumped his corpse into the ocean. Those of us back then who expressed serious reservations about the boisterous public chanting and celebratory cheering (http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/05/02/bin_laden/index.html) of executions were accused by Good Democrats of all manner (http://bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2011/05/guilt_tripping.html) of deficiencies (http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=david+kurtz+twitter+Apparently+there%27s+a+high+ correlation+between+refusal+to+openly+celebrate+th e+demise+of+OBL%2C+and+being+a+tedious+scold.&psj=1&oq=david+kurtz+twitter+Apparently+there%27s+a+high +correlation+between+refusal+to+openly+celebrate+t he+demise+of+OBL%2C+and+being+a+tedious+scold.&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=10132l35321l0l35872l28l12l0l1l1l5l6214l1336 9l3-1.2.3.3.0.1.1l11l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=fe4d51c11f0a28fa&biw=1600&bih=733).
Yes, the 9/11 attack was an atrocious act of slaughter; so were many of the violent, horrendous crimes which executed convicts unquestionably (sometimes by their own confession) committed. In all cases, performing giddy dances over state-produced corpses is odious and wrong.
Now that this issue has been vested with a partisan angle, and many Good Progressives are marching forward to condemn the act of ecstatically cheering for executions, perhaps the reservations many of us had (http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/05/02/osama_and_chants_of_usa) over the joyous, chest-beating street celebrations over bin Laden's corpse can be better understood. Like drenching a citizenry with fear and keeping them in a state of Endless War for more than a decade, training them to publicly rejoice when the Government puts bullets into people's heads or injects poison into their veins -- even if that act is justifiable -- inevitably degrades the citizenry and the character of their nation.
UPDATE: Does anyone doubt that many of the same Democrats expressing disgust this morning at the Republican cheerleading for Rick Perry's executions (of people convicted of crimes after at least a pretense of due process) will be the first in line raucously celebrating the Democratic President when he finally succeeds in assassinating (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/07/world/middleeast/07yemen.html) U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki with no due process at all?
Rick Perry on the death penalty - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjmrf4ad4jk)
Uninformed Voters Love Perry - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2F3jow3Q1IM&feature=channel_video_title)
hippifried
09-25-2011, 09:23 PM
Perry's mired in his own mud, despite his "executive hair". Ron Paul has exactly the same number of supporters that he always draws, about 8%. Bachman's already done. Cain's the new darling of the teabag set, except for the klan faction. Apparently the Cubans like him, but he's not going anywhere. Not enough ingredients on that pizza. Excluding Romney, the rest of the field is so non-descript that even the republicans don't know who they are & don't care. Romney will get the nomination for 2 reasons.
1) He's not a tunnelvisioned ideologue. Just a flip-flopping liar.
2) It's his turn.
Helvis2012
09-25-2011, 10:38 PM
Funny.
Perry's mired in his own mud, despite his "executive hair". Ron Paul has exactly the same number of supporters that he always draws, about 8%. Bachman's already done. Cain's the new darling of the teabag set, except for the klan faction. Apparently the Cubans like him, but he's not going anywhere. Not enough ingredients on that pizza. Excluding Romney, the rest of the field is so non-descript that even the republicans don't know who they are & don't care. Romney will get the nomination for 2 reasons.
1) He's not a tunnelvisioned ideologue. Just a flip-flopping liar.
2) It's his turn.
I, actually, hope it's Romney. He's the least, um, insane -- :)
Jon Huntsman won't get the nod. He's just crazy. I mean, he believes in, um, ya know, evolution and global warming. What a weirdo -- ;) (I'm kidding of course.) He doesn't have the support anyway. Neither does Paul. If Perry gets the nod he will or might go with Bachmann. Who knows.
So, of the field of candidates, well, Romney is the most level-headed. As for his lying, well, that's the essence of politics... :) I mean, Obama based his whole campaign on CHANGE and, well, we know the story....
Michele Bachmann Soviet Union "On The Rise"? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnXBt1bqoEQ)
How Rick Perry Got Rich On The Job - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrddWWcvNU8)
arnie666
09-26-2011, 10:52 PM
I, actually, hope it's Romney. He's the least, um, insane -- :)
Jon Huntsman won't get the nod. He's just crazy. I mean, he believes in, um, ya know, evolution and global warming. What a weirdo -- ;) (I'm kidding of course.) He doesn't have the support anyway. Neither does Paul. If Perry gets the nod he will or might go with Bachmann. Who knows.
