Clusterheadaches.com Message Board
        (http://www.clusterheadaches.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        New Message Board Archives >> 2004 Posts >> OT: New Trilateral? 
        
(Message started by: notseinfeld on Oct 22nd, 2004, 2:21pm)
Title: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by notseinfeld on Oct 22nd, 2004, 2:21pm
It would seem that if Kerry got elected there would be

A. Kerry (communist) president United States.
B. Bill Clinton (socialist) secretary-general United Nations.
C. Hillary Clinton (communist) US supreme court justice.

This, imo, would be the end.
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by eddie on Oct 22nd, 2004, 2:26pm
http://www.geocities.com/smeaux38/board-profile.jpg
                       the cat did it "pow"
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by don on Oct 22nd, 2004, 2:45pm
Ya see Eddie, it's guys like you who propogate rumors and falsehoods.

Everyone knows the cat was on the grassy knoll for Christ sakes.

Notsienfeld is putting together his Mc Carthy list. LMAO
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by PittsburghJoe on Oct 22nd, 2004, 3:09pm
Hmmm... I'm trying to figure out exactly WHY someone would call Kerry or Hilary a communist, but I can't find any evidence. Ditto for the socialist reference for Bill.

But then, I guess anyone who doesn't march in lockstep with the right wing agenda and its love of middle eastern blood and oil is a traitor to this great God-approved nation of yours.
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Tom K on Oct 22nd, 2004, 6:00pm
Sheesh...are you 2 going to start this again? :-/
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 22nd, 2004, 7:14pm
http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/POPCORN 2.gif

Charlie
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by LeLimey on Oct 22nd, 2004, 7:16pm
*snort* [smiley=laugh.gif]
Ah Charlie, I love your posts! They always brighten my day!!
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by notseinfeld on Oct 22nd, 2004, 7:45pm
Charlie---laughed out loud! thanks.

:)
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 22nd, 2004, 7:53pm
Sorry but you know me. I have to do this: 1908 Democratic William Jennings Bryan postcard:

http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/gop.jpg

"Full Dinner Pail" was a standard thing then.

Not much changes in 96 years.

Charlie  
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Tom K on Oct 23rd, 2004, 12:29am
I could make an age crack, but I'm too damn tired.  Your posts make me laugh, piss me off, too but make me laugh, just the same!

T
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 23rd, 2004, 12:45am
That's okay. William Howard Taft beat him after I though my support to his ticket...... ::)

Charlie
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Kirk on Oct 23rd, 2004, 9:26am
IMHO
From Senator Clinton and Pres. Clinton's writings and voting records. They are socialists. Wether that is good or bad, I'll leave up to you.
From Senator Kerry's votes and writings. He appears to reasses the facts evey day and adjust his position accordingly. This does not make him either a Communist or a Socialist. A populist perhaps? YMMV
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Marc on Oct 23rd, 2004, 1:23pm
You're right Kirk.....and the problem is that lots and lots of folks are saying we need to be more socialistic – often without realizing it.

Right or wrong, this is the heart of the divisiveness.

By the way - howdy  :)
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by floridian on Oct 23rd, 2004, 9:42pm

on 10/22/04 at 14:21:06, notseinfeld wrote:
It would seem that if Kerry got elected there would be

A. Kerry (communist) president United States.
B. Bill Clinton (socialist) secretary-general United Nations.
C. Hillary Clinton (communist) US supreme court justice.

This, imo, would be the end.



The end indeed.  I can imagine a nation destroyed by public libraries, state run universities and other socialist terrors if that lot came into power. ...  old folks forced into accepting social security checks, federally funded interstate highways, cats sleeping with dogs, frogs and fish falling from the sky.  

Why change horsemen in the middle of an Apocalypse??
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 23rd, 2004, 10:35pm

Quote:
He appears to reasses the facts evey day and adjust his position accordingly


It would be refreshing to have someone in charge who actually has the ability to think that just maybe, just maybe, he may have made a mistake or two and perhaps he should look before he leaps again. But no, it's so much simpler to stay the course at home and abroad no matter how fucked up it might be. You know, it's all important to stick George in for another four years without having to worry about reelection. After all, it's God's will....just ask either one.