So, of the field of candidates, well, Romney is the most level-headed. As for his lying, well, that's the essence of politics... :) I mean, Obama based his whole campaign on CHANGE and, well, we know the story....
Michele Bachmann Soviet Union "On The Rise"? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnXBt1bqoEQ)
How Rick Perry Got Rich On The Job - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrddWWcvNU8)
The people who support ron paul are either pot heads, 9/11 conspiracy theorists, white nationalists, anti semites, or the types who would have dodged the draft. I have never in all my days met a more loopy bunch apart from the obamabots. Who actually believed Obama was the second coming.
Perry will not get the nod now because he gave funding to give illegal immigrants an education and is overal soft on border protection . He also has been shady about this vaccine business and has lied for instance about just when he met the cancer patient that 'inspired' him./
Bachmann and cain are ones to watch in the current field to go up against romney as the conservative republican candidate. because perrys ship is sinking ,so his conservative support has to go somewhere. I have a suspicion that cain ,however will end up being someones VP candidate. All the other candidates seem to LOVE him. But to me he is pretty mediocre and at strikes me as cheap tactics to just have him in that position as a token to deal with the race baiters in the democrat party.
I have no idea why people are happy with romney ,he is an establishment check pants republican.A member of the golfing set and he will not bring the true change america needs in it's political system. Currently it is 8 yrs republican 8 yrs dem with only a few exceptions.The truly weak Obama might be one of those exceptions of being kicked out after 4 yrs, but my points stands if you like the mess the US is in now then Romney is the guy for you.
.None of them seriously impress me. The gal in your avatar is who I still want to get in the race either as a republican or a third party candidate. I think we might see other late entries, such as christie or less likely Rubio .
Silcc69
09-27-2011, 01:55 AM
The people who support ron paul are either pot heads, 9/11 conspiracy theorists, white nationalists, anti semites, or the types who would have dodged the draft. I have never in all my days met a more loopy bunch apart from the obamabots. Who actually believed Obama was the second coming.
Perry will not get the nod now because he gave funding to give illegal immigrants an education and is overal soft on border protection . He also has been shady about this vaccine business and has lied for instance about just when he met the cancer patient that 'inspired' him./
Bachmann and cain are ones to watch in the current field to go up against romney as the conservative republican candidate. because perrys ship is sinking ,so his conservative support has to go somewhere. I have a suspicion that cain ,however will end up being someones VP candidate. All the other candidates seem to LOVE him. But to me he is pretty mediocre and at strikes me as cheap tactics to just have him in that position as a token to deal with the race baiters in the democrat party.
I have no idea why people are happy with romney ,he is an establishment check pants republican.A member of the golfing set and he will not bring the true change america needs in it's political system. Currently it is 8 yrs republican 8 yrs dem with only a few exceptions.The truly weak Obama might be one of those exceptions of being kicked out after 4 yrs, but my points stands if you like the mess the US is in now then Romney is the guy for you.
.None of them seriously impress me. The gal in your avatar is who I still want to get in the race either as a republican or a third party candidate. I think we might see other late entries, such as christie or less likely Rubio .
For a guy that stay's in the UK you sure have a lot to say about American politics.
hippifried
09-27-2011, 02:20 AM
For a guy that stay's in the UK you sure have a lot to say about American politics.
It's a spectator sport.
The people who support ron paul are either pot heads, 9/11 conspiracy theorists, white nationalists, anti semites, or the types who would have dodged the draft. I have never in all my days met a more loopy bunch apart from the obamabots. Who actually believed Obama was the second coming.
Ya know, no one should be overly keen on politicians, any politician. I mean, they're politicians after all. They have to serve dominant power structures. And not the interests of, well, people. (I mean, if we live in a so-called democratic society public policy would reflect public opinion. I mean, most Americans supported the public option. Why don't we have it? Because powerful corporate interests were opposed.)
I do like Ron Paul on his foreign policy positions. I think most Americans agree with him on his foreign policy positions. But I have profound disagreements with him on domestic policy. I, honestly, think the Middle Class would disappear under a Paul presidency. I could be wrong. Anyway, it'd be difficult for him to carry out his radical agenda. I just don't see the Congress going along with him.
I think a lot of his supporters don't really know where he stands. A lot may think: Cool! He wants to end the war on drugs... ha ha! I honestly don't know who supports him.
arnie666
09-27-2011, 09:33 AM
For a guy that stay's in the UK you sure have a lot to say about American politics.
I have an interest in the tea party movement and someone who is supported by the tea party movement becoming president. Before the tea party movement I couldn't have given two shits about US politics.
The UK has it's own problems with the two main parties who are not running things in the peoples best interests,but in their own selfish interests. Members of parliament from the PM down should put the interests of the British people first,they are not doing this for a variety of reasons. I like the tea party because both sides of the political establishment are not safe. And it is far more likely to gain support than a far right movement would be using the traditional tactics of the far right.I do not believe the Tea party is far rightbut in fact a mix of disenchanted people from the entire political spectrum but with an overall conservative theme. Fiscal rather than social in the main. I think however it's example is relevant to how a minority party in the UK or a small political movement could gain ground in a hostile media environment. I would like to see a nationalist grass root movement spring up in the UK with charismatic politicians involved. So I have been keeping an eye on the tea parties progress from day 1 and am very impressed.
I believe if someone supported by the teaparty became president like many things that come from america to the UK,it is more likely fertile ground will be found here. There are close links between the two countries. The main reason I support Palin is in my opinion she is the politician associated with the teaparty most likely to make the changes she has promised.She has a history of being a radical and neither the repubs or dems will be safe. I also believe she has a far more committed network of volunteers to run an unorthodox campaign as she and other politicians pursuing radical agendas cannot rely on a media which has a close relationship with the establishment. That is the main weakness small parties in the UK have. I have heard the sarah palin has volunteers ready in every state in the US to make the necesscary moves if she decides to run. This has been organised secretly by her staff.
Stavros
09-27-2011, 02:04 PM
Arnie, you seem to overlook the fact that we have a third party in power, a minority grouplet sharing this Coalition govt...
I, honestly, think the Middle Class would disappear under a Paul presidency
Ben, the danger with economic depression is that the Middle Class will shrink whoever wins the Presidency, if you focus on issues like jobs -not just white collar jobs that the Middle Class tend to think of as their metier, but the large-scale low-to-non skilled jobs that formed the huge base of American prosperity when it was the industrial leader of the world. I don't think the 1950s can be done again, whoever is in the White House or Congress for that matter.
We take an interest in the US here because a) its always on the news; b) sometimes foreign issues are a relief from the tedium of domestic politics; c) it is entertainment without responsibility, as Hippifried says; and d) we are responsible both for much of the capital investment that made America rich, and in return, for example, my pension comes from a firm that is now 40% American through mergers and various projects.
The issue that excites conspiracy theorists is how Presidents get onto the ballot paper and whether or not their background is 'checked' by mysterious men in grey suits. It is ironic that the allegations about Obama's origins successfully diverted attention away from his solid state credentials through both of his parents connections to the CIA -I don't know enough to know how much of it is fantasy, there are articles on voltairenet which are risible nonsense, but this two-part article goes into his parents CIA activities, his mysterious years in New York in the early 1980s (working for the CIA?), and also note the Geithner family makes an appearance with the Obama-CIA nexus near the end of Part II. Worth reading and I wonder what people think.
http://www.voltairenet.org/The-Story-of-Obama-All-in-The,166741
God Tells Rick Perry To Kiss AIG Ass? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwhlVXkwrL4)
Arnie, you seem to overlook the fact that we have a third party in power, a minority grouplet sharing this Coalition govt...
I, honestly, think the Middle Class would disappear under a Paul presidency
Ben, the danger with economic depression is that the Middle Class will shrink whoever wins the Presidency, if you focus on issues like jobs -not just white collar jobs that the Middle Class tend to think of as their metier, but the large-scale low-to-non skilled jobs that formed the huge base of American prosperity when it was the industrial leader of the world. I don't think the 1950s can be done again, whoever is in the White House or Congress for that matter.
You're right. Those jobs are gone. And they aren't coming back. As long as corporations control public policy, well, they'll continue to do what's in their interest. And they have to. I mean, they're legally required to put the short-term interests of their shareholders above all other interests.
Fact is: The Middle Class and Working Class don't control the economy. If they did, well, they'd be looking out for their best interests.
Again, a CEO can't, by law, serve the interests of working people.
People say NAFTA didn't work. Actually, it did. The goal was to suppress wages for the vast majority of the population. For that it was a success. The investor class are reaping the rewards.
In the late 50s and 60s and early 70s (up until 1973) there was a burgeoning Middle Class.