Charlie
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by clarence on Oct 24th, 2004, 8:23am

on 10/23/04 at 22:35:21, Charlie wrote:
It would be refreshing to have someone in charge who actually has the ability to think that just maybe, just maybe, he may have made a mistake or two and perhaps he should look before he leaps again.


It sure would.  But, Kerry, in my opinion is not this man.  He doesn't admit that he screwed up on anything.  Instead, he says one thing, and then the next day says the other, and then says that both represent his view on the matter.  So, in essence, he is never wrong, but he is always right, because he holds every position.

Maybe that is the kind of guy we should elect...

*damn, did I just post to this topic?*

Casey
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Melissa on Oct 24th, 2004, 9:09am

on 10/24/04 at 08:23:09, clarence wrote:
*damn, did I just post to this topic?*


Yes, and now you're going to burn in hell!

I've been down here for awhile and it's getting lonely.

;;D

;)
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 24th, 2004, 8:41pm

Quote:
He doesn't admit that he screwed up on anything.


Have you got that backasswards. Bush is the kind of guy who gets off the elevator on the wrong floor and blames the building. Nothing is his fault.

Go ahead though. Vote against yourselves, for John Ashcroft's selective reading of the BIll of Rights, gross underfunding and cutting out of the budget programs he praises, trying to curb stem cell research and other scientific programs that might upset Pat Roberston because god told him so....and my favorite;

His famous photo-op with the NYFD at ground zero that the GOP just loves.....Except in August 2002, Bush pocket-vetoed $150 million in emergency grants for first-responders. The New York firefighters never got their money.

Still, all you have to do is remember John Ashcroft and that Bush would like to make Canadian drugs illegal. Easy.

Charlie
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Pegase on Oct 24th, 2004, 9:15pm

on 10/24/04 at 20:41:25, Charlie wrote:
Still, all you have to do is remember John Ashcroft and that Bush would like to make Canadian drugs illegal. Easy.



Yeah Canadian drugs are the best and not expensive...  should not turn your back to that;-)
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 25th, 2004, 4:40am

Quote:
Canadian drugs are the best and not expensive


Good stuff and pretty much made the same place mine are.

Charlie  http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/pills.gif
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Tom K on Oct 25th, 2004, 11:34am

on 10/25/04 at 04:40:17, Charlie wrote:
Good stuff and pretty much made the same place mine are.

Charlie  http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/pills.gif



And if anything happened to you because those drugs didn't go through FDA approval, you'd be the first one to bitch.


T
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 26th, 2004, 2:49am
Our FDA is pain in the ass now. Politics. Very sad.

Charlie
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by notseinfeld on Oct 28th, 2004, 1:48pm
Yo Pitts-Joe,

saw this article and it reminded me of you!

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41142

If it walks, talks, acts and 'takes orders' from a communist regime, well......
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 29th, 2004, 5:07am
Yes sir.

If Sean Hannity is featured, you can bet on its veracity.

Yer killin' me.

Charlie
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Gator on Oct 29th, 2004, 1:21pm

Quote:
In 1847, Marx and Engals laid out a 10 point plan to turn America into a Communist state without ever firing a shot.


Most of their plan has already been implemented in this country without much more than a whimper.


Quote:
Soviet mathematician Shafarevich, a member of the Soviet Academy of Science, wrote in his book, "Socialism" that socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death.



Quote:
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin:  Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.


One goal of Socialism is to wipe out the concept of the individual and replace it with a "collective" mindset.  I would say that Lenin's emissaries have taught the children well.  Look at the crap being taught in the schools today.  Individual achievement cannot be recognized or celebrated because someone else who didn't try as hard's feeling might be hurt.  Local newspapers in some areas won't print honor roll's and other achievements, because they don't want to hurt someone's feelings.  "Everyone is a winner."  Bullshit, there is only ever 1 winner.  2nd place is the first loser.  It is the people that recognize this and take it to heart that make their fortunes in this world.  Which would be great, except as soon as someone has more money, more power, more anything, they become "the evil rich."