And then Reagan gets in in '81. (The same policies that reward the, as Adam Smith called them, Masters of Mankind were continued under Bush Sr. and Clinton.) And the overclass or overlords decided, as Naomi Klein said, that they "want it all."
Hence the massive income GAINS for the top 0.01 percent of the population. That's zero point zero one percent that have made astronomical income gains while wages for the vast majority of working people have stagnated for over three decades.
I mean, Henry Ford realized that he wanted his workers to BUY his cars so he RAISED their wages (albeit there was pressure from his wife) with the realization that they then could afford them. I mean, that's what you want. A burgeoning Middle Class to buy stuff. It is good for business. It's good for democracy....
Silcc69
09-28-2011, 02:21 AM
I have an interest in the tea party movement and someone who is supported by the tea party movement becoming president. Before the tea party movement I couldn't have given two shits about US politics.
The UK has it's own problems with the two main parties who are not running things in the peoples best interests,but in their own selfish interests. Members of parliament from the PM down should put the interests of the British people first,they are not doing this for a variety of reasons. I like the tea party because both sides of the political establishment are not safe. And it is far more likely to gain support than a far right movement would be using the traditional tactics of the far right.I do not believe the Tea party is far rightbut in fact a mix of disenchanted people from the entire political spectrum but with an overall conservative theme. Fiscal rather than social in the main. I think however it's example is relevant to how a minority party in the UK or a small political movement could gain ground in a hostile media environment. I would like to see a nationalist grass root movement spring up in the UK with charismatic politicians involved. So I have been keeping an eye on the tea parties progress from day 1 and am very impressed.
I believe if someone supported by the teaparty became president like many things that come from america to the UK,it is more likely fertile ground will be found here. There are close links between the two countries. The main reason I support Palin is in my opinion she is the politician associated with the teaparty most likely to make the changes she has promised.She has a history of being a radical and neither the repubs or dems will be safe. I also believe she has a far more committed network of volunteers to run an unorthodox campaign as she and other politicians pursuing radical agendas cannot rely on a media which has a close relationship with the establishment. That is the main weakness small parties in the UK have. I have heard the sarah palin has volunteers ready in every state in the US to make the necesscary moves if she decides to run. This has been organised secretly by her staff.
Well why is she still on the sidelines "contemplating" what to do? BTW who would you liek to be her running mate?
Wha' the fu...
David Letterman - Rick Perry Top Ten Preview - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKTwEoSF8Gw)
This is great comedy:
Embarrassing Catastrophic Moment for Rick Perry- Forgets What He Wants To Say At Presidential Debate - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTNjhcyx7dM)
Why is Nobody Asking the Obvious Rick Perry Question? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxZk98OVgMs)
trish
11-12-2011, 07:41 AM
Rick Perry: dumbest fuck ever...dumber than Michelle Bachmann even!!! Who would've thought it possible? Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Newt, Santorum, and the two flip flopping Mormons. These are the only possible republican presidential contenders!!!! What has the GOP come too? The tea-baggers have gutted this party. It would be funny if it weren't so fucking sad and dangerous.
Stavros
11-12-2011, 08:39 AM
Is there any evidence that Americans will be suspicious of a Mormon seeking the Presidency? Mormons claim to be the only true Church, and deny that their founder Joseph Smith was a confidence trickster who invented a religion but successfully persuaded other people to join it. The Curse of Cain -which states that Black people are cursed and can never attain the 'priesthood of God' was not abandoned by the Mormons until 1978; they also claim God lives on a planet near a star called Kolob, which I guess gets them the Trekky vote, and oh by the way, the Garden of Eden was originally in Missouri....
I wonder, does Mr Romney have seer stones in his pockets and avoid travelling on water?
Call me an old cynic if you want to, but sometimes I wonder if there was a spelling mistake when Mormon came to America with his message for Mr Smith....
http://www.exmormon.org/tract2.htm
Rick Perry: dumbest fuck ever...dumber than Michelle Bachmann even!!! Who would've thought it possible? Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Newt, Santorum, and the two flip flopping Mormons. These are the only possible republican presidential contenders!!!! What has the GOP come too? The tea-baggers have gutted this party. It would be funny if it weren't so fucking sad and dangerous.
The whole thing is an absolute joke. Just give the nod to Mitt. Plus, isn't Mitt the richest candidate? If he is, well, give it to him. He deserves it. On that alone -- ha ha ha! And spare us this absolute freakshow. (And Cain won't win the nomination. As the Irish-American writer Alexander Cockburn writes, "Cain has never had a prayer of getting the Republican nomination. He doesn’t have the money, or the big backers, just a handful of staffers and the 9-9-9 thing. His star began to rise when the Tea Party crowd figured Gov Rick Perry of Texas as a hypocrite and also a moron, as he conclusively demonstrated in the debate in Michigan Wednesday night.")
And the Republican Party isn't even a political party anymore. They've ceased participating in a parliamentary framework. They're merely deep in the pockets of corporate America. Specifically the financial sector.
No political party can survive without voters. (And you can't vote for them based on their policies. Because only a small fraction of the population actually supports their policies... which simply serve to enrich the super rich.)
They've attempted to develop a mass base. And what they've attempted to do is appeal to some of the elements of American society and culture that have always been there but are not very attractive. But they've never been mobilized politically before. And we're talking about religious extremists....
Faldur
11-12-2011, 05:53 PM
Well thank goodness the Republican party isn't asking progressives to pick their candidate. Compared to the current commander in chief, you know the guy who can't speak to a classroom full of 3rd graders without a teleprompter, Rick Perry looks like a genius. Lets see elected governor to the most prosperous state in the US for 14 years now. I would call that solid executive experience. And what did obummer have? Oh, thats right he was actually a "community organizer".. and you laugh at the Republican candidates. Think you might want to check what your own house is made of before you start tossing stones. Which of the 58 states will he campaign in next?
Your genius in chief (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omHUsRTYFAU)
trish
11-12-2011, 05:58 PM
Rick Perry looks like a genius.Really? Either you're just as stupid as Rick Perry or you are willing to say anything to save face. LOL
Faldur
11-12-2011, 06:03 PM
Really? Either you're just as stupid as Rick Perry or you are willing to say anything to save face. LOL
What face do I have to save? I'm not even a republican. At last check I don't see my name on a ballet anywhere. But I am smart enough to look at both sides of the fence. And if you think your boy obummer is any better than Rick Perry you need to have your hatred checked, cause your blind sweetie.
trish
11-12-2011, 06:14 PM
Oh now it's hatred. Perry's not stupid, it's just all that hatred that makes him look stupid. Your whole team is a pack of clowns. How can I hate them? They make me laugh.
Silcc69
11-12-2011, 06:37 PM
This sums it up right here
http://www.hilaryshepherd.com/rantsnraves/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/7.jpg
Well thank goodness the Republican party isn't asking progressives to pick their candidate. Compared to the current commander in chief, you know the guy who can't speak to a classroom full of 3rd graders without a teleprompter, Rick Perry looks like a genius. Lets see elected governor to the most prosperous state in the US for 14 years now. I would call that solid executive experience. And what did obummer have? Oh, thats right he was actually a "community organizer".. and you laugh at the Republican candidates. Think you might want to check what your own house is made of before you start tossing stones. Which of the 58 states will he campaign in next?
Your genius in chief (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omHUsRTYFAU)
I'm not a fan of Obama. But he is smart. I don't think he's very principled. But, yes, he's smart. (And, too, I don't think Bush is moronic. But I don't think he ran the show. That was Cheney's job.) The job of president is to be, well, a good actor. It's entertainment -- and acting.
The role of president is sorta like the role of the Queen of England -- :) The U.S. is run, according to the writer and essayist Gore Vidal, by the National Security Council. Which is the Pentagon and the C.I.A. Obama has a role to play. And he plays it well. (Noam Chomsky was asked who is the most dangerous person on the planet. He said the most dangerous person on the planet is usually the most powerful. And then he explicated that it isn't a person. It's a system, a structure. And any form of concentrated power is extremely dangerous.)
I'm not sure why anyone would defend -- or have an undying love for -- either the Dems or the Republicans. It's beyond me. Well, unless one is a classic conservative. And believe in Edmund Burke. And believe in elite rule. That the rich and responsible men should assume power over the majority 'cause their too "stupid and ignorant" to run their own affairs.
But I doubt that the vast majority of people are pleased with a small group of people having authority over them. Whether it be corporate or political.
Actually, no power structure is self justifying. Any system of power has to prove its legitimacy. Sometimes they can. But most of the time they can't. Like, say I came to your home and started bossing you about. Is that justified? Same applies to a man that bosses his wife around. Or politicians assuming power over the populace. Is that justified? (Yes! I'm a libertarian. Well, a left-leaning libertarian. I think a lot of Ron Paul's proposals are pretty good. But a lot I disagree with.)