Quote:
Lenin also said:  The goal of socialism is communism.



Quote:
1940's Socialist Party Presidential candidate, Norman Thomas said:

The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened.


Look around.  Liberalism aka Socialism is creeping into every facet of life.  People do not realize that with every hand out, with every entitlement program, another link is added to the chains that enslave us to government control.  While it pays young mothers to be little more than baby factories, the government is educating and raising those kids to be more addicted to government.  The family unit is being disbanded and fathers made obsolete.  All for the greater good is the theme of the day.


Quote:
In 1874, Karl Marx said "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs!"


Under Socialist/Communist rule, no matter how hard you work, the fruits of your labor are going to be taken and divided amongst those who did little or nothing at all.

The fall of the Soviet Union is the best evidence available that Socialism/Communism does not work.  Why are we fighting so hard to go there?

Gator
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Marc on Oct 29th, 2004, 1:27pm
Gator,

Because, as you pointed out - people don't even see it
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Bob P on Oct 29th, 2004, 1:40pm
Hey Marc how did the bedroom wall come out?

Can we consider that a clusterhead in the news?
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Tom K on Oct 29th, 2004, 2:25pm
Gator...well said, as usual!  


T
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by PittsburghJoe on Oct 29th, 2004, 3:11pm
Wow, Social Darwinism at its finest.

Too ill to work?  Tough shit, starve and die, only the strong shall survive.

Work your ass off for 30 years, only to have your pension stolen by the likes of Ken Lay?  Tough shit, he's wealthy because he deserves it, and obviously you don't.

I'd much rather see bits of socialism in this country than to have arrogant people in office making decisions about what is best for me. I'm not a little kid anymore, I can make my own decisions.

Government that invades the bedroom but stays out of the boardroom is NOT a government "of the people, by the people and for the people."

BTW, I try not to get facts from tabloids, so I'll avoid the Weekly World News, the NY Post, the Washington Times and NewsMax.com.
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by floridian on Oct 29th, 2004, 4:27pm

on 10/29/04 at 13:21:44, Gator wrote:
In 1847, Marx and Engals laid out a 10 point plan to turn America into a Communist state without ever firing a shot.

Most of their plan has already been implemented in this country without much more than a whimper.

...  Gator


Gator,  stop talking trash about this country.  If you don't like it, leave it. But don't tell lies.  

One plank of the Communist Manifesto was Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose.

I own a home. My neighbors own their homes. In fact, home ownership has increased steadily over the past 15 years, and is now at a record if I am not mistaken.  Quite a few wing-nutters believe that the abolition of private property is being accomplished by: The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management.

The BLM exists to manage the large tracts of land that the government owns, most of which were purchased from other governments.  Zoning to keep nudie bars 1000 feet or more from schools??  Damn that Marx ... wait, it was the Reverend Smith that proposed that law and lobbied to get it passed.   Property taxes?  Not invented by Marx - these go way back in history, and were a feature in most of the original US colonies.

Another plank was Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.  Don't see that one happening in the US either.  Not really sure who the rebels and emigrants are, but Marx probably was talking about groups in the German States in the 1800s.

Then there is Extention of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

Yeah, we have soil conservation department in the USDA.  The Corps of Engineers drained a lot of swamps, most of which were sold off to the public.  Big deal.  Extension of factories owned by the State?  Not a concern in the US - I can't think of any factories owned by the state.

Equal liablity of all to labor. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.  We let the corporations establish the armies of farm workers here.  Even if they have to break the immigration laws to do it.

Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.

The 'gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country' (aka suburbanization) was driven by market forces.  Most people want to live in a house with a yard, not in a tennement.  Another yawn - suburbanization didn't move anyone down the road to communism.

Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.

Oh, that sounds dangerous.  In fact, public schools in the US date back to the New England colonies, long before Marx wrote his mannifesto, And anyone who read Upton Sinclairs Jungle can see that child labor under unrestricted capitalism (or any other system) can be a dehumanizing evil.

Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State.  The Federal Interstate Highway system was a big boost to the US - and it was sold as a defense item.  Having a port authority that dredges harbors, provides charts, navigation signals, etc - those are ideas that work.  