I mean, the Republicans simply serve the super rich. So, unless you're, well, super rich (part of the 0.01 percent) it's beyond me. Or, again, you could be a classic conservative. And believe in elite rule. (And not a genuine conservative who believes in local control; and that one should control his/her life, his or her own labor.)
And the Dems, too, serve the financial sector. Wall St. got THEIR GUY elected in '08.
Again, it's beyond me why anyone would be passionate about either the Dems or Republicans.
I mean, politicians should be simple administrators. You simply put in place policies that the majority want. Hence: democracy -- :)
But elites loathe democracy. For good reason. Their specific interests wouldn't be served in an actual democracy!
Faldur
11-13-2011, 01:40 AM
I'm not a fan of Obama. But he is smart.
Give me a break, he is a stuffed suit that reads words other people put on his teleprompter. This is 7 minutes of a 41 minute press conferene, not one of his drooling babble was repeated. 18% of the speech was mindless stammering. And were picking on Perry?
He who lives in glass houses...
The mighty brainless wonder (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp0hU1THjuc)
trish
11-13-2011, 02:27 AM
Lot of serious editing there. Bachmann, Cain, Perry and Newt don't need editors to look stupid. And you guy's claim to be the values party and to have integrity?! Once again you FAIL.
Erika1487
12-09-2011, 03:38 AM
He is trying to step into Iowa swinging but, it looks like is as struck out and needs benched :/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA
trish
12-09-2011, 04:17 AM
The Partisans - Rick Perry - Weak, man. - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbrI3F7p6-o&feature=player_embedded)
Check out the jackets below.
LOL
Erika1487
12-09-2011, 04:37 AM
The Partisans - Rick Perry - Weak, man. - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbrI3F7p6-o&feature=player_embedded)
Check out the jackets below.
LOL
:jawdrop lol That might have been the best thing you have ever posted Trish :cheers:
Stavros
12-09-2011, 01:13 PM
You have to admit, that's a nice jacket....does it really get that cold in Texas?
hippifried
12-10-2011, 12:12 AM
Those canvas jackets are pretty popular among the cowpuds & cowpies. If you're going to be governor of Texas, you gotta keep up appearances. Of course we're talking about Texas, so it's almost all appearances manufactured out of bullshit, from Rick Perry back through Davey Crocket.
Does he drop out of the race soon. Yes? No? Don't care -- ha ha! :)
pantybulge69
01-08-2012, 03:09 AM
even people inside his own campaign are tired of his arrogant, silly ass.
disgruntled senior advisors leaking how disorganized, indecisive, and dysfunctional he's been. ...and this guy would dare to think he can "lead" the country ? The more he was expose to a much bigger public exposure, the more Americans saw for themselves that this was a buffoon waiting to
self-destruct. the dude is such a comical, damn joke.
In Rick Perry's own words: " Adios, Mo-fo " ... !!!
RIck Perry Doubles Down On Turkey "Terrorists" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOF3FP8akU0)
It's a sad day when a great visionary and intellectual giant like Rick Perry bows out of the Republican race -- :heartbroken:
Rick Perry Endorses Newt Gingrich - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXBoi241OWw)
Some of his better moments:
OOPS! RICK PERRY CAN'T NAME 3 AGENCIES OF GOVERNMENT HE WANTS TO ELIMINATE - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQX2lwKS3Pg)
Rick Perry: Turkey Is Ruled By Islamic Terrorists - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGFy6htQARg)
Strong - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA)
Dino Velvet
01-20-2012, 12:36 AM
The Partisans - Rick Perry - Weak, man. - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbrI3F7p6-o&feature=player_embedded)
Check out the jackets below.
LOL
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/attachment.php?attachmentid=438515&stc=1&d=1323397143
Nice pic. The guy pictured at the bottom could quit something.
hippifried
01-20-2012, 03:33 AM
Well I'm devastated. There's nobody left with "just right" executive hair.
Oh well. I guess the mantle of Comedian in Chief passes to Newt for now.
The race for the Republican nomination is the best Reality TV show -- ever... ha ha ha!
Newt Gingrich Asked Ex Wife For An Open Marriage - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n-nf0w_ehU)
LMFAO--Mitt Romney--MUST WATCH!! - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdR-iS1l5ds)
Does Gov. Rick Perry Hate Women?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTid5nj9JOA
Texas Governor Rick Perry Indicted for Coercion:
http://www.newsweek.com/texas-governor-rick-perry-indicted-coercion-265019
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.