Abolition of all rights of inheritance.  As a general principle, the government taxes money every time it changes hands.... there are inheritance taxes.  But that is different from the abolition of inheritance, and inheritance law in the US has numerous exemptions.

A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.  The one that more Americans gripe about.  Though the idea of 'heavy' is relative, and the wealthy have been able to accumulate money at increasing rates in the past years.  Again, not an idea that Marx originated - The British had a progressive tax in 1798, which was instituted to fund a war against France.

Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly. Well, the US government does have a monopoly on printing money.  Some people see that as sinister, although it could just be an idea that works based on  economy of scale.  And the FDIC wouldn't be needed if so many banks didn't fail in the great depression.  
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Gator on Oct 29th, 2004, 4:37pm
I know where some of your issues come from Joe and I agree with a lot of them.  You know I have a son who is facing the same issues.  You also know that I lovingly accept and support him the way he is.  I am concerned for his safety and his future, not because of how I feel about homosexuality, but because I know how the world he will soon be forced to live in feels about it.   I do not side with the "Moral Majority."  In fact I have a great disdain for their ignorance and self rightousness.


on 10/29/04 at 15:11:00, PittsburghJoe wrote:
Wow, Social Darwinism at its finest.

Nothing like an over reaction to get things rolling

Too ill to work?  Tough shit, starve and die, only the strong shall survive.

I don't have a problem helping people that legitimately cannot help themselves.  The problem I have is supporting the laziness and sloth of those who CHOOSE not to work.  The welfare system in this country needs a shake down from the top down.

Work your ass off for 30 years, only to have your pension stolen by the likes of Ken Lay?  Tough shit, he's wealthy because he deserves it, and obviously you don't.

You really can't believe that I believe it is okay to steal just because you are rich.  Where did I or anyone else say that people deserve to have their pensions stolen by some rich guy?  People like this digust me and should be punished to the full extent of the law.

On the other hand yes, anyone that legally and legitimately works their ass off and does more and better does deserve to benefit from the fruits of his or her labor.  Not you nor I nor anyone else should have any claim on that person's riches, just because he has more than we do.

I'd much rather see bits of socialism in this country than to have arrogant people in office making decisions about what is best for me. I'm not a little kid anymore, I can make my own decisions.

First off - YOU elect those arrogant people to make decisions for you or you sit idly by while others do it for you.  Try again on that one.  Do you really think that Lenin, Marx, Stalin and chairman Mao would be interested in your opinions or in your right to make decisions for yourself?  

In our society you are free to make your own decisions, though the farther to the left this country has traveled, the more restriction has been put on that right.  "Political correctness" used to be a concept that people shook their heads at in disgust, now it is an ideology wherein if someone is not careful he or she may find themselves fighting a lawsuit.  

I'm not saying the entire concept of socialism is bad.  Every social system has flaws.  In this country, we have found a pretty good balance of many ideologies.  It's when we allow ourselves to be dragged too far in one direction that the balance is upset.  The current trend of moving closer and closer to that which has proven not to work is disturbing.  In my opinion, a shift to the far right and the so called "Moral Majority" would be equally as disturbing.

Government that invades the bedroom but stays out of the boardroom is NOT a government "of the people, by the people and for the people."

I agree government should have absolutely no interest in the bedroom.  What happens between consenting adults is no one's business.  Government should stay out of the boardroom as well, at least up to the point that illegal activities start to take place.  Crap like what happened with Enron and WorldCom and others should have been caught much earlier and been dealt with much more severely.  

BTW, I try not to get facts from tabloids, so I'll avoid the Weekly World News, the NY Post, the Washington Times and NewsMax.com.

Every quote I made is an actual quote from the very people who tried to use socialism and communism to rule their little corners of the world.  No tabloid stuff and no opinion or misquoting.  Just pure history.

If we do not learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it.

Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Tom K on Oct 29th, 2004, 4:41pm

on 10/29/04 at 15:11:00, PittsburghJoe wrote:
I'd much rather see bits of socialism in this country than to have arrogant people in office making decisions about what is best for me. I'm not a little kid anymore, I can make my own decisions.


I hate to break it to you Joe, but that's what Socialism is.  

T
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 30th, 2004, 2:44am
There is nothing wrong with socialism in itself. Most of the progressive legislation has socialist elements. We are the victims of Red Scares and ingorance. Such ignorance of socialism is why so many retired hard working people suffer having to chose food or medicine.

A late friend of mine once said, during one of our long arguments:  "I'd be a socialist if it would work here." It doesn't so far.  Nevertheless, throughout history with minor glitches, the country zig zags to the left. I'd pretty happy that there are zigs and zags.

Charlie
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Marc on Oct 31st, 2004, 12:09am

Quote:
Hey Marc how did the bedroom wall come out?

Can we consider that a clusterhead in the news?


Hi Bob - you saw that? I didn't think that anyone read that paper  :)  No, I don't think that it counts.......

By the way, who has the OUCH yacht these days?
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by notseinfeld on Oct 31st, 2004, 1:45am
Good grief I don't where to begin. I guess first that any  government other than the one defined in the US Constitution is such nonsense and counter-intuitive that it doesn't warrant discussion. To wit, the US Constitution is barely recognizable any more and frankly my view is that predominantly leftist, big government lovers have actually won the war.

Individualism vs. Group Identity; the ability to plunder someone's life (their time involved in making money to feed family, etc.) and that money to give to someone who has not earned it through threat of imprisonment or death (see Waco).  Control of information in the schools (see what modern gov't schools produce), the takeover through incrementalism of every established function of a free society (food inspection, OSHA, morality) --next on this hitlist is healthcare of course. This will swell to 10 times estimates of cost and 1/10 quality of care. But hey, it's free!

Indeed, everything the gov't touches turns to the absolute most expensive, non-functioning, red-taped debacle imaginable. Freedom has been lost for some time and folks are either too stupid or too apathetic to care.  It so easy to be generous with someone else's sweat and money--plus, it's a great vote buyer!

The goodie basket is in place and everyone knows what's best for everyone else. Freedom is natural gift that's supposed to be protected by gov't and IS NOT granted by gov't. People died for the ability to live their lives according to their own values and that is an impossibility in our modern, socialistic national setup. A tragedy of the highest order.

For the record, I'm a Libertarian and I trust each of you writing here to know what's best for your lives and expect the same in return. The candidate who most closely resembles this position and the position of our Constitution is Michael Badnarik. So if it's a cliffhanger and there's only my vote left to tilt the GA electoral votes either for Bush or   Kerry, I'm afraid it's going to be a draw.  
Title: Re: OT: New Trilateral?
Post by Charlie on Oct 31st, 2004, 9:32pm

Quote:
To wit, the US Constitution is barely recognizable any more and frankly my view is that predominantly leftist, big government lovers have actually won the war.
Those who wrote the thing never expected it to last. Predictions at the time were the 1820s. It's been remarkably more resilient.  It was meant to be adjusted as the times warrant. It was NOT meant to be used for intolerant idiotic social legislation and for politics. All do it but the far far right uses it much more trying to get the evangelical cranks votes.


Quote:
Control of information in the schools (see what modern gov't schools produce), the takeover through incrementalism of every established function of a free society
Great. I can't wait for the Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons of the world to have control of information, such as teaching "intelligent design," that the world is only a few thousand years old, and that only they know what qualifies as science. That along with banning books, censorship of your CD rentals, computers, news of all kinds, alcohol, abortion, and the list goes on...I can't wait for them or other neocons to make my life so pure.


Quote:
Control of information in the schools (see what modern gov't schools produce), the takeover through incrementalism of every established function of a free society
A true Libertarian is far far more tolerant than you. I have strong libertarian leanings but I can't support them because they are too arbitrary and throw out the baby with the bathwater. Not everyone is well enough fend for themselves.  

Medical care: Why do you think drug companies fight so hard against national health? It's because it would be so much cheaper for us and their profits would be a fraction of what they are. Federal health care will be so much cheaper that it scares them to death.

It's okay to be a conservative. It's not okay to be nuts.

Charlie


Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1!
YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved.